New Houellebecq novel

[Anonymous No.19575373]

It’s gonna be here soon, /lit/. Michel Houellebecq’s next novel will hit the shelves on the 7th of January, 2022. What will it be about? Will it live up to his other works, or maybe even surpass them? Discuss. Personally, I think he’s still got the juice. Let’s hope it’s not about COVID. What do you guys think?

[Anonymous No.19575393]

>736 pages
I’m already exhausted

[Anonymous No.19575402]

>>19575393
I feel lucky. I’m gonna take my time with this one. Really digest it

[Anonymous No.19575420]

>>19575373
This one will be the same as all his other novels, male charachter in his 40s gets hit suddenly by some realisation about his reality and about himself, a sense of horror and satire ensues.
This one will almost certainly be about the covid event and just be 730 pages of outright misanthropy and more lampooning of this western civilisation in its last perverted stage.

[Anonymous No.19575431]

>>19575420
Hopefully, more Asian women fucking dogs — although I wished he released it to the world in Serotonin, but that would have been uncharacteristic of the protagonist who lacked the will to make any real decision in his life

[Anonymous No.19575443]

>736 pages
Fake

[Anonymous No.19575460]

>>19575420
You'd think someone so self-aware would think that they are becoming repetitive. Let's see how this will play out.

[Anonymous No.19575470]

>>19575443
He's probably been stuck inside for the best part of 2 years now, he could crank out 700+ in that timeframe no problem.

[Anonymous No.19575481]

>middle age man
>depressed
>sleeps with young women
>never struggling with finances or anything, always women on disposal
>only struggle in life is self-awareness and depression
>doomerist views on Western civilization
>700 pages of this

[Anonymous No.19575516]

>>19575470
Seems unlikely to me he would ever publish a 700+ novel, based on his style and general sensibility. So I assume this is fake

[Anonymous No.19575522]

>>19575393
His longest book, right? Can't wait.

[Anonymous No.19575548]

>>19575443
A French website says it's inspired by German books and that the publisher wanted to change the title but H said he chose the title because he wanted the book to last.

[Anonymous No.19575550]

>>19575443
>>19575516
Sorry that you grew up in a world where nothing was certain, sincere, honest or trust-worthy but this doesn't make every bit of news a lie. Just search for "Houellebecq new novel" and you will see the 700+ pages announcement everywhere. Of course the publisher knows how many pages the book has if it's out in 3 weeks. What are you thinking? That they'd lie about this? This is Flammarion, this isn't Bethesda lol

[Anonymous No.19575578]

>>19575373
It's something big, guys. They also mention something about German books. Will it be Mann-inspired?

[Anonymous No.19575579]

>>19575548
>>19575550
Okay, lol, guess I was wrong. I'm genuinely surprised. Didn't expect such an expansive work from this fella

[Anonymous No.19575592]

>>19575578
God this is going to be fucking kino

[Anonymous No.19575598]

>>19575578
God this is going to be fucking shit

[Anonymous No.19575608]

all good
https://editions.flammarion.com/titre-a-venir/9782080271532

[Anonymous No.19575609]

>>19575578
Mann is a hack, so I hope not.

[Anonymous No.19575614]

>>19575578
Same website mentions something about The White Album by The Beatles but I couldn't get past the paywall. Is this Houellebecq's White Album?

[Anonymous No.19575630]

>>19575608
TITRE A VENIR, what a stupid title lmao

[Anonymous No.19575633]

>>19575630
Actual title will be announced at the end of december

[Anonymous No.19575691]

>>19575609
filtered

[Anonymous No.19575754]

thank god I learned fr*nch

[Anonymous No.19575756]

Nice! Most authors I like are long dead, so it will be the first time I follow the release of a book. I feel like those waiting the spiderman movie.

[Anonymous No.19575757]

>>19575373
where do I start with the goblin? Submission?

[Anonymous No.19575759]

>>19575691
>filtered by trash
Sounds good, m8. Wish I could get back all my time from reading all the schlock he churned out.

[Anonymous No.19575760]

>>19575756
Read Krasznahorkai

[Anonymous No.19575764]

>>19575759
Are you talking about Houellebecq?

[Anonymous No.19575766]

>>19575757
Depends. I followed chronological order and it worked nice for me. Atomized is still his best imo.

>>19575760
Which one should I start? Are his works complex just for the sake of it?

[Anonymous No.19575769]

>>19575764
I understand reading comprehension is lacking among Mannfags, but you're quite the nonpareil imbecile

[Anonymous No.19575798]

Does anyone know if it will be published in English, or will we have to wait for a translation?

[Anonymous No.19575800]

>>19575759
Figures a Houellebecq fan would lack the patience or understanding of nuance to make it through a Mann novel.

[Anonymous No.19575818]

>>19575798
Just get the pdf and use https://www.deepl.com/translator

[Anonymous No.19575853]

>>19575769
If you think Houellebecq is good and Mann is bad you are retarded

[Anonymous No.19575862]

>>19575766
Satantango
>complex for the sake of it
No, he creates great atmosphere but his writing is more advanced than Houellebecq's.

[Anonymous No.19575899]

>>19575373
I'm guessing it's related to AI/technological transhumanism.

[Anonymous No.19575943]

>>19575756
Isn't it cool? I'm excited.

[Anonymous No.19575960]

>>19575798
Well he's not writing it in English is he

[Anonymous No.19575972]

>700 pages
It’s gonna be his magnum opus, and it’s gonna be talked about a lot, and it’s gonna get a mainstream movie or miniseries

[Anonymous No.19575976]

Can only imagine how long it'll take to come out in English

[Anonymous No.19575983]

>>19575960
No, but he's mostly read in English.

[Anonymous No.19575987]

Any anons know if Houellebecq's essay collections have ever been translated to English?

[Anonymous No.19575988]

>>19575972
>Houellbecq movie becomes mainstream

the normies will REVOLT

[Anonymous No.19575995]

>>19575983
Not true. He's mostly popular in France. He's a literary rockstar there. The Anglo world barely knows him.

[Anonymous No.19576006]

>>19575960
plenty of big authors like houellebecq have their novels translated into other languages and released simultaneously with the original

[Anonymous No.19576011]

>>19575988
Don’t think so, as seen by Tiktok and Gen Z in general, they’re pretty apt at devouring whatever you throw at them and then turning it into a superficial character trait. Young women especially I could see getting on a Houllebecq binge. I don’t think any of this stuff is internalized, but they like to play with it

[Anonymous No.19576014]

>>19576006
Houellebecq sort of did that with the Spanish edition of Serotonin (also released in January, I think), while English speakers had to wait until September or something. Hopefully everyone can get it early

[Anonymous No.19576021]

>>19575995
>The Anglo world barely knows him.
Anyone whose even mildly interested in literature knows Houllebecq. I could go to fucking Barnes and Noble right now and buy three or four of his books

[Anonymous No.19576023]

there is no chance this book is good if it's that long lol. his books are all too long as it is and they're all around 300 pages. this is definitely a shitpost of a novel

[Anonymous No.19576025]

>>19575995
Leaf here, hes pretty well known, even outside Quebec

[Anonymous No.19576029]

>>19576025
You're lying.

t. fellow leaf

[Anonymous No.19576033]

>700 page misanthropic doorstopper
>didn’t even take him three decades to write
Gassbros… we definitely got way too fucking cocky

[Anonymous No.19576036]

can we expect a translated copy on Jan 7th?

[Anonymous No.19576037]

>>19576029
why would I lie, I have nothing to gain

[Anonymous No.19576042]

>>19576021
Maybe but he's not "mostly read in English."

[Anonymous No.19576044]

>>19576042
I didn’t say that the other guy did, monsieur

[Anonymous No.19576045]

>>19576033
kek

[Anonymous No.19576050]

>>19576036
If the publisher is smart.

[Anonymous No.19576065]

>>19576036
Definitely in Spanish and Italian.

[Anonymous No.19576091]

submission was released in french, german, and italian in january 2015, then in english in september the same year. looks like this one will come out in italian same day as in french. if they do the same as the last time, then english will have to wait a while

[Anonymous No.19576103]

>>19576091
Lazy anglos! Translate harder.

[Anonymous No.19576112]

>>19576091
retarded

[Anonymous No.19576138]

>>19575373
This will be his Nobel prize novel

[Anonymous No.19576145]

>>19576091
>looks like this one will come out in italian same day as in french
Basato.

[Anonymous No.19576162]

>>19575373
Céline for zoomers and not even that good.

[Anonymous No.19576170]

>>19576162
Houllebecq is a much more relevant writer than Celine, and also more talented

[Anonymous No.19576181]

>>19576162
>writer thread gets traction
>célinefags come out of the woodwork
every time

[Anonymous No.19576183]

>>19576170
>relevant
>and also more talented
You are retarded

[Anonymous No.19576196]

>>19576170
Houllebecq's writing is dogshit compared to Celine's. He is readable because of his obvious social commentary.

[Anonymous No.19576219]

>>19576196
Celine is a sap. Amazing anyone argues for this guy with nothing to say

[Anonymous No.19576227]

>>19576196
>>19576183
>>19576162
>DUDE... LIFE SUCKS... AHHHHH... I THINK I AM GOING INSANE... IT IS SUCH CRUD... POOPOOO... PEEPEEE... AHHHH... HOLY FUCK... I SHIDD MY PANTS... AND THE WORLD... IS TO BLAME

[Anonymous No.19576237]

>>19576162
>War le bad because it's not what I thought it would be!! Waaa waaaa

[Anonymous No.19576238]

>>19576219
He says more than Houllebecq and is a better writer so yes, amazingly people argue he is better.

[Anonymous No.19576241]

>>19576227
>>19576237
>OH NO I'M LE DEPRESSED AND MIDDLE AGED MAN AGHHHHH WOMEN AND SEX I'M LONELY AGH SHALLOW CRITIQUE OF NEOLIBERALISM AGHHH

[Anonymous No.19576245]

>>19575800
Imagine championing a writer named Mann. Like just come out of the closet already.

[Anonymous No.19576248]

>>19576219
>books need to say something
You can just read children's books with easy messages at the end. Would be fit for you.

[Anonymous No.19576254]

>>19576241
Sounds based

[Anonymous No.19576265]

>>19576248
>shitty vulgar style
>nothing to say
>no poetry (lmao)
>rambling nonsense about le jews

[Anonymous No.19576279]

>>19576265
You haven't read his books and you are retarded.

[Anonymous No.19576283]

>>19575373
i read submission last night and i'm now down with islamic governance

[Anonymous No.19576287]

>>19576248
Yes books need something to say, I’m sorry if you’ve convinced yourself otherwise. The very nature of a book is saying something, clown

[Anonymous No.19576290]

>>19576265
First 3 apply to Houllebecq. Rambling nonsense about his depression is the 4th.

[Anonymous No.19576298]

>>19576287
Then by your definition he says things, you utter imbecile

[Anonymous No.19576300]

>>19576298
Yes, and what he says has no particular significance to anyone, milksop

[Anonymous No.19576314]

Celine calling out the Jews will make him forever an honourable man.
Maybe H talks some shit about Zemmour although I see it as unlikely.

[Anonymous No.19576317]

>>19576290
>First 3 apply to Houllebecq
Houellebecq has four books of poems and they're pretty good. Also he comments about the modern world in his novels while Céline comments about his life, onanistic writing.
>Rambling nonsense about his depression is the 4th.
Not quite. Céline has dedicated non-fiction books about his ramblings. His pamphlets, I mean.

[Anonymous No.19576325]

>not happy with shitting up the Borges thread, célinefags decide to shit up a new Houellebecq thread
why are célinefags such attention whores with daddy issues?

[Anonymous No.19576330]

>>19576314
>DUDE
>HE CALLED OUT THE JUICE
>THATS WHY HES A GOOD WRITER

[Anonymous No.19576339]

>>19576314
Even the Nazis thought he was a loony.

[Anonymous No.19576342]

>>19576300
Houllebecq's obvious observations do kek?

>>19576317
>t. never read them in French
>they le good
>modern world
His comments are apparent to anybody who looks around. Celine also comments about "modern" world.

[Anonymous No.19576347]

>>19576314
Houllebecq has made mentions if it is relevant, but being a much better writer than Celine and also more intelligent, he’s more concerned with a moral decay that can be found on an individual level as a result of the final results of western civilizations goals and how that effects people throughout their lives. Because after all, none of the shit people are exposed to would have any effect if they’d simply just stand up to it, or refuse it. But they want it, and that’s something that hack Celine would never grasp, too concerned with painting everyone as a cartoon villain out to get hm

[Anonymous No.19576348]

Another Houellebecq I won't read. He hasn't written anything worth reading and I don't expect him to change so late in life

[Anonymous No.19576349]

>>19576325
>got btfo so hard in Borges threads he stopped replying and his cherry picked arguments stopped after he was shown a thread about celine with no /pol/ shit
>continues to embarrass himself in the next thread
Hilarious

[Anonymous No.19576350]

Pound and Wyndham Lewis will also be seen as honourable men even though Wyndham tried to backtrack a little later on.
It's a shame Celine never got to live in a world where every Talmud was burned, Sad!

[Anonymous No.19576356]

>>19576342
>t. never read them in French
Yes, I have lol that's the way they're meant to be read, I'm not some anglofag.
>His comments are apparent to anybody who looks around.
Kind of like Céline's "war is le bad, okay?"

[Anonymous No.19576357]

>>19576196
I feel like every writer is somewhere on a scale...some are very high in style, technique, etc. Others are very high in content, plot, commentary. No one is great in both realms. Houellebecq is very good in content. Dostoyevsky is good in themes, for example.

[Anonymous No.19576361]

>>19576348
>I haven't read him but he has nothing worth reading
Truly a retarded brain here

[Anonymous No.19576369]

>>19576361
Thank you

[Anonymous No.19576372]

>>19576342
Houllebecq has only become obvious after the fact, bud. I suggest the board /pol/ where you can pretend to be Catholic or pagan or whatever the fuck you want with people more your mental speed. I know you feel super emotional about Celine since he’s the first person you’ve read in years but you have to realize most people on this board think he sucks and no, they aren’t going to change their minds because he made some comments about Zionists, something just about every writer has done

[Anonymous No.19576375]

>shit up threads of relevant and better writers because no one cares to read muh Céline
are they the new guénonfags?

[Anonymous No.19576376]

>>19576347
not them but you are beyond braindead my friend

[Anonymous No.19576383]

>>19576376
Prove him wrong

[Anonymous No.19576385]

>>19576356
You haven't you are some mutt probably
>he thinks it's all war le bad
Yes, both of their sayings are obvious. Your point? Le he doesn't say anything but actually he does I just don't like it.

[Anonymous No.19576389]

>>19576376
No one is forcing you to log on to pornhub besides yourself, monsieur

[Anonymous No.19576397]

>>19576383
no need to say him when its clearly you

[Anonymous No.19576401]

he looks ugly though.

[Anonymous No.19576404]

>>19576372
Lol. It was always obvious.
>most people on this board think he sucks
Should I link the thread again? Kek. He was mostly praise. Your babble doesn't hold together at all.

[Anonymous No.19576408]

Anons wanking over Houellebecq had better check out Marc-Édouard Nabe.

[Anonymous No.19576416]

>>19576385
>You haven't you are some mutt probably
No, you're the mutt bastard who loves muh Céline because of le /pol/ memes and supposedly edgy aura. But when you engage with his texts, if you have a brain, anyway, you would realise there's very little no substance and the style is not compelling enough to compensate it. He's basically just a proto-Kerouac, proto-Bukowski in terms of style.
>Yes, both of their sayings are obvious. Your point? Le he doesn't say anything but actually he does I just don't like it.
"War is bad" is not a particularly revolutionary statement. Jünger's experiences in WW1 are far more interesting to read.

[Anonymous No.19576424]

>>19576404
>Kek. Your babble doesn't hold together at all.
This is the shit Celinecels actually write

[Anonymous No.19576434]

>>19576408
>Writing your little thoughts
Sounds exactly like what Céline does in his work. Onanistic writing in his fiction, pamphletistic writing in his non-fiction.

[Anonymous No.19576443]

>>19576408
Literature is for writing your thoughts. Whether they’re little or not is up to the reader’s interpretation, which is generally how a writer’s work is criticized. You can delete the picture and stop spamming it everywhere

[Anonymous No.19576447]

>>19576443
>Literature is for writing your thoughts.
No, that's what blogs and diaries are for.

[Anonymous No.19576459]

I don't like his miserable books, but he's the only modern author who's telling it like it is. I basically have no choice but to write in his genre if I want to be relevant and contemporary without forcing myself to approve of this dystopian nightmare we live in.

[Anonymous No.19576460]

>>19576424
Céline does the exact opposite. Céline works on style with a precision of a jewel maker and the ear of a musician to give an elaborate form to emotion in a way that looks easy but isn't. He wasn't blogging or writing anything that came to mind. And actually he despised writer who were much concerned with thoughts and ideas, he was very much about finding a special lyrical tune and holding onto it.

Remember that what Céline did in French is very hard to translate. If you're reading him in English you're getting a taster, not the real thing. Céline is unsurpassable.

[Anonymous No.19576461]

>>19576408
based

[Anonymous No.19576469]

>>19576416
Kek, you already got BTFO with that argument and then you run away from the thread, just shut up retard.
>style not compelling
>t. never read in French
We already established all of this. Why do you insist on embarrassing yourself further?
>Junger
They aren't.

[Anonymous No.19576477]

>>19576447
What is literature for then? Do you write other people’s thoughts? Does the writing come from somewhere besides your thoughts?
Nice compressed image about a guy’s little thought on literature by the way. It’s very amusing. Because he is in a suit and glasses I definitely give more credence to this one sentence removed from context that he had to say. It shocked my world when I saw him say that, really. Before I saw it I was convinced literature was for writing whatever little thoughts I had, but then I saw this guy say it’s not about that and I realized (on account of his well tailored suit and fashionable glasses), I was wrong. Literature is actually about… something? I don’t know, I guess I have to wait until another compressed picture of a suited man tells me what it is

[Anonymous No.19576484]

>>19576459
But that wd just be writing sub-Houellebecq. Houellebecq himself is already writing sub-Houellebecq now. His latest novel didn't add anything to his body of work, he was just doing the same old.

Better find some other, fresh take on contemporary life. A artist of today ought to show how joy and ecstasy are still possible in this mess we're in. Baudelaire was already talking about turning mud into gold. This is urgent. Houellebecq doesn't do that. He's shown you the mud. Sure he's done it like no one else, but one needs to go beyond that. Transcend the mud.

[Anonymous No.19576485]

>>19576424
He is right. The anti-Celine sentiment is quite dumb ITT. 2 people running in circles with unsupported claims, hard to even call them arguments since they are so dumb.

[Anonymous No.19576489]

>>19576460
>Celine does the exact opposite. Céline works on style with a precision of a jewel maker and the ear of a musician to give an elaborate form to emotion in a way that looks easy but isn't.
I was actually commenting on your cringe writing style. Thanks for doubling down with something even worse

[Anonymous No.19576497]

>>19576485
Yes they need to start posting one liners from nobody academics next to their posts. They also need to talk about the quality of literature as it relates to calling out the joos. If they do this then they’ll have accomplished the rhetoric of celinecels

[Anonymous No.19576500]

>>19576460
>Céline works on style with a precision of a jewel maker
No, he doesn't, he's meandering and sparse. You must be talking about some other writer that is not him. Nabokov put it best "Second-rate. A tense-looking but really very loose type of writing."
>the ear of a musician
Not in the poetic sense.
> Céline is unsurpassable.
Jesus Christ lol

[Anonymous No.19576505]

Céline is a master stylist. Incomparable to anyone else. Funny to see Americans, reading it in English, giving their opinions about the style and musicality as if they meant something. Americans shout their opinions with great conviction but that doesn't make them any less retarded.

[Anonymous No.19576511]

>>19576477
I think you misunderstand what he means by 'writing your little thoughts.' God, you people are so literal.

[Anonymous No.19576513]

>>19576477
Have a harder think and also listen to the rest of what he says in the itw.

Literature is an art. Art isn't just made of thoughts. Art is form given to subject matter, to visions of the world, to emotions. Simply putting your thoughts down on paper obviously doesn't mean you're writing literature. How is that not obvious?

[Anonymous No.19576515]

>>19576505
No one is shouting. this is an imageboard

[Anonymous No.19576518]

>>19576497
Thread about Celine >>19551411 Find me all the /pol/ talk. You are running with dumb presumptions like the moron you are. It's quite funny though.

[Anonymous No.19576523]

>>19576518
>ending sentence with though

[Anonymous No.19576526]

>>19576485
Why was Céline even mentioned in an unrelated thread btw? Célincels are looking for trouble by just shitting up threads and then act faggy when people actually react to their nonsense.
>NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO YOU CAN'T DISLIKE CÉLINE, HE'S ONE OF THE GREATS, M'KAY? MY FAVORITE BLOGGER SAID SO!

[Anonymous No.19576527]

>>19576515
NIGGER

[Anonymous No.19576530]

>>19576500
>Not in the poetic sense
Lmao

[Anonymous No.19576533]

>>19576527
Does the existence of black people upset the celincel this much?

[Anonymous No.19576537]

>>19576526
Kek, meltdown with no arguments after getting BTFO second time in a row.

[HM No.19576541]

>>19576489
You're talking to a different anon.

>>19576500
> Nabokov put it best "Second-rate. A tense-looking but really very loose type of writing.
Nabokov was a great writer but a doubtful judge with narrow aesthetic principles. He thought Dostoevsky was bad, that's enough to make you wary of his judgments.

>Not in the poetic sense
You must out of your bloody mind and completely ignorant of Celine. His prose is uber-poetic. Anyone with a pair of eyes knows that. We're going to have to start posting extracts here cause you're talking completely groundless shit.

[Anonymous No.19576543]

>>19576527
You would never say that to his face

[Anonymous No.19576544]

>>19576518
It ended in a pretty relevant note. Thank you for sharing!

[Anonymous No.19576556]

>thread about houllebecqs new novel
>past forty posts have been celinecels demanding people write essays on why celine is bad, talking about jewish people, and posting gifs of basedjaks in diapers shitting themselves
This makes realize why Celine sucks lol!

[Anonymous No.19576558]

>>19576541
>Nabokov was a great writer but a doubtful judge with narrow aesthetic principles.
Cope. He's right about Céline.

[Anonymous No.19576559]

>>19576526
kill yourself.

[Anonymous No.19576561]

>>19576559
seethe

[Anonymous No.19576563]

>>19576544
Nobody argues he is fucking Musil you dumb fuck

[HM No.19576573]

>>19576556
TBF as a French person everytime I hear Americans or anglophones talking about Houellebecq, whether they're critics or anons, they often end up mentioning Céline. Points to a serious misconception of what both their literatures are like, as very few French people would find a common ground between these two writers.

[Anonymous No.19576574]

Houellebecq writes the same book with different narrative variations. I’m not sure how long he could keep it up in a book that’s 700 pages, hopefully he does something different this time or has a premise that can give a lot of complexity like Submission

[Anonymous No.19576578]

>>19576563
>Céline, Louis-Ferdinand. Second-rate. A tense-looking but really very loose type of writing

[Anonymous No.19576587]

>>19575373
I don't care about the subject matters Houellebecq writes about. I take pride in not reading his bullshit and acting is if I know what he's on about after skimming one of his shitty interviews. I plan to never read a single line of his fiction, yet I will continue to call him and all his fans shitheads.

[Anonymous No.19576588]

>>19576578
>gets filtered by everybody
bravo nabokov

[Anonymous No.19576598]

>>19575373
It's going to be a middle-aged Frenchman who sleeps around until eventually he realizes France would be better off if a plague wiped out a large portion of the population.

[Anonymous No.19576602]

>>19576588
Not quite, he liked Joyce, Borges, Kafka, Bely, Tolstoy, Stevenson, Beckett, Milton, Poe, Cheever, Austen, etc.

[Anonymous No.19576603]

>>19576598
People who sleep around should be publicly lashed or exiled. Many ancient civilizations did this. Get a life, degenerate scumbag. A single moment of suffering from me is worth a lifetime of pain from you.

[HM No.19576639]

>>19576602
He said Borges wrote flimsy little fables. I doubt it shows much admiration.

[Anonymous No.19576647]

>>19576639
Houuellebecq writes flimsy little tales about his psychosexual issues projected onto human civilization.

[Anonymous No.19576649]

>>19576639
>Borges, Jorge Luis. A favorite. How freely one breathes in his marvelous labyrinths! Lucidity of thought, purity of poetry. A man of infinite talent.

[HM No.19576655]

>>19576649
Indeed. I'll find the source for what I mentioned. It was in a letter I think.

[Anonymous No.19576664]

>>19576602
you are right. filtered by almost everybody

[Anonymous No.19576666]

>>19576639
Are you still seething about the Borges thread? Why single him out in particular? He also said some bad shit about Joyce and Beckett. Just let it go, man lmao

[Anonymous No.19576673]

>>19576664
No, he disliked bad writers like Céline. Let's face it, Céline's writing is dogshit. But at least it has soul, unlike other shitty writings.

[HM No.19576675]

>>19576647
There aren't many psychosexual issues in Houellebecq's books. Unless being a lonely person (you might say a loser) who would like to bang women and might end up going to prostitutes is a psychosexual issue. That would make it a pretty enormous category of people.

[HM No.19576681]

>>19576666
Don't know the thread. No, I don't really care, I was just replying to anon whos aid Nabokov liked Borges cause I remembered that "flimsy little fables" comment I read. Nabokov dissing on writers doesn't stop me from sleeping at night anon. I like the man and don't mind his mistakes.

[Anonymous No.19576706]

>>19576469
>style not compelling
Correct. There are better stylists in France, let alone the world. Proust comes to mind, just to mention someone from that era.
>We already established all of this. Why do you insist on embarrassing yourself further?
I was not that guy. Not sure what you mean.
>They aren't.
Yes, they are. Jünger is far more fascinating than Céline, both as a writer and as a person.

[Anonymous No.19576709]

>>19576675
>Unless being a lonely person (you might say a loser) who would like to bang women and might end up going to prostitutes is a psychosexual issue
Yes, I consider that a psychosexual issue.
>That would make it a pretty enormous category of people.
Execute all of them.

[Anonymous No.19576717]

>>19576673
Yes Henry James and Gogol are bad writers while Nabokov is great kek

[Anonymous No.19576719]

>>19576709
>I want to kill people who are having the fun I'm lacking
why are you like this?

[Anonymous No.19576724]

>>19575420
>This one will almost certainly be about the covid event and just be 730 pages of outright misanthropy and more lampooning of this western civilisation in its last perverted stage.
I'm hyped

[Anonymous No.19576726]

>>19576719
People must live by higher ideals in order to truly cultivate themselves or gain genuine insight. By living a life of sexual immodesty, they promote social chaos, delusion, and mental illness.

[Anonymous No.19576731]

>>19576717
>Henry James
He's awful, yes. Mere dry overly latinate style (unlike aesthetic and latinate like Nabokov). Meandering, autistic prose. Nabokov had the right instinct and taste in disliking him 'rather intensely'.

[Anonymous No.19576740]

Gotta say it's pretty exciting that there are still major "literary" authors producing work that we can anticipate. Although it's mainly just Houellebecq, Knausgaard, and Krasznahorka. A reminder at least that there is still culture left in the world.

[Anonymous No.19576741]

>>19576726
Ok Weininger. Remember to not make a mess on the carpet when you shoot yourself.

[Anonymous No.19576747]

>>19576741
I have many hobbies that do not involve fixation on sex, you degenerate scumbag.

[Anonymous No.19576752]

>>19576706
Yes, Proust. Very comparable to Celine kek.
>I was not that guy
That's why you have the same talking points. Right.
>Junger
He isn't. He is worse writer and not as interesting or funny.

[Anonymous No.19576754]

>>19575420
Sounds awesome, I can't wait

[Anonymous No.19576759]

>>19575420
Are most French people incapable of deep contemplation until they hit their 40s?

[Anonymous No.19576771]

>>19576752
>He isn't. He is worse writer and not as interesting or funny.
He's a more fascinating thinker and has a more interesting view on war other than Incéline's sappy old "war le bad xD."

Jünger >>> Incéline.

[Anonymous No.19576780]

>>19576747
You sure one of them isn't feeling inferior when you see a guy going out with a sexy girl?

[Anonymous No.19576795]

>>19576771
Kek, you are so retarded.

[Anonymous No.19576796]

>>19576780
"Take a look sometime at the face of a dog who’s just had sex. He just stares into space with strangely empty eyes. It’s exactly the same with people – in the beginning they work themselves up into a frenzy, and in the end there’s nothing at all." -- Kodo Sawaki

[Anonymous No.19576800]

>>19576796
When are you in the room to look at someone's eyes after sex?

Also if you saw a poet or thinker daydreaming you wouldn't find they looked particularly intelligent. Being deep in thought often makes you look like a downer.

[Anonymous No.19576804]

>>19576795
Whatever you say, incélinefag. Just remember that your favorite writer is a mediocre at best, awful at worst.

[Anonymous No.19576809]

>>19576800
>When are you in the room to look at someone's eyes after sex?
Why do you act like sex is something unique to only a few people? There are 7 billion fucking people on this planet. You need to take a bullet to your incel shit-brain. You truly live on a lower plane of existence.
>Also if you saw a poet or thinker daydreaming you wouldn't find they looked particularly intelligent. Being deep in thought often makes you look like a downer.
Fuck off to Reddit. It's not about appearances here, you stupid faggot. Contemplation will lead you to derive meaning and purpose in ways that do not involve obsessing about sex, you depraved son of a bitch.

[Anonymous No.19576814]

>>19576809

Your mistake is indeed to see sex as a uniform common denominator to the human race. As a low, beastly, debasing practice of all humanity, or a raw primary need like shitting or being sick.

Sex is what your mind brings to it. Erotic emotions and contemplation are correlated to the sensitivity and imagination. It's highly individual in power and drives creativity. Look at Picasso.

[Anonymous No.19576817]

>>19576771
>>19576804
>no arguments + poor wordplay
i read the borges thread, you really are low iq

[Anonymous No.19576822]

>>19576817
>he thinks he has presented good arguments by writing "Kek, you are so retarded."
lmao the delusion continues

[Anonymous No.19576823]

>>19576809
So riled up. Someone's got issues. Are you worried that having sex needs makes you the same as every moron on earth?

[Anonymous No.19576828]

>>19576814
You are wrong. Celibacy and long stretches of abstinence lead to a wisdom and forms of creativity that are more aligned with the absolute. The erotic dimension is fundamentally obstructive to true insight, to true contemplation and wisdom. The vast majority of mystics throughout history have either been entirely celibate or gone through long stretches of abstinence. By obsessing with sex, you will see things in a narrow and more worldly perspective.
Can you imagine devoting yourself to one craft, endeavor, or path that does not involve sex for at least 2-3 years? You are an ingrate.

[Anonymous No.19576835]

>>19576828
I doubt you're serious, but would love it if you are. Someone who really thought like that would be tragically hilarious.

[Anonymous No.19576838]

>>19576823
There is no such thing as sex needs. The issue is your mentality shall add to these problems and help spread sexual immodesty. The best societies, in the past, valued ideals that did not promote sexual immodesty.
Promotion of sexual immodesty leads to social chaos, debauchery, lack of contemplative depth, and the deterioration of higher values.
What I have is to say is absolute, and if you disagree, then you are deserving of public lashings, execution, or exile.

[Anonymous No.19576843]

>>19576835
You are frivolous minded, shallow, and scum and one factor for this has to do with your obsession with sex. You are worse than the vast majority of animals even.
You promote the spread of sexual immodesty which thereby leads to social turmoil, disintegration of communal integrity, the loss of higher ideals, and the loss of contemplative depth.
This is not a joking matter. While you may view me as "hilarious" from your misguided perspective, you are, objectively speaking, barely sentient. You are scum.

[Anonymous No.19576849]

>>19576838
>>19576843

[Anonymous No.19576861]

>>19576849
Oh wow, I am so sad! My life is so worthless because I couldn't land a hot chick like that! My dick calls out for the pussy of a hot, sizzling chick. Every night I walk on top of the mountain. I stare at the moon and unzip my pants. I let my little pee pee dangle in the wind. The breeze feels so good. All of mother earth's history led to the creation of my pee pee as daddy Bataille once told me. I live only for its satisfaction. I speak only for its satisfaction. I die only for its satisfaction.
All of this universe is one big phallic symbol moving in and out of a huge black whole shaped like a vagina. I live and die for pussy :D

[Anonymous No.19576872]

It's going to be his best yet.

[Anonymous No.19576877]

>>19576162
Celine is a dogshit writer overhyped by Amerifats.
Houllebecq is miles more talented, and funny.

[Anonymous No.19576882]

>>19576408
His writing fucking sucks. Just stick to his interviews.

[Anonymous No.19576886]

>>19576795
you are embarrassing. you got BTFO and can't cope anymore. just close the thread already and try to forget this by tomorrow morning

[Anonymous No.19576893]

>>19576882
What have you read?

[Anonymous No.19576896]

>>19576861
This post actually readily betrays your deep-seated insecurity and need for beautiful pussy, it's hilarious. Try as they might, the incels on here always expose themselves. Just dive deeper into one of your hobbies to cope. I suggest woodworking.

[Anonymous No.19576899]

>>19576872
He's making a big deal out of it (including a deluxe limited edition of 300K copies, something he's never done before) so he's obviously proud of it. I think this might be a masterpiece. There's mentions of it being like a 'great German novel.'

[Anonymous No.19576900]

>>19576771
>>19576804
>>19576886
>got BTFO in Borges thread
>got BTFO in Houllebecq thread
>he keeps going
Funny.

[Anonymous No.19576909]

>>19576896
>can't understand satire or being mocked
You're an idiot.
From reading Houellebecq, he strikes me as being similar to Bataille in mentality. I dislike both of them, but I think Bataille has more literary value. Bataille, at the very least, takes his obsession with sex to its metaphysical conclusions, which are obviously wrong.
Both are psychosexual messes due to promoting sexual immodesty.
It is ideal for a society to either promote monogamy or polygyny. Once a society starts being accepting of polyamory, open relationships, and polyandry, then it will start to disintegrate as its higher values unravel.

[Anonymous No.19576910]

>>19576900
Jünger >>> Incéline.
Seethe, cope, dilate.

[Anonymous No.19576918]

>>19576843
Less funny when you're pushing it anon. No sense of comic measure. Yawn.

[Anonymous No.19576920]

>>19576886
>NOOO Celine fans on like him because of /pol/
>gets proven wrong
>NOOO he isn't musical enough
>gets proven wrong, admits to not reading it in French
>NOOO it has no substance
>WELL ACTUALLY IT HAS OBVIOUS SUBTANCE AHHHH (which I extracted from a certain part of his first novel while conveniently ignoring the rest of the novel and his other novels)
>Houllebecq has obvious substance too but he good because...
LMAO, pathetic.

[Anonymous No.19576928]

>>19576918
Have fun becoming an unwise sack of shit in your 40s.

[Anonymous No.19576951]

>>19576920
>NOOO he isn't musical enough
>gets proven wrong, admits to not reading it in French
He's got a colloquial tone, but he's not musical. You must have terrible ears if you think he's musical. Also, I'm not the guy who's never read him in French.
>NOOO it has no substance
>WELL ACTUALLY IT HAS OBVIOUS SUBTANCE AHHHH (which I extracted from a certain part of his first novel while conveniently ignoring the rest of the novel and his other novels)
This proves you were arguing with more than one person, retard. I never did any of this.
>Houllebecq has obvious substance too but he good because...
Because his knife cuts deeper than Céline's. Also he is a poet at heart and that's how he first became relevant in France, because of his early poetry (novels came later).

[Anonymous No.19576952]

>>19576928
Thanks.You have fun devoting years of asceticism in order to reach the same mental vacuum as that of a jock who just fucked a cheerleader. Only you'll call it wisdom or whatever mystic doctrine you go for.

[Anonymous No.19576962]

>>19576920
>NOOO Celine fans on like him because of /pol/
>gets proven wrong
A great deal of why he's liked in this site is because of his politics. Let's not be naive. Although that's not the only reason and some misguided fools actually enjoy his writing.

[Anonymous No.19576965]

a lot of garbage posts in this thread

[Anonymous No.19576973]

>>19576962
Projection with no basis in reality. Journey was/is considered leftist by many.

[Anonymous No.19576976]

You guys remember when Houellebecq wrecked the New York Times back in the year 2000?

[Anonymous No.19576980]

>>19576952
Go back to Christianity, please. You are akin to demons without authentic religion. Even Islam is better than what you've become. Either the West should go back to authentic Christianity or be force converted to Islam. You shouldn't be allowed to remain as edgelord atheists who make a mockery out of all traditional values, such as sexual modesty. You are unknowingly shooting yourselves in the feet and are becoming as destructive as the minority subversive Jews.
Comparing the sexual high of a jock fucking a cheerleader to the authentic ataraxia of a devoted religious man is immensely damaging to the inner spirit or accrues negative karma (depending on which tradition you follow).
For your own good, please drop this gay ass post-Enlightenment and secular bullshit.

[Anonymous No.19576981]

>>19576965
Yes, but nonetheless this is by far Houellebecq's greatest /lit/ achievememt... 206 posts and counting.

[Anonymous No.19576984]

>>19576973
>4chan doesn't like radical edgy nazi-adjacent writers bro lol that's just projection
alright lad

[Anonymous No.19576994]

[Anonymous No.19576999]

>>19576980
" Even in your folly and despising ye each serve your Self, ye despisers of the body. I tell you, your very Self wanteth to die, and turneth away from life.

No longer can your Self do that which it desireth most:—create beyond itself. That is what it desireth most; that is all its fervour.

But it is now too late to do so:—so your Self wisheth to succumb, ye despisers of the body.

To succumb—so wisheth your Self; and therefore have ye become despisers of the body. For ye can no longer create beyond yourselves.

And therefore are ye now angry with life and with the earth. And unconscious envy is in the sidelong look of your contempt.

I go not your way, ye despisers of the body! Ye are no bridges for me to the Superman!—

Thus spake Zarathustra."

[Anonymous No.19577006]

>>19576886
lmao I love inserting myself into arguments and pretending to be one of the parties

you guys are nuts

[Anonymous No.19577013]

>>19576909
>>can't understand satire or being mocked
Your post is quite literally dripping with virginity. You don't understand how normal people, who actually have sex, operate.

Didn't read the rest of your post because I don't engage with male virgins above the age of 20. Take your victory.

[Anonymous No.19577014]

>>19576999
Sexual modesty does not mean despising the body. Nietzsche is an idiot, and you are treating him as a kind of prophet of the secular, industrial, and globalized world order.
Please go back to Christianity. You depraved and promoting social chaos, denigration of higher values, and more.
You will reap better fruits from Christianity than promoting this filth.

[Anonymous No.19577015]

>>19577006
>you guys are nuts

Honestly don't see any other reason why one wd read and post here

[Anonymous No.19577024]

>>19577013
You are a complete idiot. It shouldn't matter whether I am married, celibate, single, or whatever. Look at the content of what I'm saying, faggot.
Please go back to Christianity. You are ruining the entire world with your silly and destructive secular and post-Enlightenment values.

[Anonymous No.19577027]

>>19575373
It's about a scientist who finds out that COVID is exclusively sexually transmitted and everyone is just fucking. He resents it because he never gets laid because his dick is small and shaped like an egg. His brother whose penis is shaped like a mushroom wants him to release the information but egg penis refuses due to ennui and a fear that it will lead to societal breakdown, in the now Le Pen-led, constantly on strike france, that is held together mostly by trad-cath petit bourgeoisie. finding out that children with Covid are all being molested might be a match in a tinderbox. Mushroom penis tries to leak the information independently but ends up being institutionalised. The remaining 509 pages are records of egg penis visiting mushroom penis in the asylum.

[Anonymous No.19577028]

>>19576984
Houllebecq is the same based on this logic

[Anonymous No.19577041]

>>19577014
I love how secularism is seen as promoting a globalized world order, but Christianity somehow isn't. You might want to revaluate what you think the Christian church has been about.

[Anonymous No.19577048]

>>19577028
Not quite. I don't remember Houellebecq wanting to exterminate all Jews and becoming buddies with the Nazis.

[Anonymous No.19577056]

>>19577041
Even authentic Christian globalism is more palatable than this decadent secular bullshit. Please go back to Christianity.

[Anonymous No.19577063]

>>19577048
Taking risks anon. Chances you don't know shit about Céline are about 99% if you say this.

[Anonymous No.19577071]

>>19577056
He even uses the word "decadent". So cute. Where d'you find it? Huntington? Spengler?

[Anonymous No.19577073]

>>19577048
KEK, anti-Celine fag exposed as retard. Thanks.

[Anonymous No.19577076]

>Anglos think 'decadent' is a fancy word somehow
kek not even that guy but this is embarrassing

[Anonymous No.19577088]

>>19577048
He is liked because of what people here think his politics are and the incel characters in his books. Are you daft?

[Anonymous No.19577108]

>>19576994
kek

[Anonymous No.19577109]

>So you want to kill all the Jews?
>I think they don't hesitate much when it comes to their ambitions, their purulent interests? (10 million in Russia alone)? If calves are needed for the adventure, let's bleed the Jews! That's my opinion! If I catch them in the middle of a racket, trying to push me into the trench, I'll liquidate them without batting an eyelid, from the first to the last! It's the Man's retaliation. I would like it to be proclaimed in an absolutely conclusive, certain, trumpeted all over the world, so that this invertebrate people, called French, may recover a little of their self-respect, that a single rotten toenail of the drunkest, dumbest, most knave-like Aryan, lying on his vomit, is still worth a hundred thousand times more, and a hundred thousand more still, no matter how or when, than a hundred and twenty-five thousand Einsteins standing upright, all faded with unheard-of resplendent glory. I hope you have understood me...
Incéline, Bagatelles pour un massacre

[Anonymous No.19577111]

>>19576976
When the fuck did Michio Kaku become a literary critic?

[Anonymous No.19577115]

>>19576348
We got too cocky Houellebecq-bros..

[Anonymous No.19577123]

>>19576951
You just admitted you haven't read it in French you dumb fuck. At least man up instead of making clearly uneducated proclamations based on your own ignorance you American pig.
>Because his knife cuts deeper than Céline's.
Kek. Maybe if you are an incel.
>Also he is a poet at heart and that's how he first became relevant in France, because of his early poetry (novels came later).
Nobody gave a shit. Only his novels are of interest and that's why he became famous.

[Anonymous No.19577125]

>>19577027
>509 pages of medical record visits
SNORE. Cut those out and close the book early and I'll be interested

[Anonymous No.19577156]

>>19577123
>Kek. Maybe if you are an incel.
Not sure how that would be the case. He only has one loner type character who can't have sex and he's a best seller. Rather unlikely all those people are incels. Céline on the other hand is a writer that attracts /pol/tards, who are the biggest incels on this site.
>Nobody gave a shit.
kek yes they did, in the poetic scene of France, anyway. Can't trust everyone to have a good taste. But the poetry has even been translated to other languages, meaning it's of interest to certain readers.
>Only his novels are of interest and that's why he became famous.
Sure but there's also poetry in lots of his novels.

[Anonymous No.19577188]

>>19577071
Baudelaire :>)

[Anonymous No.19577199]

5 and everyone in this thread has no sex in 2022, including me

[Anonymous No.19577205]

>>19577199
phew
rerolling

[Anonymous No.19577219]

>>19577205
based

[Anonymous No.19577244]

>>19576408
https://youtu.be/2XM6SksSlVw

holy... god... mother of based.....

[Anonymous No.19577262]

First time reading again since high school, 26 now.

Been enjoying The Elementary Particles quite a bit, but then he pulls out the alpha - beta - omega hierarchy out of nowhere and I laughed harder than I ever have while reading a book. Can't tell if it was supposed to be played straight, since everything else until now has been pretty morbid and sneering, aside from the schoolboy who jumped out the window and crippled himself. How much are the characters a stand-in for himself, you think? Not very much I'd say. Houellebecq seems more pitying than caustic so far.

[Anonymous No.19577299]

>>19577262
Comparing human society to wolf packs and animalistic heirarchies has been a thing for years, it didn't suddenly spring up from PUA forums and incel websites

[Anonymous No.19577309]

finally book kino is back on the menu
robert one seat in the readinglodge pls

[Anonymous No.19577503]

>>19575420
I can only read Houellebecq if I imagine the main character not as a midwit 40 year old but as a young fertile anime girl to which I project myself onto but also hate.

[Anonymous No.19577521]

>>19577299
>wolf packs
Debunked theories btw

[Anonymous No.19577543]

Will this finally win him the nobel?

[Anonymous No.19577549]

>>19577543
one can only hope. imagine the seethe if he wins.

[Anonymous No.19577586]

>>19575548
>A French website says it's inspired by German books and that the publisher wanted to change the title but H said he chose the title because he wanted the book to last.
Holy shit did he really name it Mein Kampf?