
What Houellebecq Learned from Huysmans - samclemens
http://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/what-houellebecq-learned-from-huysmans
======
blfr
_he’s read the Koran and is no longer calling Islam “the stupidest” of all
religions, as he did in 2001_

It's hard to say whether he found new respect for Islam or just doesn't want
to be hassled by the French authorities (they put him on trial for that
remark).

~~~
omginternets
It says a lot about the mentality of the French left that calling a religion
"stupid" gets you a criminal charge...

"Touche pas a mon pote" has devolved into "say nothing about Islam, except
that it's the religion of peace".

Hopefully this will change, and we'll be able to make meaningful criticisms.

I leave it as an exercise to the reader to translate the following quote:
"Sans la liberté de blâmer, il n'est pas d'éloge flatteur."

~~~
coldtea
> _It says a lot about the mentality of the French left that calling a
> religion "stupid" gets you a criminal charge..._

Well, in the US if it hit a wrong nerve with someone you could lose your job
-- even if you said it on your personal account. Heck, it has happened for far
less offensive things.

And unless you name-check God every so often, whether Republican or Democrat,
you ain't getting to be President. If God "talks to you" directly, even
better.

~~~
throwitup
In the UK you can be arrested for posting on Facebook that your beauty salon
is 'no longer taking bookings from anyone from the Islamic faith'.

[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3320166/Police-
arres...](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3320166/Police-arrest-woman-
racially-abusive-Facebook-post-banning-Muslims-beauty-salon-time-country-
first.html)

~~~
seszett
Well, discrimination according to religion is illegal in the UK, isn't it?

~~~
_delirium
Also in most other western countries nowadays. In the U.S. it's been illegal
since the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Historically one of the more common cases
of discriminating based on religion was the prevalence of businesses with "no
Jews" policies, but that was eventually banned.

------
xefer
Knausgaard had similar observations of Houellebecq and Huysmans:

[http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/08/books/review/michel-
houell...](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/08/books/review/michel-houellebecqs-
submission.html)

------
pmoriarty
The difference is that Huysmans' A Rebours is a relatively intellectual and
sophisticated novel, while Houellebecq's is pedestrian garbage.

~~~
maldusiecle
A shame this is being downvoted, it's concise but in my opinion on point. I
enjoyed several of Houellebecq's novel as an undergraduate, but when I
revisited them recently I was surprised how superficial their social critiques
are. You can get a lot more from one good literary essay than from his novels,
albeit minus the deliberate offensiveness (misogyny, racism, etc.) with which
he proves himself "edgy."

A Rebours isn't a perfect novel, but the image of the jewel-encrusted tortoise
is a better passage than anything Houellebecq has achieved.

