Houellebecq is somewhat of a literary phenomenon in France, and pretty much everywhere else. Curious to see what kind of skills got him to win the prestigious Prix Goncourt, I started 'La carte et le territoire' (the map and the territory), his latest book, earlier this year. I didn't finish it. It didn't have the scandal, and obscenity he was famous for... but mainly I was just a little bored.
But since I am in the Japanese mountains this holiday and I have nothing else to do but ski, stick to the 10 books and 40 dvds I've brought with me (there's a lot more space in my suitcase when heels are not involved)... I've given him another chance, with his first commercial success, Les particules élémentaires (the elementary particules/ or 'Atomised'). This is nothing short of a revelation to me... A sentiment of relief, I feel. Compulsive, essential reading - especially after what I've read recently (see previous posts ).
Houellebecq is a true novelist. He covers society as it is now, with all its realities and complexities - the way Balzac did so long ago, and I hadn't really found since. He uses scientific, philosophical, metaphysical, sociological and autobiographical tools to render a pessimistic portrait of the society left by our parents and grand parents, in which 30-something men are sick, depressed and impotent... ravaged by the sexual hedonism and feminism of previous generations. It's fiction as social commentary as there's almost no real 'plot' in 'Atomised'.
Ok it's also provocative and shocking. The New York Times called it a 'deeply repugnant read'. Many see it as hate-filled, sex crazed, nihilistic, disgusting book, so it's not for everyone.
But I really feel that Houellebecq is breathing new life into french literature, and this is obvz so inspiring.
I really enjoy his interviews as well (not the ones in which is racist comments land him in court). This one is great: http://www.theparisreview.org/interviews/6040/the-art-of-fiction-no-206-michel-houellebecq. This bit reminded me that as a French teenager, obsessed with Verlaine, Baudelaire and Corneille (Le cid remains one of my favourite plays), I left prose on the side and spent most of 2003 writing in alexandrines! How ridiculous. Who did I think I was?!
And what about poetry?
I think poetry is the only domain where a writer you like can truly be said to influence you, because you read and reread a poem so many times that it simply drills itself into your head. A lot of people have read Baudelaire. I had the more unusual experience of reading virtually all of Corneille. No one reads Corneille, but I came across a little pile of classics, and for some reason, I loved it. I loved the alexandrine, the traditional twelve-syllable verse. When I was at university, I wrote quite a bit of classical verse in tetrameters, which appealed to the other poets. They said, Hey, that’s not bad. Why not write in classical verse? It can be done.
A constant refrain in your novels is that sex and money are the dominant values of this world.
It’s strange, I’m fifty years old and I still haven’t made up my mind whether sex is good or not. I have my doubts about money too. So it’s odd that I’m considered an ideological writer. It seems to me that I am mostly exposing my doubts. I do have certain convictions. For example, the fact that you can pay a girl, that I think is a good thing. Undeniably. An immense sign of progress.
You mean prostitutes?
Yes. I’m all for prostitution.
Why?
Because everybody wins. It doesn’t interest me personally, but I think it’s a good thing. A lot of British and Americans pay for it. They’re happy. The girls are happy. They make a lot of money.
How do you know that the girls are happy?
I talk to them. It’s very difficult because they don’t really speak English, but I talk to them.
