Skip to main content

Submission, by Michel Houellebecq



Michel Houellebecq's new book, SUBMISSION, seems to have caused a good deal of stir in France, and is now producing much the same effect in the United States.

Houellebecq is a well-known novelist, although as is surely the case with many important people, places, things, and ideas this is the first mention of him in this or any of my blogs. His previous novels include WHATEVER (1994), THE ELEMENTARY PARTICLES (1998), PLATFORM (2001), and THE MAP AND THE TERRITORY (2010).

THE ELEMENTARY PARTICLES, or in French "Les Particules élémentaires," was first translated into English for the UK market as ATOMISED, then re-translated for the US market with the more literal translation of the title I've provided here.  It may have been his most successful novel thus far.

The new book, though, concerns Islam. At least on its face. It postulates a near future in which an Islamicist political party wins a French national election and forms a government.  Given contemporary politics in both Europe and the Middle East, this was a premise bound to kick up a fuss. 

Laurent Joffrin, the editor of Libération, has said that the publication of this book marks "the date in history when the ideas of the far right made a grand return to serious French literature.” The left regards any contemplation of an Islamicist take-over in France as akin to, say the argument that Dreyfus really was a traitor and got what he deserved.

But as I said above the new book only "on its face" concerns Islam.  The reviewer for The Guardian sees it as a satire on contemporary France, secularist, sclerotic, exhausted, waiting to be overwhelmed by some sort of tidal novelty. Perhaps Islamism is simply a literary artifice akin to the Persianness of the voice in Montesquieu's Persian Letters.

Marco Rich, who reviewed the novel (not very favorably, but without animus) in Harper's in October, observed that the Islamicization of France in Houllebecq's scenaro seemed to amount to making France a satellite of Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, which itself is an Islam of "mundane compromise," not the militant faith of ISIS or the Taliban.

Herein is my usual confession: I haven't read the book, and don't plan to. This blog entry should be considered merely a non-judgmental observation of one of the passing fancies of the world around me.

Comments

  1. "Submission" just made the NY Times list of 100 notable books of 2015.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/06/books/review/100-notable-books-of-2015.html?emc=edit_tnt_20151127&nlid=9442118&tntemail0=y

    It is unfortunate that no notable books will be published in December.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majesti

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

  Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave.   First, Plato  is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability.  I  only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable assigns a task to philosophers

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak