Islam might provide enormous publicity for the novel, but the French writer Joris-Karl Huysmans (the narrator's speciality) is actually the main subject. This is heavy Rive Gauche stuff, in that much of the action is about French Literature. The narrator's obsession with Huysmans reflects, I suspect, Houellebecq's affinity with him (pessimism, misogyny). There are a few in the Anglo-Saxon world who will have read Huysman's Satanist classic Là-bas (Down There) or perhaps the aesthete's manual À rebours (Against the Grain) but Huysmans had a much larger oeuvre which has never travelled and which is largely forgotten back home.
I can't go along with Houellebecq's championing of Huysmans, but I did enjoy his trashing of the Rimbaud crew. However, a lot of the wit will be wasted on anyone without a grounding in writers like Léon Bloy, Jean Lorrain and Guénon. And similarly you need to know something about French politics to get full value. I didn't entirely understand the significance of Huysmans, unless he was meant as a symbol of spiritual searching. The famous comment after the publication of À rebours was that the author's only choice was between the muzzle of a pistol or the foot of the Cross. Houellebecq seems to be mellowing towards religion, or perhaps mellowing, full stop.
Bearing in mind Houellebecq's previous attacks on Islam, you would expect a scathing portrait of a Muslim France, but that's not quite what you get. The Saudis own the Sorbonne but triple the salaries of the academics, and you can't escape the feeling Houellebecq has some time for a religion that allows you to take a 15-year-old girl as a second wife (this isn't a read for feminists). The end of the book will surprise many readers and will cause furious arguments over what Houellebecq "means" (one assumes his intention).
Houellebecq has a taut style so you rarely get bored in Soumission, but it is a novel with little event and a lot of reflection and debate: characters sit down with a drink and talk about Nietzsche for pages. As a novel, this won't add much to Houellebecq's reputation, but it might do a lot for Huysmans.
I can't go along with Houellebecq's championing of Huysmans, but I did enjoy his trashing of the Rimbaud crew. However, a lot of the wit will be wasted on anyone without a grounding in writers like Léon Bloy, Jean Lorrain and Guénon. And similarly you need to know something about French politics to get full value. I didn't entirely understand the significance of Huysmans, unless he was meant as a symbol of spiritual searching. The famous comment after the publication of À rebours was that the author's only choice was between the muzzle of a pistol or the foot of the Cross. Houellebecq seems to be mellowing towards religion, or perhaps mellowing, full stop.
Bearing in mind Houellebecq's previous attacks on Islam, you would expect a scathing portrait of a Muslim France, but that's not quite what you get. The Saudis own the Sorbonne but triple the salaries of the academics, and you can't escape the feeling Houellebecq has some time for a religion that allows you to take a 15-year-old girl as a second wife (this isn't a read for feminists). The end of the book will surprise many readers and will cause furious arguments over what Houellebecq "means" (one assumes his intention).
Houellebecq has a taut style so you rarely get bored in Soumission, but it is a novel with little event and a lot of reflection and debate: characters sit down with a drink and talk about Nietzsche for pages. As a novel, this won't add much to Houellebecq's reputation, but it might do a lot for Huysmans.
Like this article? Share, save or print using the icons below:
