6,353
edits
Whatever (novel): Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
→Criticism: who cares about this queer
mNo edit summary |
m (→Criticism: who cares about this queer) |
||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
Clouscard described the liberalized sexual marketplace being chiefly the domain of what is known is classical Marxist theory as the exploiter classes, namely the bourgeois and the Capitalists, whereas Houellebecq's characters described the sexual marketplace as all-encompassing. In other words, Clouscard focuses on classical materialist Marxist economics, and sees the values pursued in the sexual revolution and the French student uprising in May 1968 as a distraction, whereas Houllebecqs characters directly blame the sexually successful and are often wealthy themselves. However, both Clouscard and and Houllebecqs characters describe sexual license as something less within the reach of the masses than it is promoted. Clouscard argued that sexual liberalism has served to divide the working class against itself (by agitating women against men, through labeling all men as oppressive "Phallocrats") in what he has dubbed "The prostitution economy."<ref> http://www.marxisme.wikibis.com/michel_clouscard.php In French.</ref> | Clouscard described the liberalized sexual marketplace being chiefly the domain of what is known is classical Marxist theory as the exploiter classes, namely the bourgeois and the Capitalists, whereas Houellebecq's characters described the sexual marketplace as all-encompassing. In other words, Clouscard focuses on classical materialist Marxist economics, and sees the values pursued in the sexual revolution and the French student uprising in May 1968 as a distraction, whereas Houllebecqs characters directly blame the sexually successful and are often wealthy themselves. However, both Clouscard and and Houllebecqs characters describe sexual license as something less within the reach of the masses than it is promoted. Clouscard argued that sexual liberalism has served to divide the working class against itself (by agitating women against men, through labeling all men as oppressive "Phallocrats") in what he has dubbed "The prostitution economy."<ref> http://www.marxisme.wikibis.com/michel_clouscard.php In French.</ref> | ||
==Criticism== | ==Criticism== | ||
Due to the frankness of Houllebecq, [[incelphobe]]s assert that reading to much into Houllebecq is a fools game, and assert (without any evidence and without challenging the ideas) that because the arguments are contained in fiction, that they cannot be taken seriously. | Due to the frankness of Houllebecq, [[incelphobe]]s assert that reading to much into Houllebecq is a fools game, and assert (without any evidence and without challenging the ideas) that because the arguments are contained in fiction, that they cannot be taken seriously. Some claim Houllebecq was mocking incels and not taking them seriously. Adam Kirsch however, writing in the New York Times, would beg to differ, stating:<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/12/books/review/michael-houellebecqs-sexual-distopia.html</ref> | ||
{{Quote|"Lacking in looks as well as personal charm [..] I don’t in the least correspond to what women are usually looking for in a man,” the narrator confesses. Houellebecq has always seen himself as speaking for and to such men"|Adam Kirsch in the New York Times}} | {{Quote|"Lacking in looks as well as personal charm [..] I don’t in the least correspond to what women are usually looking for in a man,” the narrator confesses. Houellebecq has always seen himself as speaking for and to such men"|Adam Kirsch in the New York Times}} | ||
It seems Adam is more correct, and Houllebecq was not writing simply to mock, but to illustrate what life is like for an incel in a sympathetic and foreboding manner. Whatever was not written in the spirit of being a [[chad]]. The main reason being the novel was a self-autobiographical work about his life after a crumbling and extremely short marriage (his first). This was the period of his life between 1988-1991 when he was a nobody, had no public accomplishment under his belt, became a programmer, fell into a depression, visited psychiatric hospitals, experienced periods of unemployement, had no partner etc<ref>https://quillette.com/2019/04/10/michel-houellebecq-prophet-or-troll/</ref>, major themes in the book Whatever. Houllebecq only became anywhere close to a [[chad]] after this point in his life, when his writing career started building in the 1990s. His writing eventually took off after his first published hit in 1998, the same year he found a partner again.<ref>https://www.theguardian.com/books/2005/nov/05/fiction.michelhouellebecq</ref> | It seems Adam is more correct, and Houllebecq was not writing simply to mock, but to illustrate what life is like for an incel in a sympathetic and foreboding manner. Whatever was not written in the spirit of being a [[chad]]. The main reason being the novel was a self-autobiographical work about his life after a crumbling and extremely short marriage (his first). This was the period of his life between 1988-1991 when he was a nobody, had no public accomplishment under his belt, became a programmer, fell into a depression, visited psychiatric hospitals, experienced periods of unemployement, had no partner etc<ref>https://quillette.com/2019/04/10/michel-houellebecq-prophet-or-troll/</ref>, major themes in the book Whatever. Houllebecq only became anywhere close to a [[chad]] after this point in his life, when his writing career started building in the 1990s. His writing eventually took off after his first published hit in 1998, the same year he found a partner again.<ref>https://www.theguardian.com/books/2005/nov/05/fiction.michelhouellebecq</ref> | ||
== References == | == References == | ||
<references /> | <references /> | ||