Houellebecq is a well-known author in France for writing about controversial topics, and Soumission is perhaps the greatest example of this. Published incidentally on the day of the Charlie Hebdo attacks, this narrative envisions a Muslim political party rising to power in traditionally secular France. The narrator is a literature professor at the Sorbonne, and struggles to understand his role in the rapidly changing society.
If possible, it is best to read this in the original French. Translators have taken their own approaches to the novel and changed certain aspects according to their interpretations, and often don't exactly align with Houellebecq's tone. Houellebecq is purposefully ambiguous, an unreliably unreliable writer in whose works it is nearly impossible to pinpoint his true thoughts. Is Soumission intended to be Houellebecq's fears of the future, or a critique on modern society and our inclinations toward fear-mongering? At times racist and misogynistic, Soumission will probably not become anyone's favorite book, but it makes for good discussion and will certainly make readers think.
No comments:
Post a Comment