New novel out in France becoming Islamicised. Quite an interesting article and yes I think we'll probably see this happening in some countries in the future because he's right, most politicians don't want to face up to what is happening in their countries.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30694811

Still I find his attitude depressing.

"That's why I don't feel that I'm writing out of fear. I feel, rather, that we can make arrangements. The feminists will not be able to, if we're being completely honest. But I and lots of other people will."

At the end of the book Mr Houellebecq's hero Francois has himself "made arrangements" - going back to his teaching job at the Islamicised Sorbonne, tempted by a pay increase and the promise of several wives."

In other words the men will be fine because they can make "arrangements", but women will be forced back into being nothing but the property of men. And he's quite happy to go along with that.

Not all novels have happy endings.

There is a trend in France around the lost identity. You should also read Eric Zemmour "le suicide français" (the french suicide) and Alain Finkelkraut "l'identité malheureuse" (the unhappy identity). All these authors tend to link french decline to the multiculturalism with a strong focus on immigrants from Africa. All of these authors were accused at some point with neocolonialism and racism. They have a natural tendency to focus on islam and stir islamophobia.
Houellebecq is a natural provocateur and wrote a novel promoting sex-tourism and islamophobia.

Not just a trend in France, it's the trend across Europe. There'll be a load more condemnation and screams of "Racist!". In the meanwhile politicians and the media just don't seem to get it, people can't be forced to like Islam.

No one should be forced to like Islam. But you should not use it as a scapegoat as well. Just an example:

Black shooter = entire race guilty

Muslim shooter = entire religion guilty

White shooter = mentally troubled lone wolf

Unforunately, he wasn't talking about the novel at that point.

Unfortunately that's also all too easily turned around by blacks and Muslims.

White shooter = entire race guilty

Christian shooter = entire religion guilty

So everyone is guilty of being prejudiced one way or another.

It's only a novel. You might also get depressed after reading "A good son" by Pascal Bruckner.

Another book in the same mould is 'Renaud Camus - Le grand Remplacement' which is one of Zemmour's reference. The title speaks for itself, the great replacement, meanin local people being replaced by waves of immigrants.
I also think that the Islamophobia trend is across Europe, you just have to see what happened in Sweden recently
I understand the reaction of ordinary people seeing their social landscape changing completly. But strangely, all these authors never point out the disastrous mess that the US and its EU lapdogs are doing in the middle east. So it seems that there is a global trend to look for a clash of civilization between ordinary christians and ordinary muslims. One has to wonder, to whom's benefit ?
Personally my main concern is that if immigrants go home, who will pick-up my garbage outside ? don't think any French people want to do thes jobs

I thought it was

Muslim shooter = media and politicians go to great lengths to explain that shooter does not represent 99.9% of Muslims, and no need to worry about your Muslim neighbours.

Non-mulism shooter = media and politicians scream that guns are bad.

...noticed that too. Double standards of approaching undesirable events.

No, this is his personal opinion.

"That's why I don't feel that I'm writing out of fear. I feel, rather, that we can make arrangements. The feminists will not be able to, if we're being completely honest. But I and lots of other people will."

Personal opinion of a writer among plenty of French writers. I'm curious how many novels are written in France, in a year only.

But aren't most of them just endless repetitions of slightly varied accounts of millipedes being squashed?

Heh, maybe...

I hope this one won't have a...small accident.

Okay, I'm reving this thread top see if anybody has actually read the book by now and has any fresh inbsights based on that.

Here's my five rappen worth.

- The book is really a phenomenally good read. I read it pretty quickly. The narrative is fairly lightweight yet gripping.

- I didn't feel the book to be especially anti-Muslim. Most of the Muslim's who appeared in marginal roles appeared to be reasonable. The only clowns are the intellectual French guys and these continue to act like clowns after converting to Islam.

- By and large the plotline has credibility, although there are details that don't make sense, such as lack of protest and the speed of the transformation.

- Houellebecq's political analysis is pretty much spot on, with the political parties having to put their cards on the table and reveal their real allegiances and agendas. By and by the book also analyses the various reactionary, right wing and conservativeand other fringe political streams (ranging from Distributism to Third Way to full blown Neo-Fascism). To me these seem mostly accurate in their depictions and inter-connectedness, but not very profound. They nevertheless make an entertaining read. In the final pages a theory on how sexuality and religion are mutually inter-controlled is put forward. This seems to be something from a crackpot reactionary if the author didn't make it up on the spot, yet the narratve assumes it to be true and brushes aside any feminist objections with it. I had the feeling the author was cutting corners here.

- One interesting aspect in the book weas a pamphlet written by one of the French professor's who had converted to Islam. This pamphlet is the major source of information on Islam for the book's main character, Francois. The pamphlet is woefully superficial and is full of the type of statements I'm sure all of us have read on pamphlets you get handed out on the street. Francois admits doubting the accuracy behind the statements but does not question them or seek independent verification. He converts because it suits him.

First, let me say that Houellebecq is not happy about anything but book selling numbers.
Secondly, the book is an ambiguous fantasy but nevertheless fantasy in the same style as the scientific genetics fantasy in La possibilité d'une île. He is not fighting for anything.
Finally, it is clearly inspired by the theory of the great replacement, which makes it a book to read with careful critical mind, but it dorsn't mean that he advocates it. He explores it to the full in literary form in order to see where it leads, even if that might be absurdity.

His a book about a thought experiment. Not about taking side. The only side he ever took was to declare the sexual revolution and liberation for failed. Anything else is a literary creation as a tool to put a reasoning on trial.

He ends up very pessimistic and fatalistic about our common future, but he does not fight for what is comming. Huge difference.

__________________
Es wird nichts ausgelassen, um mich hier herauszuekeln. Ein Lehrbuch. False accusations and attacks continue. There is no stopping righteous people when they are wrong.