I just finished this novel and want to discuss it on /lit/, but we can't discuss it without discussing politics.
How can /lit/ host substantive debate while censoring uncomfortable opinions?
This is a serious question. I'm not trolling. I genuinely want to understand why this board is being censored.
>>7457947
And please, don't tell me to take this to /pol/. Submission has been excerpted in The Paris Review, listed among the best books of the year by The New York Times, and reviewed by Knausgaard.
All of those outlets touched on the political elements of the book. Why can't we do the same?
>>7457947
The plot and exposition was extremely ill-executed. He just uses his characters to ventriloquize long political diatribes. Literally a French Ayn Rand
Should I read Husyman before reading this?
>>7457969
If you want to get the most out of it, I would say so. But just reading his wiki article will get you by if you don't have time for that. I think that the main subject of Submission is the current political situation rather than literature.
>>7457969
>favoring husyman over bloy
why don't you just post your opinion instead of making some dumb metathread you retard
>>7457947
He's parroting Alain Soral's opinions at this point, and rehashing Huysman's A rebour with Islam instead of Catholicism and a protagonist who reads Rene Guenon.
What do you want to discuss? His interview with The Paris Review basically tells you everything he feels ie he's an anti-liberal, anti-modernist who likes Catholicism for aesthetic reasons though is too lazy to commit to it, who thinks Catholicism should form an alliance with Islam.
He does some good stuff mocking French intellectuals who pretend these problems don't exist but imo he doesn't have a really new or profound anti-modernist critique. He's still good, but I don't care for his prose and I find his ideas better expressed elsewhere.
>>7457982
Because I'm tired of getting banned for hurting sensitive readers' fee fees, friend.
>>7457969
start with the Greeks then work your way up to Huysmans.
>>7457994
great victim complex. how're your fee fees doing? why do I have the lingering doubt you haven't even read the book and are just shitposting.
>>7457947
>>7457956
>censored
because politics threads are off-topic. political threads with a pretense of being about literature are also deleted, that's fine with me. a good example that happens sometimes is someone posting the bell curve. its a book, sure, but those threads develop into nothing but text and pic dumps from /pol/lacks about race and IQ.
this isn't censorship, you are a private individual voluntarily making an agreement with another private entity (4chan). before you post here you agree to terms of service which, if you read them, you'd understand that basically mods and admins can delete any content for any reason, as well as ban any user.
censorship is something that happens when GOVERNMENT forbids or punishes speech. you don't have free speech rights here or any other message board. an expectation of absolute and universal free speech is the kind of attitude i expect to find on reddit
>>7458017
Free speech, not hate speech!
>>7458017
>"censorship is something that happens when GOVERNMENT forbids or punishes speech"
How old are you, pal? Still in your teens?
Censorship is not exclusive to government bans. Private school libraries have been accurately accused of censorship, as have religious institutions. Censorship is practice of officially examining books, movies, posts, etc., and suppressing unacceptable parts. The institution effecting that suppression does not need to be government run, and never has been.
>>7457994
thats not whats going on, you're being delusional, as ill demonstrate below
>>7458017
id like to add that i searched the archive for other threads about the book. they weren't deleted in spite of shitposting, and fell off page 10 like any other thread. drop the persecution complex.
https://warosu.org/lit/thread/S7432766
https://warosu.org/lit/thread/S7427744
https://warosu.org/lit/thread/S7406851
https://warosu.org/lit/thread/S7224586
https://warosu.org/lit/thread/7376010
notice how none of them have the little trash-can icon at the topic, which indicates they were indeed deleted, as with this thread linked below. it was a thread that had the potential to generate recommendations and discussion but was deleted. and no, it wasn't because it was a right wing thread that was hurting anyone's feelings, the op had a feminist slant.
https://warosu.org/lit/thread/S7457363
>>7458058
Worth adding something else:
For decades and decades, the far left railed against "soft censorship" of books by radical authors. These books weren't officially banned by the government, but were kept from print and often kept from sale at major bookstores. The left termed this systemic marginalization "soft censorship."
>>7458058
older than you, probably.
>accused of censorship
>accused
lol. i can also accuse you of censorship, that doesn't make it so. private schools, even though independently funded, still must comply with federal and state laws. your example of religion doesn't work either. you voluntarily join and remain a membership with a religious community, one is free to access materials they might ban or leave any time one desires. you may want to reply that people aren't always voluntarily part of religious groups, but that coercion comes from other individuals in the religion.
>>7458077
again, private corporations, private decisions. the far left's fee fee's are often hurt easily, i see no reason why we should give their idea of 'soft censorship' any credence. are you defending a far leftist belief?
>>7457962
True, but that could be said about plenty of great books, they're still interesting characters. I think the biggest flaw is how unrealistically university life is portrayed (Houellebecq never attended a university).
>>7457947
>I just finished this novel
lies
> want to discuss it on /lit/
lies
> but we can't discuss it without discussing politics.
lies
>How can /lit/ host substantive debate while censoring uncomfortable opinions?
>implying your shitty rhetoric qualifies as substantive
nothing of value is lost whenever your shitty bait posts get deleted
>censored
lmao
i wish the board was being censored
>mfw stalin returns and gulags shitposters
>>7458017
>an expectation of absolute and universal free speech is the kind of attitude i expect to find on reddit
Why would you expect to find this on reddit when they are often criticized for downvoting any post they don't like?
>>7460207
Because plebbit is a libertarian shithole.
>>7460220
Since when?
>>7457947
>I just finished this novel and want to discuss it on /lit/, but we can't discuss it without discussing politics.
So, you didn't actually read it, huh
>>7460257
What do you mean? This book is about the immigration crisis. Even wikipedia says so.
>>7460271
>Even wikipedia says so.
>I only read the wikipedia blurb and I'm pretending to have read it to justify my crossboard shitposting
so transparent we can your organs
>>7460087
no, becky went to college, he talks about it in one of his interviews.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4LXMR-RdQQ&ab_channel=NewYorkInstitutefortheHumanitiesatNYU
