A writer named Marin de Viry made an interesting analogy between writing and cycling. People tend to praise the mountainous stages, he said, where each new sentence, like each turn of the pedals, seems to display superhuman effort; but the stages of flat open country where nothing seems to be happening but where, at any moment, things can change dramatically have their own charm; the long stages along flat stretches, or stretches that only seem to be flat.“

less as a match than a game, less of a competition than a way for two people to invent and produce together a work of the mind, with questions, answers, frustrated passions, sudden revivals, shared or hidden flashes of understanding, virtuoso performances, the setting of traps. (p. 173-4) En plus des trois saisons sur Auvio, un récap par personnage est disponible en bonus sur la plateforme.But there are lighter notes: "Why do you write? Because you can't make love all day. Why do you make love? Because you can't write all day." (p 234)

Houellebecq's understanding of irreconcilable public differences starts with, "Problems, real problems, begin when two spiritual principles come face-to-face." (p 110) This can lead to a great unraveling: "A government can ask much of its citizens, of its subjects; but there comes a moment when it asks too much; and then it's over." (p 113) Fear not though: "Nowadays things are okay, we have a professional army; under such circumstances it's easier to love one's country, since the love is risk free." (p 114) But the risk remains, even still: "What if compassion disappeared? I think, in that case, humanity too would disappear. And that the disappearance of such humanity would be a good thing." (p 169) Human beings, in general, are possessed of a surprising ontological self-importance.//But they can have their free will, since they’re so keen on it; it’s like a decoration, it doesn’t cost much and people seem to like it.” 170 The philosopher Bernard-Henri Lévy, known for his liberal activism, and the novelist Michel Houellebecq, known for his social satire, exchanged letters for six months in 2008. Subjects include the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, where both support Israel but Houellebecq rejects the value of ethnic identity whereas Lévy describes himself as "a Jew who fights". [1] On the subject of wars in Africa and the rise of Islamism, Lévy accuses Houellebecq of apathy and Houellebecq argues for personal freedom over civic duty, describing exaggerated engagement with humanity as a greater danger. [1] Reception [ edit ]people who are complete atheists and who are therefore convinced of their complete ontological solitude, of their absolute, irremediable mortality, still go on believing in love, or at least behaving as though they believe.//And go on believing in moral law and go on behaving according to its tenets.” 145

As they conclude their correspondence, Houellebecq sums it up: "we are never as rational as we think we are" (p 255), and this from the self-identified free thinker! Levy agrees, "that's how life is, absurd, contradictory, you forget that you sold the Bentley, you believe that you always were who you are now until you wake up one fine morning and notice that time has changed you." (p 287) Levy notes wryly (take note, internet controversialists!), "In most discussions people arrive with their convictions and leave with the same ones." (p 286) Yet, despite not converting one another, despite still having no end of differences apart from the merely political, they discovered much about one another and found so much they shared. They at least understood that if the Church did not break the unnatural covenant it had made with the bourgeoisie and the employers, if it could not forge ties with the working classes, it was signing its own death warrant.“ Public Enemies: Dueling Writers Take on Each Other and the World ( French: Ennemis publics) is a collection of letters between the French writers Bernard-Henri Lévy and Michel Houellebecq, published in 2008. It was published in English by Random House on 11 January 2011. [1] Summary [ edit ] En préambule nécessaire, je dois reconnaître que si ce bouquin paru en 2008 ne m'était pas tombé par hasard entre les mains et contre ma volonté, je ne l'aurais pas lu. Pour de bonnes et de mauvaises raisons. this book moved me. i did not expect to be moved. i expected inspiration, intellectual stimulation, perhaps a couple of laughs, and an insight into m.h i could not grasp from his novels or interviews (also to read BHL for the first time). but i often found myself in awe of both of these writers and their honesty and intellect, and respect for what they have been dragged through.La série belge Ennemi public tourne le dernier volet de son triptyque en été, ce qui change complètement la donne après deux saisons tournées en hiver. "Ce tournage décalé, cela nous a donné un peu d'air pour terminer les scénarios. Cela change la garde-robe des comédiens, les lumières et l'ambiance d'équipe aussi, finalement. Ce n'était pas forcément inscrit dans l'histoire. Cela a entraîné quelques changements techniques, d'organisation de journée, mais rien de très important", confirme-t-il. What these two do is moan about their public identity, and their importance to culture. Which may be true (and I am a fan of Houellebecq) but it is almost like a Saturday Night Live skit. They're hysterical but I don't think they mean it in that light. Public opinion is the real enemy then, in large numbers and small (not the writer himself, as the title of this book would have us believe), and his novels are built around this core belief.

Mon impression globale en tant qu'observateur, lecteur, est que vous remportez le match. BHL ne peut pas vous suivre, et c'est normal. Il essaye de se hausser sur les épaules des géants précédents (dont les votres d'ailleurs). Il bosse. Mais il lui manque du génie. Un créatif est insaisissable et ne rentre pas dans le cadre. BHL veut être tout et c'est trop. When asked if writing is painful or pleasurable for me, I’ve never known how to answer; the truth, I think, is that it is something else and can take either of those forms. An extreme nervous agitation, an exaltation that can be rapidly exhausting. „ Words or things? I can’t even understand how the question can be formulated.//Literature or life? Life because of literature; for me life does not ‘live,’ it is not profoundly and carnally life unless I know that I can snatch words from it.” 238-9vrlo zahtjevna korespondencija između dvojice francuskih pisaca/intelektualca. s houellebecqovim opusom sam relativno dobro upoznata, a za bernard-henri lévyja nikad prije nisam ni čula. s obzirom da sam veliki houellebecqov fan, imala sam okvirnu predodžbu što mogu ovdje očekivati... uglavnom, to je palo u vodu nakon nekoliko stranica - njegov nihilističko cinični depresivni ego ovdje je prikočen. Levy, in particular, is a product of his insular haute-haute environment. I once read his “War, Evil and the End of History”, which begins as a collection of gripping and thoughtful war reportage, followed by an airy anthology of aphorisms on, well… War, Evil and the End of history, roughly passed off as oracular pensées. With such an apocalyptic topic, Levy might be forgiven for cosmic irresolution, but he reads like an indolent aristocrat who’s lost any obligation to perform heavy lifting.