Product Description

Half-brothers Michel and Bruno have a mother in common but little else. Michel is a molecular biologist, a thinker and idealist, a man with no erotic life to speak of and little in the way of human society. Bruno, by contrast, is a libertine, though more in theory than in practice, his endless lust is all too rarely reciprocated. Both are symptomatic members of our atomised society, where religion has given way to shallow `new age' philosophies and love to meaningless sexual connections. ATOMISED (Les Particules elementaires) tells the stories of the two brothers, but the real subject of the novel is in its dismantling of contemporary society and its assumptions, in its political incorrectness, and its caustic and penetrating asides on everything from anthropology to the problem pages of girls' magazines. A dissection of modern lives and loves. By turns funny, acid, infuriating, didactic, touching and visceral.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #6745 in Books
• Published on: 2001-03-01
• Binding: Paperback
• 384 pages

Amazon.co.uk Review
Michel Houellebecq's dark and disturbing novel Atomised sees him establish himself as a unique and important voice in European letters. With his first work, Whatever, Houellebecq had created a sassy, street-wise bulletin of disaffected existentialism, and here that voice brilliantly extends its range. Atomised (from the French Les Particules élémentaires) is the story of two half-brothers, Michel and Bruno, who seem to represent two sides of Houellebecq himself (there are more than a few moments in the book where we feel we are reading a strange roman à clef). Michel, a molecular biologist, finds ordinary, human emotions inexplicable, making him seem abstruse and cold. Bruno is his opposite: a frustrated libertine trapped in a body most find repellant but still holding sex up as his most validating moment. Through these skewed archetypes an intricate, sometimes quite moving story of the brothers' lives is formed.

Houellebecq obviously has a formidable intellect and, like the best French writers, manages to rail against anthropology, psychoanalysis, New Age philosophy and modern society in general without losing sight of his narrative--indeed the narrative is controlled quite beautifully, the pacing excellent, the switching from one brother's story to the other's done with a quiet grace. While some of Houellebecq's views are at the least questionable, and while there are moments when the conclusions to be drawn from his broadsides are disturbing, this never negates the value of the work. This is an ambitious book in which Houellebecq asks important questions: if sex is continually degraded by its increasing commodification and, concomitantly, genetics increasingly offers us the opportunity for procreation without recourse to it, where does that leave us? How do we navigate ourselves, afloat as we are, in this new moral universe? What does the increasing pace of scientific change mean to the conversations non-scientists have about our lives? What place does something called spirituality, whatever that means, have in this brave, new world? This is a big, bold, clever book that has already achieved more than cult status in France. Houellebecq should be read, and read carefully, if not always believed. --Mark Thwaite

Observer
`Destined to become a cult book…a genuine page-turner'

Independent
`Compelling... wrenchingly terrible... Unhealthy and haunting, rich and provocative, Atomised astonishes ...'

Customer Reviews

Camus lite
There's already quite a lot been written about this book both on Amazon and elsewhere. So there is no need to go on a any further length about how depressing Houellebecq's world view is. I could not disagree with any of that! And of course this kind of nihilism has plenty of antecedents, especially in European literature. Most immediately we can see the influence of Camus and Sarte in the existentialist-style anti-hero. What I think does need pointing out is that far from being a masterpiece and work of genius, this is actually highly derivate and rather poorly written. Maybe the judgement on the writing is unfair - after all this is a translation and we would need to be fluent in French to form a qualified opinion on the style. All I can say is that in the translation the writing comes across as leaden and clumsy, and, I might add, pretentious. Houellebecq is a philosopher and we are right to expect his work, like Satre's fiction, to be informed by his philosophical views. But what we get is a hotpotch ill asssorted observations that might look impressive in a teenager's efforts. Moreover, the grimness of his world view does not really pack all that much punch. The horrors he describes are nothing compared with what can be seen on tv any night. We are, I fear, as a society, generally desensitized to atrocity. But a modern writer has to take this into account. On the plus side I will say that Houellebecq is sometimes quite funny - perhaps his real gift is for comedy!

Transformative
As an author, I was genuinely changed after reading "The Elementary Particles" (the Canadian edition's name). The author's ability to weave various subjects together within a single paragraph was shockingly innovative, and reminds us how linked our human dramas are to the everyday happenings within the microcosm. It is the most original of the last 60 years, easily.

Pushing the boundaries
I read this book ages ago - like last year. It is relatively strange book but certainly poses a lot of question about human and how we think and response. It pushes a lot of boundaries ie when is a taboo doesn't become a taboo any longer? Very explicit in nature and very brutally honest. Some may argue it is being too clever for it's own good but is it? It just opens up a debate and makes you think.

I personally think it doesn't try to be anything but to convey a formed anthropological explanation human (or somewhat similar) thought process in a manner of a narrative story and event conveyed in 2 different characters ironically two half brothers. Alternatively you can say the author is a sick man. I think not.