Give us that! The scene that will soon play out in court between Michel Houellebecq and Islam in France has a little air of deja vu. The trial will however have nothing literary about it. There will be a question of his remarks published during a copious interview with the philosopher Michel Onfray in a special issue of his review Popular Front. He is accused by Chems-Eddine Hafiz, rector of the Great Mosque of Paris, of a “provocation to hatred against Muslims”. He accuses him of essentializing them all as Islamists and of calling on the French to take up arms against them: “[…] The wish of the native French population, as they say, is not that Muslims assimilate, it is that they stop stealing from them and attacking them. Or else another solution, that they go away”, assures the writer.
Faced with the bronca, intellectuals come to his aid. Michel Onfray puts this on the requirement of “generalization” of any conversation (!); Mathieu Bock-Côté and Robert Redeker deplore the decontextualization of his remarks (known tune); the three raise the specter of censorship by using big words: “inquisition”, “absolute scandal”, etc. According to them, Houellebecq is just pessimistic. He does not wish: he describes. Caroline Fourest, she believes that the complaint of the mosque is not “unreasonable”. All things that bring back memories.
Houellebecq, 2001: “And the stupidest religion is still Islam”
It was in September 2001. The novelist had just published Platform. On this occasion, the magazine Read devoted several pages to an interview granted to the journalist Didier Sénécal. They spent the whole evening talking casually: “[…] And the dumbest religion is still Islam. When we read the Koran, we are collapsed […] Islam is a dangerous religion, and has been since its appearance […] Materialism is a lesser evil. Its values are despicable, but still less destructive, less cruel than those of Islam.” We must at least recognize his continuity in ideas. Several Muslim or anti-racist associations, starting already with the Great Mosque of Paris and that of Lyon, filed a complaint. At that time, the writer was supported by left-wing critics who applauded each of his books. The hearing took place from 1:30 p.m. to 10 p.m. in the presence of a large number of French and foreign journalists in front of the 17th correctional chamber of the Paris TGI. I also stood on the bench of infamy in solidum as managing editor of Read.
Rigged interview, forced drink … The poor arguments of Michel Houellebecq
Michel Houellebecq showed perfect cowardice. Instead of confronting the representatives of the Muslim organizations facing him, he discarded himself on the magazine, claiming in spite of irrefutable evidence (tape, etc.) that his interview had been faked, that sentences of their context (well-known tune), that his remarks had been made in the context of a work of fiction (unpublished metaphor to designate both an interview and a bistro), that he had been made to drink (as if he had need help!) and that, anyway, he often changed his mind. The magistrates followed the prosecution and, in the name of freedom of expression, Houellebecq and Read were relaxed.
Twenty-two years have passed. He is no longer on the cover of Inrocks but that of Current values. Only the naive still imagine that it has evolved or turned around, which exempts them from wondering about their own blindness. Because he is absolutely faithful to what he has always been: a deeply reactionary, lying and provocative decliner, much smarter than his admirers. As regards Islam, it has not budged one iota. It will nevertheless be interesting to observe the consequences of this new trial. It will act as a reflection of the times. In 2001, the court dismissed the plaintiffs on the grounds that the incriminated remarks fell under the right to criticize religious doctrines. What will happen this time in a society where the notions of identity, assimilation, Islamophobia are constantly controversial?