Michel Houellebecq, the preeminent author and literary celebrity from France, has a myriad of things said about him. Some feel it appropriate to call him the greatest author alive. Others call him a hack. The Elementary Particles, the novel that established Houellebecq’s preeminence, is the subject of a lot of commentary as well. But what seems to be generally unaddressed is the novel’s sheer efficiency. In 262 pages of characteristically unflinching confidence, Houellebecq manages to address the destabilization of materialist philosophy by contemporary particle physics, the cultural legacy of the Sixties, the legacy of the postmodernists, sex positivity, pluralism, academic politics, the future of marriage, reproduction, death, the beauty of life, a latent desire in Western civilization for annihilation, the human predicament, and what seem like a thousand other things. The novel also manages to tell at least two entire life stories, concisely capturing the essential dynamics of these lives with only a modest amount of detail or “data.” The three main elements that I think have enabled its incredible thematic density are the quality of Houellebecq’s prose, the retrospective narration by his characters, and the qualities of the main characters.

Houellebecq’s prose is not florid, nor is it so austere as to be comparable to Hemingway. Houellebecq favors quality over quantity. This can be understood with reference to a hysterical realist, like David Foster Wallace, for whom quantity is itself a quality which can be used to produce some sort of effect upon the reader. In Houellebecq’s work, a sentence is written economically, with only the necessary words. In order to reduce the need for clarification, he avoids specificity that verges on the esoteric. Houellebecq does not write postmodern novels, and The Elementary Particles is accordingly a straightforward read. What enables him to make effective use of these strategies is the fact that his prose is simply fantastic, and evidences a writer of immense natural talent. Houellebecq’s writing is brutal and coldly efficient. Paragraphs cut aggressively, and the pages bleed with subtext. In an excruciatingly indifferent deadpan voice, Houellebecq delivers profound anguish, builds towering monuments of potential redemption for characters, and then decimates them without hesitation.

The efficiency of The Elementary Particles is greatly contingent on the reader’s ability to truly understand lengthy narrative arcs with only a few points of reference. Many events in the main characters’ lives are related at a point in time which affects their views of them in important ways, with some retrospective commentary. This mode of story-telling connects things across time and space, making possible an extrapolation of a character’s development over time. From recollections of only a few events, the principal dynamics that define a character’s life can be deduced. A full human being can be understood, down to their fundamental volitions, by an examination of these very few things--many of which don’t seem at all like significant landmarks in a life.

The dense intellectual dialogues in The Elementary Particles explore topics including quantum physics, molecular biology, the mechanics and ethics of reproduction, morality, metaphysics, scientific validity, literary studies, and many other things. In presenting these dialogues, Houellebecq uses his two main characters, half-brothers Michel and Bruno. Both are highly intelligent and well educated. Michel is a molecular biologist, very well-versed in philosophy, with origins in physics. Bruno studied literature and the other humanities, with a focus on the existentialists. The two brothers have very interesting intellectual lives on their own. However, when they occasionally meet and have these conversations, the dialectic between them is precisely what the narrative requires. They spar as two sides of the same miserable coin. One is confined to the murkiness, uncertainty, and multiplicity of the obsessive study of a few cultural moments, while the other scurries with a horrible diligence across the cold, gray plains of pure empiricism.

There is a lot to be said about a book that seems to say a lot of things, some of which the author may not even believe in. And my intention was never to dissect Houellebecq’s novel. My aim is to point to an underappreciated characteristic that allows the novel to succeed and to reach so many people. My second wish is that you will read it.