The novel begins, appropriately, on a Monday in late November “as if you’re in death’s waiting room.” What follows is a slow, methodical unravelling of both the individual subject and the French state, told through the lives of bureaucrats, technocrats, and the fading remnants of a professional-managerial class whose prestige rests on its usefulness to a system they no longer understand. Annihilation is not a thriller, though it borrows the form; it is a mood piece, a study in exhausted affect, and perhaps Houellebecq’s most fully realised ideological novel. Here, the longue durée of neoliberal decline meets the deep time of personal despair.
Paul Raison, the novel’s protagonist, is an inspector of finances, Houellebecq’s idea of a tragic hero. He occupies the bland heart of the French state, a functionary who drifts between a broken marriage, ministerial briefings, and lukewarm ready-meals. His affect is blunted, his libido fading, his politics at best administrative. Around him, France hums with quiet dread: mysterious cyber-attacks, synthetic snuff videos, “geometric figures that form in this video [that] are impossible.” These ruptures are never resolved. They serve instead to highlight the limits of both comprehension and control. “We’re dealing with an attack carried out by people unknown,” says a security analyst. “Their motives are unknown.”
The impasse is deliberate. Houellebecq is not interested in narrative resolution—he is interested in structural dead ends. For all the novel’s references to surveillance agencies and machine learning, the real object of investigation is the class function of technocratic elites in a state where liberal democracy has become little more than a holding pattern. “The world was no longer like his father’s,” Paul reflects. “Now, almost immediately, dangers assumed a global dimension.” It is a grim echo of the state’s diminishing sovereignty, its inability to manage crises beyond the management of appearances.
“There was no one left to govern, only platforms to maintain.”
Houellebecq has often been accused of reactionary politics, and not without reason. But his genius—if we must use the term—lies in his structural pessimism. Annihilation offers no romance of return, no rightist nostalgia for the tricolore. Instead, it presents a vision of capitalism so totalising, so devoid of meaning, that even the bourgeoisie are suicidal. The technocrats are not villains, they are husks. Bruno Juge, the economy minister whose simulated beheading kicks off the novel’s central mystery, is described as “a decent guy.” His tragedy is not that he is evil, but that he is irrelevant. “He knew it, it made him suffer,” we’re told. “People held him in high esteem but didn’t like him.” In any sane society, this would be comic; in Houellebecq’s France, it is devastating.
Pull back, and what we see is a novel about the end of a class, the petty bourgeois managerial caste that once believed itself to be the custodians of Enlightenment reason. They bought into the fantasy of meritocracy and efficiency; they internalised the neutral idiom of policy papers and fiscal projections. Houellebecq strips this class bare. Their marriages are loveless, their appetites feeble, their friendships transactional. “They had attained instead a kind of standardized despair.” Paul’s relationship with his wife, Prudence, reads like a satire of the affective limits of liberal individualism. She is a finance inspector and a vegan; he eats Saint-Nectaire and microwaved tagines. Their marriage becomes a symbolic war over the fridge. “The switch to veganism… would provoke total nutritional warfare.” The shared apartment, gleaming, luxurious, mortgaged, marks the point of no return. The more materially secure they become, the more their emotional bond corrodes. Houellebecq is not critiquing veganism, per se, but the atomised liberal subject, for whom even intimacy becomes a form of moral competition.
“Living together in particular” is what disappears, as consumption replaces collectivity, and identity replaces solidarity.
These men don’t fail to perform masculinity, they perform it perfectly, in its post-’68 form: no anger, no dominance, no need. Just a low, ambient competence. They are soft, decent, emotionally literate and utterly adrift. The father figure has become a colleague, a mentor, a sleepwalker. The violence doesn’t vanish; it becomes procedural. It lives in austerity budgets, in procurement contracts, in softly worded policy briefs that remove services from entire regions with the click of a mouse.
The tragic irony is that, in all three books, these men are not resisting change, they’re merely surviving it. If Louis and Baglin show the crisis of masculinity from below, Houellebecq shows it from above, among the class that supposedly benefited from the new order. But the result is the same: a world where men no longer know what they are for. Not because feminism triumphed, but because capitalism no longer needs them in the same way. The father is dead. The manager has replaced him. The rota is king.
Masculinity After Reproduction
It helps to read Annihilation alongside two other recent French novels: Édouard Louis’s The End of Eddy and Claire Baglin’s On the Clock. The three books differ wildly in tone, Louis writes with a cold, almost forensic rage; Baglin with clipped, lyrical restraint; Houellebecq with bitter detachment, but all are preoccupied with the same historical failure: the death of the father as a transmissible figure. Not the death of actual fathers, who remain stubbornly alive, watching television and drinking cheap beer, but the death of a class-bound structure of authority that once passed from man to son like a name or a trade.
In Louis, that transmission becomes violent. His father is not a monster so much as “a tired vector of inherited damage,” trying to enforce a form of masculinity, tough, hetero, working-class, that the son refuses. He punches walls, celebrates his own father’s death, and shouts at his son not to “talk like a fairy.” But his violence has no project. It doesn’t reproduce anything. The terror is not that he wields power, but that he is already its residue. He rages because he has nothing left to pass on.
In Baglin, the transmission has failed altogether. Her father does not discipline, he drifts. He repairs broken furniture, folds into the contours of the sofa, and exists primarily as an exhausted body. There is no ideology to enforce. The disciplinary function has migrated out of the household and into the logistics depot. Masculinity becomes ambient, not enforced but absorbed, policed by rota, headset, hygiene protocol. The father is still present, but he no longer speaks. Authority now lives elsewhere, in apps, in contracts, in the rhythm of low-paid service work.
Baglin’s real innovation is to portray a world in which even masculinity’s remains are being erased, not reformed, not overcome, but quietly deleted. There are no confrontations, no overt rejections of patriarchal values. There is only silence, retreat, and reabsorption into the machine. Her narrator doesn’t rebel against the father; she watches him decay. And the figure who takes over is not a new father, but a manager, one who offers shift work instead of certainty, time-clock logins instead of identity, biometric scans instead of guidance. In On the Clock, masculinity isn’t contested. It’s surplus.
Houellebecq’s men are their mirror image: elite, salaried, fluent in bureaucratic grammar, but just as emptied out. They are the heirs not of industrial labour but of la grande école, shaped not by fists but by function. And yet they too suffer the crisis of reproduction. Bruno Juge’s affective life is a series of deferrals and small breakdowns. Paul Raison moves through the novel like a ghost: he cannot connect, cannot love, cannot even eat properly. When asked what he eats, he describes “nutritionally synthetic” microwaved dishes. He’s not a man so much as a user interface.
“They had attained instead a kind of standardized despair.”
There is a moment in Annihilation when Paul steps into a lift and descends to level -62, a floor that doesn’t exist. The doors open onto a grey concrete corridor stretching into nothing. He doesn’t step out. Then the lift hurls him upward, crashing into level 64, another impossibility. The doors open onto a blinding, empty space. He returns to ground level and finds himself in a shopping centre filled with pale, flat-faced creatures whose tongues are like those of snakes. He wakes in a panic. It’s a dream, but also a diagnosis. Masculinity has no floor anymore. No grounding. No map. Just endless simulation, up, down, back again.
Masculinity has no floor anymore. No grounding. No map. Just endless simulation, up, down, back again.
And yet: this is not a novel without sympathy. Paul is no hero, but he is recognisable. His confusion, his yearning, his blunted pain, all reflect a deeper social truth. Under neoliberalism, even despair is privatised. The state cannot save him; the market has nothing left to offer. The family is broken, the workplace empty, the polity a memory. He is a man in a suit, eating a cold sandwich, watching a simulation of his boss’s head roll into a synthetic meadow.
Book Review (45) Books (49) Britain (15) Capitalism (9) China (7) Class (7) Conservative Government (35) Creeping Fascism (12) diary (11) Donald J Trump (33) Economics (7) Elon Musk (8) Europe (7) Film (10) France (12) Gaza (7) Imperialism (13) Israel (9) Keir Starmer (7) Labour Government (17) Labour Party (8) Marxist Theory (10) Migrants (11) Palestine (9) Protest (13) Russia (10) Suella Braverman (8) tarrifs (7) Television (7) Trade Unionism (7) Ukraine (8) United States of America (62) War (15) Work (7) Working Class (8)
