Four years ago US-Writter Johnatan Littell got the major French book prize 'Goncourt' for a book in (a very bad) French ("Les Bienveillantes", 2006). I am the first to recognize that 'style' is the make-up of art, but the funny part of this story was to observe that a Prize which is almost entirely devoted to entertaining and stylate litterature for grand-mothers and christmas gifts was given to this big book on ww2 (It is a current joke in France that no good writter ever got this Goncourt-Prize which has been without exception given to 'writters-that-suck'.) It is not new that the bullshit that enable publishers to live makes author die.
Due to some Jewish obsession to summarize History into a Jewish problem and so destroy Historical studies*, French press and TV almost coerced French customers to buy Littell's book because of its subject (75% of books are bought in France by women, whose religious attitude is determining the success of a book; every blockbuster must be seen through this prisma. As a man I was bored by long sado-masochist descriptions added to the military life description. Is there any subject more boring in art than sex except soldiers and their military life? Subtle poets know that sex and soldiers are comic subjects about which only secretaries talk about seriously).
A bizarre shock happened between two main religious today dogmas: Jewish dogma against Gay dogma. As Littell makes his main sadistic nazi anti-heroe a paederastic one, insisting on the incestuous part of his sexuality, the question was: what kind of dogma would be the strongest? Jewish or Gay? I must admit that thanks to Littell I was interested in this Goncourt Prize for the first and probably last time of my life.
Theory of Littell is in fact not far away from what you can deduce of the reading of the French Marquis de Sade himself, whose devotion to sex cannot be separated from his devotion to politics. Sade is for sure the French philosopher who is the closer to nazi's revolution and Nietszche.
My idea is rather different from Littell's one and that is the reason why I do think he is just an hypocrite. Sado-masochism is not the consequence of nazism but of liberalism. Karl Marx would no doubt have seen in Hitler's politics a regular liberalism, due to marxist historical method to examinate any kind of politics under its economical machinery first of all.
French author Pierre Drieu La Rochelle (still censored in France or published with a preface to prevent people to share DLR's opinion!), who was seduced by nazism before the war like Ezra Pound or English Evelyn Waugh were by Mussolini, as soon as they went into Paris, Drieu La Rochelle was disappointed by nazis, recognizing in them ordinary capitalists although he was hoping that Hitler would change liberalism into an honest politics.
*The most shocking effect of the Jewish obsession about ww2 in France is this idea that Napoleon Ist, because he did not made anything against Jewish, was not a butcher as Hitler, although the cruelty of Napoleon's orders was may be more terrific than nazi's cruelty. No need to say that Napoleon did not have the same opportunity to provoke popular electorate against Jewish like Hitler did.