Houellebecq Takes KIRAC to Court Again over Sex Film

In January, nothing is wrong yet. Stefan Ruitenbeek and Kate Sinha, who together form the art collective KIRAC, are sitting at the kitchen table in Sinha's Amsterdam home, with soup and a baby monitor in front of them, talking about their new film: a film showing Michel Houellebecq having sex with several women. The trailer has not yet been released, the controversy has not begun, and the legal battle between Ruitenbeek and Houellebecq has not erupted.

Exactly what the film is about remains unclear. “It will be a portrait of Houellebecq, but also of me, unexpectedly becoming a father for the second time,” Ruitenbeek explains. It will also concern the role of sex and love in society and in Houellebecq's work and life. Precisely how, Sinha and Ruitenbeek do not yet know. That is how KIRAC always works: the film takes shape during the process.

When asked, with some surprise, whether Houellebecq is really cooperating fully with what could be seen as a porn film, Ruitenbeek confirms that he is. “He signed a contract. And he wanted this. Initially, we only wanted to organise a symposium with him.”

A judgment is expected this coming Monday in the second case Houellebecq has brought against KIRAC. The writer lost the first, in France, partly because the film falls under Dutch law. Before the Amsterdam court, Houellebecq argues that he was depressed when he took part in the film, tired and drunk when he signed the contract, unable to foresee the consequences and unaware of what he was agreeing to. He demands that the film not be shown. Houellebecq's lawyer says she has never read such an unreasonable contract. According to KIRAC's lawyer, it is a standard release agreement regularly used for films and books.

While KIRAC fights for the film in court, the women who had sex with the writer chiefly feel deceived. According to evidence submitted to the court, one of the women says she will feel used by the writer if the film is not made. The film was a condition of the sex: the camera was not there by chance.

A philosopher on a sex date

This is not the first time KIRAC has run into trouble over a sex film. In October 2021, Honeypot, in which conservative philosopher Sid Lukkassen goes on a sex date, also caused controversy. Lukkassen felt humiliated and wanted to withdraw. The film was released anyway. In the media and arts sectors, a debate arose about abuse and consent: was it morally acceptable to distribute sexual footage of someone who did not, or no longer, wanted that?

This time, KIRAC tried to do everything properly. Ruitenbeek and Houellebecq had already been in contact for some time. His books and philosophy had long played a role in KIRAC's work. From time to time, Ruitenbeek sent films to Houellebecq, including Honeypot. The seed of the Houellebecq film was planted in July 2022. Ruitenbeek and Sinha noticed that young, often subversive artists in their circles admired Houellebecq. From that emerged the idea of organising a symposium in Amsterdam. Houellebecq liked the idea; he would cut a ribbon.

Later that year, when Ruitenbeek was in Paris to make a film about porn performer Jini van Rooijen, it became clear that the plan would not be feasible. Houellebecq failed to turn up for a meeting with KIRAC. His wife, Lysis Li, came instead. She explained that Houellebecq was not particularly interested in KIRAC's exhibition. He could, however, be tempted by a Honeypot-like project. “It is absolutely better to suggest filming a porn scene,” she says in footage from that evening submitted to the court.

A sex date is arranged. Van Rooijen has a threesome with Houellebecq and Li; Houellebecq wears a wolf mask. The footage is intended for Van Rooijen's OnlyFans channel. After sex, however, Houellebecq refuses to send a photograph of his passport, which is required to post footage on the platform. Van Rooijen feels used for sex, as does one of the other women in the film. In a later email exchange with KIRAC, Li says it would be better to arrange matters of this kind beforehand in future.

Another meeting follows. A stay in Amsterdam is planned, in one of the few remaining hotel rooms where smoking is permitted, a requirement of Houellebecq's. Several women, admirers of his, come to have sex with him. Before filming, Houellebecq signs a contract: a standard release drawn up by a lawyer.

The release sets out Houellebecq's conditions in detail. For example, he does not want his genitals and face shown at the same time. In emails with KIRAC, he explains that this will allow him to deny being in the film. KIRAC responds: “This is a wonderful idea. If I understand correctly, your solution is to turn it into a work of art in which the distinction between fiction and reality takes shape as a game with your enemies' resentful paranoia.”

During the hotel stay, Houellebecq tries to send the camera crew away. He wants to have sex with the women without a camera. Ruitenbeek messages Houellebecq to say that this was not the agreement. “For me, giving you lovers and girls is only interesting if we can film.” And: “I don't think it's fair to the girls either. They want to meet you and have sex with you because they are being filmed at the same time, to sublimate their adventure with you into a beautiful film.”

Pornographer

In February, Houellebecq takes KIRAC to court. In the media and in court, he says he made a mistake. The impression emerges that an ordinary pornographer has misled him. French and Dutch media speculate about whether Houellebecq has this time taken too far the game of provocation through which he remains relevant.

The extensive email correspondence submitted to the court seems to produce a different picture. Not only does it suggest that Houellebecq did know, or at least could have known, what he was agreeing to, but also that he was guided by lust rather than strategy. For decades, people have wondered whether the writer resembles his male characters. These events — having sex with women and then failing to honour the agreement — appear to confirm that suspicion.

At the kitchen table in January, Ruitenbeek seemed to be speaking prophetically when he said: “Normally, people who take part with us find themselves in our labyrinth. Now we are in Houellebecq's labyrinth.”