Product Description

classic 1748 erotic prose work, tr Sophie Hawkes

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #1372924 in Books
• Published on: 1993-07
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback

From Library Journal
Diderot's erotic, subversive first novel, published anonymously in 1748, was a hit at the time, and no wonder: it is an allegory that portrays the king of France, Louis XV, as the sultan Mangogul of the Congo for whose amusement a magic ring is procured that makes women's genitals ("jewels") talk. The sultan's high-principled favorite, Mirzoza (Mme. de Pompadour), disapproves of his prurient curiosity; she foresees, correctly, that the indiscretion of the seraglio's "jewels" will wreck marriages and upset institutions. Clearly, Diderot's tale is more than a romp, as Adam Vartanian's long-winded introduction to this edition belabors; it is a novel of ideas in which "jewels" function as the vehicle of philosophy to enlighten society. Diderot managed his delicate high-wire act between adulation and satire so well that he wasn't thrown in jail until years later. With this new translation--serviceable but at times snagged in anachronisms-- Les bijoux indiscrets begs fresh consideration for curriculums and libraries.
- Amy Boaz, "Library Journal"
Copyright 1993 Reed Business Information, Inc.

Customer Reviews

Historical Pornography
Better known for his primary role as a Philosoph promoting the Enlightenment (cf. Diderot's work as editor and author of the monumental Encyclopedie), Diderot did what any starving writer would do early in his career: he turned to pornography ("Oh, NO monsieur! It is an erotic novel!) and published it anonymously. Well, word gets around: everyone knew he wrote it, and he served a light jail sentence.

I tried to read this novel the first time many years ago when I was learning to read French, and was happy to see it in translation (except for the occasional 18th century text on chemistry, I did not have the skill or patience to read any other books to completion).

While I would agree with other reviewers that it is not great literature (when compared with Flaubert, Zola, Proust, etc), it IS a good read.

In part this is for the sheer silly fun of a magic ring that causes vaginas to become indiscrete and tell tales of sexual adventure that would shame the efforts of boys in the locker room.

And partly this is for the historical insights a reader finds in The Indiscrete Jewels. As history of science, the novel is a good example of the active male scientist seeking the truth from passive female nature. As political history, the novel is a good example of how edgy intellectuals like Diderot (or like Galileo before him) had to suck up to royalty (in Diderot's case, King Louis XV and his mistress Madame de Pampadour) in order to gain patronage or at least benign disregard.

It's a quick read, and I recommend it for anyone with a curiousity about those darned French were up to in the mid- to late-eighteenth century.

Favorite Diderot quotation: "There are little testicles at the bottom of our most sublime feelings and our purest tenderness."

This ranks up there as one of the dumbest books ever ..
So theres this sultan and his little harem and he was totally obsesses that his wives/concubines tell him the truth about their love affairs and sexual encounters. So, in comes the magic lamp and the genie that gives the sultan a magic ring. I he turns the ring towards any women she will be forced to tell him what he wants to know .....

Only thing is, the women may not talk through their mouths but rather through their jewels .... meaning of course their vaginas .... WOW ... it's like a classical play of the current Broadway hit the Vagina Monologues ....

Thats really about where any similarity ends cause the stories and the writing are bad bad bad bad ..... Maybe the fact that this book was originally writtten in French and then translated into this English edition ....

If I were lost in the desert and this is the only form of entertainment available to me .... trust me I wouldn't read it .....