Both Ensler's Vagina Monologues and Diderot's Indiscreet Jewels are meant to be comedic, and deal with the same subject matter. However the Vagina monologues is meant to be more informative on the subject; it tries to bring a subject that has been in the dark in to the light. This work wants people to know it is okay to talk about these things; the more inform people are and call body parts by their proper name the better. Diderot’s Indiscreet Jewels is silly and meant to arouse the thoughts of the reader while exploring the subject. People at the time probably did not take away much after reading it since the subject itself was considered to be vulgar. The women in the story would have been probably deemed as prostitutes. Diderot probably made the characters in the story foreign in order to make the subject/story more acceptable.

The gender of each writer influences the text of each of the writing. They invite different types of reader. Diderot’s is more inviting to men while the Vagina Monologue is more inviting to women. Diderot’s is more about male fantasies. He is more playful with his words. He down plays the situation by making things in a way more child like. Parents might tell a child their genitals are called jewels. He does not use actual terminology. Ensler on the other hand wants people to use the correct terminology.

These two works would probably not be acceptable in other centuries and cultures because of the subject matter. Sexuality, especially when concerning women's sexuality has always been a taboo since the beginning of time. Most people do not like to talk about this subject. Most of the changes in the way people view this subject did not occurred until the 20th century. That is a long time if one thinks about how long human have been around. The sexual revolution that occurred around the 1960s and 1970s changed many previous notions people had before. During this time birth control pills were accepted as a contraceptive, people began to experiment, and write books on the subject. Although we have made progress since then it is still a sensitive subject. Even though we are in the 21st century, a society that prides itself in being modern and more knowledgeable than past centuries, talking about a woman’s genitals still makes a lot of people uncomfortable. I remember when the play on the Vagina Monologues started playing a few years ago some people were very offended by it and it caused a lot of controversies while others found the play to be very informative; it is meant to change the viewers perspective about the situation and make them think about a subject not often talked about openly. However, if any of the texts were to be accepted it would be Diderot's. His work is based on fiction, and is mostly aimed at a male reader while the Vagina Monologues is non fiction.

On "The Indiscreet Jewels", "Vagina Monologues" and "Penis Monologues"

“The Indiscreet Jewels” by Denis Diderot is a novel that portrays Louis XV as a sultan who owns a magic ring that makes women's genital or jewel talk. It's a novel of ideas in which “jewels” function as the vehicle of philosophy to enlighten society.
Louis XV was king of France between 1715 and 1774, and it was well-known for having various mistresses and was frequently influenced by them. It's said that he had ninety illegitimate children, product of all his sexual encounters with his mistresses. Louis XV's poor leadership and lack of reforms contributed to the crisis that led to the French Revolution in 1789.
“The Indiscreet Jewels” was written as a satire to the king and his womanizer powers. Diderot is most remembered as being the editor and one of the main contributors of “The Encyclopedia”. What started as a merely translation of “The Chambers Cyclopedia”, ended up being an open door to the “world of knowledge”; where not only technology articles, but also ethic,philosophic as well as aesthetic topics can be found. This type of writing was seen as an attack to the Catholic Church, whose norms still ruled the society on that time, because writings like this would open the eyes of the society and create many questions and doubts. This would negatively affect not only the Catholic Church but also the Crown since an ignorant society is much easier to rule.
As Diderot tries to reveal the secrets about the “knowledge world” in “The Encyclopedia”, in “The Indiscreet Jewels”, he tries to do the same; to expose to the general public the more deepest secrets of a woman's feelings and thoughts about desire and sexuality; topics that were taboo in Diderot's years. I think that more than being a satire about the King of France, the real purpose of this novel is to make out of a topic like sexuality something more open to discussion for the people. But a “Vagina Monologue” couldn't be created in that time, so Diderot had to find ways to present his novels to the public without being exposed to sanctions and even jail time for his open mind. Here is were “The Indiscreet Jewels” and “Vagina Monologues” share their first similitude. Although at first instance, both could be seen as mere satires, they have a hidden purpose which is to make of a topic-the women's genitalia-a more open topic of discussion. Both “The Indiscreet Jewels” and “Vagina Monologues” are written differently to target differently public too; “Vagina Monologues” is a play written in 1996; “The indiscreet Jewels” is a novel written in 1748. “Vagina Monologues” seems to be more directed to the female public, whereas “The Indiscreet Jewel” to the general public. “Vagina Monologues” uses the monologues to inform women about their own sexuality, and through knowledge, empower them and remove them from the world of hypocrisy and taboo were “talking about sexuality, intercourse, masturbation, orgasm” have been hidden in.
In “Vagina Monologues” ”every monologue somehow relates to the vagina, be it through sex, love, rape, menstruation, mutilation, masturbation, birth, orgasm, the variety of names for the vagina, or simply as a physical aspect of the body. A recurring theme throughout the piece is the vagina as a tool of female empowerment, and the ultimate embodiment of individuality” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Vagina_Monologues). “Vagina Monologues” was a boom when the first play open in New York, because even though we are in the 21 Century, talking about women's intimate parts appears to be counterproductive and improper for some. Since the first play back in 1996, “Vagina Monologues” have developed to V-Day, “a global movement to stop violence against women and girls (...) through a series of events that generates broader attention for the fight to stop violence against women and girls, including rape, battery, incest, female genital mutilation (FGM) and sexual slavery” (http://newsite.vday.org/about/more-about). On the other hand, “The indiscreet Jewels” remains as one of the most scandalous, attractive and provocative works of Diderot.

Although “Penis Monologues” is an enjoyable reading, I think his purpose differs from that one of “Vagina Monologues”. It's presented, once again, as satire, but contrary to “Vagina Monologues”, it doesn't develop further than that. I don't see any valid information, knowledge that can lead men to better know their bodies or give them more confidence to openly discuss man sexuality with others. It's just a series of jokes about intercourse, or, in the words of Peace “When privates meet”, circumcision and masturbation. Maybe it is presented this way because sexual taboo is not that much about men genitalia but rather women's. After all, men seem to understand something better when is introduced to them as a joke. :)


Internet Sources used:
http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761567404/louis_xv.html
http://people.brandeis.edu/~teuber/diderotbio.html
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Les_bijoux_indiscrets)

Past or present, the issues are the same!

Historical writings seem to have two sides to them. They show us a clear picture of the past and what its societal norms used to be, and they also mirror our current culture and mores. Most of the time it is amazing when we realise that issues then are much the issues now. Whereas interpretations are different from one time period to the next, they still cause people to think about humans and how we function. This is what my impression was, when I read the two excerpts, the "Vagina Monologues" by Ensler and the "Penis Monologues" by Peace.
It is interesting to show that womens' anatomy is not talked about in our current society, as much as mens', as per these writings. In Diderot's "Indiscreet Jewels" two issues were brought forth. One, that whether women were discreet or not, about having multiple sexual partners, they never openly told anyone about them. Also that their "jewels" were not mentioned in society. Putting the two untalked-about issues together in the idea that the woman's vagina talked about that woman's lovers was a very satirical look at society's conventions. It ridiculed the idea of hidden adolatry and hypocracy. It fits in with the background of Diderot being a reformer and philosophe in eighteenth century France.
Contemporary writings such as the two monologues in the excerpt seem less sarcastic or satirical and more funny and open. They serve the same purpose to show that women's anatomies are not talked about openly as compared to mens'. Perhaps this shows a side of society that wants to keep the female body as a hidden, mystical being to pique the curiosity of men. Ensler writes "I guess it is that if we talk about something then we demystify it". That seems to be very true of the whole idea behind why men's anatomies are discussed more openly. Peace had a hilarious outlook on men's circumcision and their penises. He clearly talked about how good it felt for men to have an erection even if societal norms forbade that in public. He also mentioned how terrifying it was for a man to think of circumcision being performed on him. Both monologues can be used by contemporary families to teach their children about their respective anatomies and how to be comfortable with biological changes that occur over their lifespan.
Overall the two excerpts offered interesting viewpoints on male and female bodies as discussed in society.

Vagina and penis monologue takes on the talking jewels

After reading the two monologues, I felt that the penis had to be more sickening to the reader’s mind as oppose to the female vagina. You know, it’s embarrassing for people to walk around the streets with female being nude or men showing their plastic penis hanging down. In the world today, most people would feel uncomfortable seeing these images as opposed to then. In those early days, sex was an important issue in people’s life. Many families had sex as well as in those early pornography films.Women dressed naked show show their appreciation and beauty about life. People craved for sexuality and it's for their own enjoyment.

In Denis Diderot, the indiscreet jewels, the passage tends to be more like an allegorical feel where jewels can talk by using some sort of a magical jewel owned by the sultan Mangogul of the Congo.This work was mostly in a form of entertainment and encourage people how women would feel after wearing the jewels. Diderot tends to be magical and relaxing by not using dirty words like female’s vagina or male’s penis or everything that is dirty. I think he is much cleaner in his way of writing. As a result, I think the vagina and penis monologue sex was to entertain people and how effective it would get as the years progress. The vagina monologue was so popular that it was eventually on Off-Broadway. Eve Ensler performed it on stage.

Ensler also wrote a piece called “celebrate the vagina” and the purpose was to stop the violence against women. She thinks that many men are attracted to the women’s vagina cause it sexy and cheesy. She wrote this to finally stop the abuse of men over women. We don’t want to see men treating women as been some sort of an illness way. We want women to have their own spare time. Ensler’s writing does show some satirical meanings.

I pretty much enjoyed reading the two passages and I felt the penis or the vagina had the most interest toward me. The Diderot was also worth reading and the jewels that were able to talk were funny like in an allegorical scene where animals could eventually talk to each other. Denis Diderot had a clean writing style as opposed to the vagina or penis. The vagina or the penis showed more intuitions and more history about it as opposed to Diderot’s writing. Overall, I enjoyed all the readings by these authors.

I really enjoyed reading both texts. I would say that The Indiscreet Jewels was written as entertainment, showing the desire of every man know the truth about the women sex life and the desire of women to hide that from the man. The Vagina Monologues, on the other hand, is written as satire to correct social ills. The author points that most of us don’t know about some of our organs until the certain age when functions and names of all other organs are already known. It is depends on the family where you grew up, if they openly can talk about our sex differences and name them accordingly.
Both texts are acceptable for both male and female audience of any age and status. Both authors discuss the same object, but they use different words. The 18th century male philosopher uses the word “jewel” referring to vagina. At that time such topics were closed for people, and they gave special names for their genitals. While the 20th century woman writer names vagina by its name. In the play by Eve Ensler, vagina talks: “Feed me, think again. I want more, please. Where is Brian? – remember me?” This was example like the 20th century vagina would talk. The 18th century “jewel” would say: “a husband must be an important guest, judging from the precautions taken to receive him.” The use of vocabulary is less specific. I feel that the Vagina Monologue would not be acceptable in the time when the Indiscreet Jewels was written as well as in the first part of the 20th century. People at that time were not open to talk about genitals and name them appropriately. However it would be useful nowadays and in the future for mothers should talk more openly with their daughters about their genitals. The Indiscreet Jewels would be acceptable at any period of time and cultures as the use of vocabulary less specific and it is written as an entertainment novel.

I really enjoyed the readings, especially Ensler’s Vagina Monologues. I think they are more natural and topical than Diderot’s reading. People from all generations liked themes about something related to sex. No wonder, why this off-Broadway play ‘’The Vagina Monologues’’ was so popular in New York some years ago. We live in a world that promotes the performance of that kind of issues.
It seems like these readings have not only entertaining and satiric origin but they are also are informative. It is important social agenda and we can see how hard is to be a woman. It also shows how different man and woman are in their origins, especially towards life.
Even though both readings raise similar issues, they look very different because they were written a century apart and by different genders. It’s not just a language usage but also perceptions. Comparing to Ensler, Diderot doesn’t use slang and words like ‘’vagina’’ and ‘’penis’’ because it was very improper and embarrassing at the time. Time changed the ways to express the issues, however they have remained till now.

I guess the purpose of Ensler’s “Vagina monologues” is to change common for almost all modern societies belief that open discussion of female genitalia is something inappropriate. I agree with the author that taboo on this issue creates “great burden” for women. I also believe that avoidance to openly discus this issue is compensated by dirty jokes and ignorance. However, I think that things are getting better and the information about this delicate issue is more accessible now due to internet. I am not talking about pornography that comprises more than a half of all internet resources, but rather truthful and serious information about genitals which is also easily accessible. Comparing Eisler’s monologue to Peace’s one, I would say the “Penis monologue” serves satirical rather than informative purpose. I did liked some points in the monologue because they were really funny, however I could not agree on some points the author made. For example, I do not see such a big necessity in discussing the opposite sex. It was a great point in the monologue when “vaginas and penises meet out in the open to demystify each other…“ But do we really need it? I mean is the open discussion more effective way to demystify the opposite sex than the old proven method to do it?
I can not agree about circumcision too. It was very funny and talented way the author presented the issue. However, I guess the entire development of the subject and its conclusion was absolutely wrong. There is no “come near me with a knife- prepare to die” approach out there, even not close. It is entirely the author’s imagination, in real life circumcision is a pretty wide spread and routine procedure