Talk:Philosophy in the Bedroom

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Philosophy: Literature Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophical literature

Sexology and sexuality Low‑importance

	Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

France Low‑importance

	France portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Theatre Low‑importance

	Theatre portal This article is part of WikiProject Theatre, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of theatre on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.TheatreWikipedia:WikiProject TheatreTemplate:WikiProject TheatreTheatre articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Philosophy or pornography?

I don't think the dichotemy in the first paragraph is acurate. de Sade clearly intended his work to be considered pornographic and it is certainly not erotic in the traditional sense. Some people like Simmone de Beauvoir (Mrs Jean Paul Satre as Eric insists) have seen philosophy within the pornography but I don't think there is a serious argument that it is not pornographic.

The piece is 200 years old, so many of the cliches of modern pornography were not really cliches at the time. There was not a lot of pornography in circulation at the time to compare it to.

The other aspect of the work that should be brought out is that until authorized se-ed became part of the curriculum in the mid 60s/70s a large number of kids (and adults for that matter) were reading de Sade for sex-ed as it was one of the few places where it was considered.

Neil Fletcher, in his biography of Sade, made a good case for the work to be considered as satire. There have been other writers who have argued the satirical nature of many of Sade's works.

It is most definitely a very theoretical work, pornographic though it may be. --71.235.81.130 03:19, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Play? No

Boudoir is not a play. Not even close. It's a dialogue. --71.235.81.130 03:19, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Biology???

Can we do away with the section on biological acurracy? It is merely a pedantic point of information a product of our enlightend age. While the infomation in this section is correct and the Sarde is wrong, he was coveying accepted knowlegde at the time and which like much 18th century sicence has subsiquently found to be wrong. This section provides no intelligent comment on the literary content of the work, nor is it an appropriate or relivant critique. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.62.56 (talk) 00:17, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Title of this entry is wrong.

Can we rename this entry Philosophy in the Boudoir? Bedroom is a mistranslation - a boudoir is a separate room to a bedroom. 2A01:4B00:8714:E700:819B:1A74:B7F0:C3D8 (talk) 13:30, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]