Poll: Candide

[Thanatos34]

I just finished reading this little gem by Voltaire for my Civilization and Literature class. I wanted to know why I had not been introduced to this work before college.

I'd encourage you guys to give it a look, if you haven't already, it's only 120 pages long, and it's witty. It's a scathing satire on practically every belief system there is, and hilariously funny, though it is primarily directed against optimists: those who believe that everything will work out for the best.

Edit: Someone mentioned Project Gutenberg, and so I went to find the link so that it can be read online:
http://www.gutenberg.org/catalog/world/readfile?fk_files=273526&pageno=7

If you want to download it, here's that link: http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/19942

 

[m_jim]

I really liked Candide. Looking back on it, I can't decide if it was the funniest tragedy ever written or the most tragic comedy ever written. Whenever things get me down, though, I always try to remember Candide's rallying cry: "We live in the best of all possible worlds."

 

[Cliff_m85]

I love Candide. Especially Runts, Twizzlers, and Orange Tic-tacs.

 

[Lord George]

I've been interested in Voltaire's work and so may take a look at this. Started reading about him after learning where the musician Voltaire got his name from.

 

[Shapsters]

I love Candide. Especially Runts, Twizzlers, and Orange Tic-tacs.

Cough cough.

I have not heard of the book, where might I find this?

 

[jboking]

I read A Treatise on Toleration and Voltaire's philosophical dictionary. I hadn't heard (or was told and forgot) about this work.

 

[Lukeje]

I enjoyed it. The copy I read was a dual-language version that had both the original French and an English translation. It helped me relearn some French...

...and for those of you who have never heard of it, Project Gutenburg [http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/19942] have an English translation that is copyright free (in America at least).

 

[Trace2010]

Played the Overture and the Candid Suite by Leonard Bernstein in college. Easily two of my favorite musical works.

 

[Seldon2639]

I just finished reading this little gem by Voltaire for my Civilization and Literature class. I wanted to know why I had not been introduced to this work before college.

I'd encourage you guys to give it a look, if you haven't already, it's only 120 pages long, and it's witty. It's a scathing satire on practically every belief system there is, and hilariously funny, though it is primarily directed against optimists: those who believe that everything will work out for the best.

It's "witty" in the same way that Glenn Beck is "witty". Instead of a legitimate analysis of different worldviews, it takes them to an illogical extreme, presents those extremes as the "real" worldview, folds its arms and says "see, how can people be so stupid"; ignore for a moment that very few people believe in the straw-man bullshit Voltaire tries to pull. It's 120 pages when it could reasonably be condensed into a half-page of bullet notes (half of which would be: "Leibniz is a dick"), and is only "hilariously funny" if someone doesn't know enough about the philosophies and political worldviews he attacks to know that he's basically just making things up.

Satire is at its best when it doesn't have to alter anything to make its target ridiculous. The Daily Show works best when (like real satire) it simply uses the pure words and beliefs of the people its attacking to show how nuts they are. It doesn't work when (like Candide) it has to morph the worldviews it wants to attack into a grotesque Kafkaesque monster resembling little of the original beliefs. Its continued attack on Leibniz's supposed "the best of all possible worlds" is both putting words into his mouth, and a misstatement of even what that philosophy would be.

A belief that we live in the best of all possible worlds would not be "everything's awesome" but that there's no other world which would be better as a whole. Also, not for nothing, but Leibniz was mostly trying to move past the very utopia debate which Voltaire claims to be trying to resolve; Leibniz's point was that there's no other world in which we can live (otherwise we would live in it), so this is the best world we've got.

If you like it, I guess that's your business, but let's not pretend it's anything other than Voltaire taking dishonest pot shots at people he either doesn't like, or doesn't even fundamentally understand. Read it, digest it, maybe even think about it, but if this kind of thing struck you as a huge revelation, and you're over the age of 15 (much the same timetable for finding Atlas Shrugged to be totally deep, man), I would suggest that you reexamine your dearth of interaction with real books of literary depth.

 

[Thanatos34]

I just finished reading this little gem by Voltaire for my Civilization and Literature class. I wanted to know why I had not been introduced to this work before college.

I'd encourage you guys to give it a look, if you haven't already, it's only 120 pages long, and it's witty. It's a scathing satire on practically every belief system there is, and hilariously funny, though it is primarily directed against optimists: those who believe that everything will work out for the best.

It's "witty" in the same way that Glenn Beck is "witty". Instead of a legitimate analysis of different worldviews, it takes them to an illogical extreme, presents those extremes as the "real" worldview, folds its arms and says "see, how can people be so stupid"; ignore for a moment that very few people believe in the straw-man bullshit Voltaire tries to pull. It's 120 pages when it could reasonably be condensed into a half-page of bullet notes (half of which would be: "Leibniz is a dick"), and is only "hilariously funny" if someone doesn't know enough about the philosophies and political worldviews he attacks to know that he's basically just making things up.

Satire is at its best when it doesn't have to alter anything to make its target ridiculous. The Daily Show works best when (like real satire) it simply uses the pure words and beliefs of the people its attacking to show how nuts they are. It doesn't work when (like Candide) it has to morph the worldviews it wants to attack into a grotesque Kafkaesque monster resembling little of the original beliefs. Its continued attack on Leibniz's supposed "the best of all possible worlds" is both putting words into his mouth, and a misstatement of even what that philosophy would be.

A belief that we live in the best of all possible worlds would not be "everything's awesome" but that there's no other world which would be better as a whole. Also, not for nothing, but Leibniz was mostly trying to move past the very utopia debate which Voltaire claims to be trying to resolve; Leibniz's point was that there's no other world in which we can live (otherwise we would live in it), so this is the best world we've got.

If you like it, I guess that's your business, but let's not pretend it's anything other than Voltaire taking dishonest pot shots at people he either doesn't like, or doesn't even fundamentally understand. Read it, digest it, maybe even think about it, but if this kind of thing struck you as a huge revelation, and you're over the age of 15 (much the same timetable for finding Atlas Shrugged to be totally deep, man), I would suggest that you reexamine your dearth of interaction with real books of literary depth.

Well. We can agree to disagree. I like satire that takes things to the extreme, and I do not agree that satire that does not do so is better. It is obviously satire, and not truly to be taken seriously, it is merely to get you to think. Assume for a moment that all he is attacking is sheer optimism. If Leibniz does not believe what Voltaire attacks, then Voltaire is not truly attacking him, whether he thinks he is or not.

Since your opinion is most certainly in the vast minority concerning Candide among philosophical scholars, I think I'm safe as far as my "dearth of interaction" goes with literary books.

Considering the sheer amount of philosophy books I have read the past three years, I do think I can venture an educated opinion on this, and Voltaire's little book was a joy to read. One must remember it is satire when you are reading it, but if you do, then it's an extremely funny satire on life.

 

[Thanatos34]

I really liked Candide. Looking back on it, I can't decide if it was the funniest tragedy ever written or the most tragic comedy ever written. Whenever things get me down, though, I always try to remember Candide's rallying cry: "We live in the best of all possible worlds."

Funny, the thing I always remember about him is the final statement: "We must cultivate our garden."

 

[m_jim]

A belief that we live in the best of all possible worlds would not be "everything's awesome" but that there's no other world which would be better as a whole. Also, not for nothing, but Leibniz was mostly trying to move past the very utopia debate which Voltaire claims to be trying to resolve; Leibniz's point was that there's no other world in which we can live (otherwise we would live in it), so this is the best world we've got.

If you like it, I guess that's your business, but let's not pretend it's anything other than Voltaire taking dishonest pot shots at people he either doesn't like, or doesn't even fundamentally understand. Read it, digest it, maybe even think about it, but if this kind of thing struck you as a huge revelation, and you're over the age of 15 (much the same timetable for finding Atlas Shrugged to be totally deep, man), I would suggest that you reexamine your dearth of interaction with real books of literary depth.

Ouch. I've read enough honest-to-God literature over the years to be offended by your parting shot, but let's forget that. I definitely do not see Candide's mantra of "we live in the best of all possible worlds" as the statement that everything is awesome. Rather, it is a desperate attempt to find solace in the world that is crumbling around you, as our unfortunate protagonist saw time and again. Despite the harsh criticism that Voltaire flung far and wide, I did not see that as the chief message of the book. Rather, I saw a naive optimism in the face of unrelenting despair, and maybe even hope to attain the unattainable, as the theme. I think that this book is very much a Rorschach test; what you take out of it largely depends on what you took into it.