Customer Reviews

Candide (Barnes & Noble Classics)

5 star:		(9)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Voltaire is still recognized as one of history's greatest satirists, and after reading Candide it's not hard to see why. Two and a half centuries later, it still has the power both to amuse and to shock.

On the surface, as has often been noted, Candide is obviously a critique of the philosophy of Liebniz, and especially of the idea that this is the best of all possible worlds and everything is as it had to be in order for this to be so (in accordance, presumably, with the plans of an omnipotent and omnibenevolent Creator). Voltaire goes quite over the top in showing the misadventures and misfortunes that befall his befuddled hero, who at first whole-heartedly buys into this "optimism."

Eventually, Candide's tale concludes with his advice that we should all just tend to our gardens--the precise meaning of which has been widely (and wildly) speculated about. Many take it to be a rejection of philosophy as such as being entirely useless, and we should just take a more pragmatic approach to life, though I find this interpretation untenable. More likely, given what we know about Voltaire as an Enlightenment thinker and from the content of Candide itself, it is simply a rejection of one philosophical school, namely that of rationalism. This is wider than just Liebniz, and Voltaire does target the ideas of other major rationalists (e.g., Descartes) as well. The message seems to be that philosophy is useless *when it has nothing to do with, and is in fact contradicted by, our actual experience.* The ending then suggests a much more practical sort of philosophy, like the one represented in America by Voltaire's contemporary Benjamin Franklin, but it is a philosophy nonetheless.

In the end, this is a highly entertaining and thought-provoking story that is still very relevant in today's world, and should still be required reading for everybody.

This novel is very short, requiring less than 4 to 6 hours to finish, depending on your reading speed. It is a satire that attempts to explore a specific aspect of human existence - why is it that human beings suffer? This may sound simple but the answer to such a question also then evokes questions around the existence of God and whether meaning is created by mankind or given by the Creator.

The characters a two dimensional and cartoons, as they should be in a satire meant to explore concepts rather than to be a novel with fully developed characters for purposes of character analysis. Candide is the eternal optimist in love. Professor Pangloss is the eternal abstractionist, unable to see reality unless it is framed within some conceptual system. Much is made of associating Pangloss with Leibnitz. Who can say? These two have adventures after adventures experiencing the acquisition of great fortunes and then the loss of these fortunes, both through accident and chance happening.

Candide travels across Europe, to South America, back to Europe. Along the way he sees vast social injustice created by social and economic inequities that are supported by both the noble and religious castes as the will of God. We see rape used by the military troops of all sides of a conflict. We see man created famine due to unequal distribution of resources and opportunity. We see warfare and torture engaged in for the most idiotic of reasons. We see great plagues and earthquakes that create conditions where man can be wolf to man once again. We see floggings and other forms of punishment that are meant to restore the social order but which are so arbitrary that they in fact undermine the social order they are suppose to support. We see criminal behavior at the highest social levels as well as the lowest. Kings and generals operate under the same principles as thieves, murderers, and pirates in this novel.

All these wild events go by very fast, each only lasting a page or two before another great calamity hits. We are then introduced to the final message of the novel which is that only those who tend their own gardens and find meaning in work are capable of weathering the vast storms of human suffering that plague all men and women during our lifetimes.

It is a classic. It is certainly odd by our current standards of literature. I came away from the novel less convinced of the final messages about tending my own garden and more convinced of the ability of man to create hell for other men with little empathy or foresight.

I didnt know what to expect from this book at all, but decided to pick it up. I had heard of Voltaire, and found out that Candide was one of his masterpieces. BINGO! this version is a really great translation, and the book just sucks you in. You want to keep reading forever just to find out what happens next. The chapters are really really short, which is definitely a good thing, especially when you read on the bus like i do. You can finish a few chapters without having to stop in the middle of one or anything (you know how annoying that can be). Anyways, i digress. The book is really entertaining and sucks you right in until the last page. Pick it up right away. You wont be disappointed.

I knew very little about Voltaire prior to picking this up, other than he was a leading French figure of the Enlightenment. I had heard of him, but after reading Rousseau's Dog: Two Great Thinkers at War in the Age of Enlightenment (P.S.), his name was still fresh in my mind when I saw this edition on sale at a local bookstore. I shrugged my shoulders and bought it, not even sure then when I might get round to reading it.

Actually, I was a little intimidated by it. I was afraid it would be written in that dense, thick style common to the times, and that it would be pure drudgery. At least I could see that it was short, which went a long way toward me bringing it home in the first place.

As usual, my uninformed prejudices came home to roost again, as it was obvious from the very beginning that Voltaire's style is as readable today as it must have been 250 years ago. There are hundreds of critical reviews of 'Candide', both on Amazon and other sites, so I'll not try and analyze too much, though the author raises questions just as pertinent now as then. The reader may broach those questions after an event such as Voltaire himself witnessed (The horrific Lisbon earthquake of 1755, which killed hundreds of thousands), or from one as recent as 9/11 - in a nutshell, why does a perfect Creator allow pain and suffering into the world?

To be a little more specific, Voltaire was really responding to the philosophy of blind optimism as spelled out by Gottfried Leibniz, who proved (at least to himself) that ours was the best of all possible worlds. A perfect Deity would be incapable of creating anything but a perfect world - thus our world was 'the best'. Evidently, this was accepted axiomatically by Voltaire, until he came up against the tragedy of the Lisbon Earthquake. 'Candide' is his response.

Earthy and at times grotesque, Voltaire chronicles the misfortunes of the eponymous character as he travels the globe, continually falling out of the frying pan and into the fire. Candide and his companions (especially Dr. Pangloss, as the stand-in for Leibniz) suffer one truly horrific setback after another, until finally, Candide and his companions, much the worse for wear, are able to retire to a small farm in Turkey. Even there, though, disension begins again, until a neighboring farmer tells Candide that by tending his small plot of land with his children, they avoid "the three great evils - boredom, vice, and want." Candide takes the farmer's example to heart, and organizes his small community, giving them all useful tasks. Die-hard Dr. Pangloss, at the end, tries to stir them up one last time with his pondering on optimistic philosophy, but Candide cuts him short. "Excellently observed," he tells him, "but we must cultivate our garden."

Apparently, there is still some discussion over what exactly Voltaire was trying to get across with these final words, and different readers may come up with different interpretations after reading the book. As the answer lies somewhere in the borderland between theology and pragmatism, I think it's best that the individual comes to their own conclusion, but I will say that blindly following any philosophy (as Pangloss does in 'Candide') only sets one up for having his legs knocked out from under him. By cultivating his own garden, Candide leaves much of the rest of the world to blindly follow whatever philosophy they want, while he tends to his own simple labors.

Humorous at times, 'Candide' as a satire may be somewhat diluted in this day and age, as people's beliefs aren't nearly as homogeneous as they were at the time of it's writing, though I think the underlying questions are still valid. In our time of 'personal theology', one may have a very comfortable relationship with their convictions, but if they haven't yet answered for themselves the questions posed by Voltaire, then it's only a matter of time before they will have to wrestle with them anyway. I don't necessarily advocate Voltaire's answers, but I do think he gave us an entertaining starting point for our own investigations.

This Barnes and Noble classic edition is a very inexpensive and quality reprint, which also includes the illustrations by Alan Odle, and typesetting that is easy on the eyes. The translation by Henry Morley has been revised by Lauren Walsh, and Gita May has written a new introduction. With footnotes and endnotes, a list for further reading and some concluding thoughts by noted critics, this edition should satisfy all but the most demanding scholars.

In his most unguarded writing, Voltaire portrays several unforgettable characters and unmemorable personae devoid of character in this novella about Candide who resides in a castle belonging to the baron of Thunder-ten-tronckh. There, the young kindhearted man falls for the baron's daughter Cunegonde. Suspecting a romance in progress between the two, the baron speedily kicks the suitor out of the castle. War in Bulgaria ensues. The Bulgars tear the castle into pieces and abduct the lovely Cunegonde. To Candide their reunion deems inauspicious. Candide's arduous journey takes him from Portugal to France, to the mythical island of El Dorado, the English Coast, from Italy to Turkey in quest of his long lost love. In his travels, he encounters hardships and witnesses privation beget by people's greed and inhumanity.

Voltaire narrates how Candide overcomes his travails with sublime sanguinity in constrast to Leibniz's unsupported optimism. The novelist exemplifies purity of desire and integrity of friendship through Candide's companions Cacambo and Martin. However, Voltaire is unyielding in his attack on issues of government, religion, philosphy, medicine, even humankind in general where tidalwave of hypocrisy is likely to surface.

Candide is not a book for everyone. It was definitely not France's book of choice during the 18th century. It is discernible how the naive would be flabbergasted and the impostor would be offended after reading this book. Nonetheless, this is an admirable piece of writing if one overlooks the satire and focuses on the story's significance; that the secret to happiness lies not on the bulk of one's plot but on the "cultivation of one's garden."

This was required reading for a graduate course in the Humanities. A great story and important historical work in literature. Voltaire was a Renaissance Christian humanist who played a role in the development of the Enlightenment.

On the one hand, the structure of his novel Candide is Homeric, it is the journey narrative, the hero with a thousand faces, but it is a satirical restructuring of that classical motif of the hero on a quest. What is the importance of the quest in Candide? What is the quest about in the classical sense? The quest is about learning. In the classical sense the hero leaves, has to acquire some sort of knowledge, learn a set of skills that is going to help him or her enact the quest surmount the obstacles that they encounter at one point or another, and the finally what does the hero have to accomplish? What is out there the "Holy Grail" The prize, the whole quest is about attaining some sort of ultimate end or some sort of ultimate knowledge. Does it end there? No, you got to go back with that knowledge, because the quest is never just about attaining the goal, it's about bringing it home to make everybody better, to restore the community. The individual quest, the heroic quest in the classical sense always has a larger social corrective end. The purpose of the individual, the function of the individual all depends on his ability to return to the collective, whatever it is that he has found that he has acquired that is going to change the way things are. Now how does that compare to the journey or quest narrative in Candide? Contrary to the notion of what prepares us for the world, OK here is the important structure of the journey or the quest, and the critique of knowledge by Voltaire. It is contrary to the idea of the knowledge that we acquire prepares us for the world. That each new bit of knowledge that we acquire, prepares us for the next step, and prepares us for the next stage. Contrary to the idea that life is somehow to be understood or that human history is somehow to be understood as a journey organized around progress, around betterment advancement acquiring new knowledge more knowledge more science more learning, we're getting better again, Candide tells the story that goes in the opposite direction. So, then you acquire knowledge and then you spend the rest of the journey finding out that the knowledge is useless, bit by bit, and every lesson you've acquired has to be cast aside, everything you learn you have to abandon. Instead of gaining and getting better, it is throwing off, letting go, and getting worse. Where does Voltaire want us in the end to think of the notion and narrative of progress?


Of course, you know that Candide is steeped in so many of the political and philosophical controversies of the 1750's. One of his big critiques is of the philosopher Leibnitz who said that `this is the best of all possible worlds," the idea championed by Leibnitz was a simple version of the philosophy espoused by enlightenment philosophers that the existence of any evil in the world was a sign that god was not entirely good or very powerful. The idea of an imperfect god would be nonsensical. So if you are a philosopher who takes for granted that god exists, you would have to conclude logically; and here is where humanities and Christianity really start messing with each other in all kinds of obvious ways, that god is perfect if you logically conclude that god exists. Therefore, his creation, the world, and man must also be perfect. According to many enlightenment philosophers, people perceived imperfections of the world only because they do not get the plan. This is a teleological idea of the world. Now obviously Voltaire does not accept this theory, or that god or any god has to exist. Therefore, he makes fun of the idea that the world is completely good. Much of the novel is a satire addressed to the notion that the optimists who witness countless horrors and unbelievable injustice such as floggings, robberies, and earthquakes will always find a way to write it off. They will say, `oh well there must be part of a plan, even though none of these calamities seem to serve any good at all it must point to human cruelty ignorance and barbarism and points to the indifference of the natural world. Pangloss the philosopher in the book throughout the story is always trying to find some justification for the terrible things that he sees and the arguments that he makes seem increasingly to be absurd, like his quote that "Syphilis needed to be transmitted from the new world to Europe so that Europeans could taste new world delicacies. What other things is Voltaire criticizing here that connects to some of the debates that define the enlightenment period of the 1750's Religion? Religion- He criticizes the whole hypocrisy of religion. In the book, Voltaire has a parade of corrupt hypocritical religious leaders who are like the Pope that has a daughter (should have been celibate). Hard line Catholic inquisitors, a Franciscan monk who should have vow of poverty but is a jewel thief. Here Voltaire provides countless examples of the immorality and hypocrisy of religious leaders, he does not really condemn believers per say, he is really out to attack church leadership and church hierarchy. For example Jacques, who is an Anabaptist is arguably one of the most generous and humane characters.

What else does Voltaire criticize or satirize? Wealth- money corrupts; Candide seems to have more problems when he has lots of money. Things get worse he gets unhappy. An interesting point, Voltaire was deeply involved in a debate with the many deep thinkers of his time, most notably was Rousseau, who lambasted the aristocracy. Voltaire himself really moved very comfortably among aristocratic circles and interestingly the French enlightenment philosophy really took off among the French aristocracy. Since they had the leisure time to contemplate so many of the new ideas in reason, science and rationalism and his notions of progress and advancement were ideas that were principally championed and discussed by members of the French aristocracy. Therefore, it was among some of the idle members of the French aristocrats that these enlightenment philosophers were able to find their most ardent followers. Despite the fact that the church and the state were not more often that not completely allied with each other, kings could be attracted on occasion to arguments that seemed to undermine the authority of the church. The fact that the aristocrats were very much unaware of the precariousness of their position tended to make them overconfident. Dabbling in some new ideas that were part of the enlightenment movement caused them not to take seriously the kind of jeopardy they were in or what the enlightenment would lead to in the championing of the common man and the overthrow of the French aristocracy. Because they found these ideas somewhat new, interesting, and exciting and they did not really see this as at all leading inexorably to the demise of the aristocratic class. Now of course it was thinkers like Rousseau not at all like Voltaire on this particular point that made his chief adversary. Rousseau distrusted the aristocrats out of a hunger to overthrow the class but because he believed that people of wealth betrayed decent traditional values. Rousseau opposed the theatre, which is Voltaire's lifeblood; he shunned the aristocracy, which Voltaire very much courted. He courted their attention he courted their interests. Rousseau argued for something dangerous like democratic revolution, and Voltaire argued that equality was impossible it would never come about. Rousseau argued that inequality was not only natural but that if it were taken too far it would make any decent government a total impossibility. Voltaire was very charming and witty, which led largely to his success in moving about aristocratic and social circles. Rousseau insisted on his own correctness and was not a charming person to be around; he was very intense and very serious about his ideas. Voltaire endlessly repeated the same handful of core enlightenment notions, where as Rousseau was a deeply original thinker. Who was always challenging his own way of thinking contradicting himself, coming up with ideas on the equality of education, the family, the government, and the arts in a matter that was much more radical than Voltaire was ever willing to go along with. They were both skeptics, and Voltaire is nothing if not a skeptic.

What does Voltaire do with the idea of philosophy in Candide? Philosophy- What is the value of philosophical speculation? It is useless for Voltaire; it is one of Pangloss' biggest flaws. Abstract philosophical argument is not based on any real world evidence. In the chaotic world of this novel, philosophical speculation repeatedly proves to be useless, and at times even dangerous. Time and again it prevents the characters from making any useful assessment of the world around them, it prevents them from bringing about any kind of change, it prevent them from thinking that they might try to bring about some social change. Pangloss is the character most susceptible to this kind of foolishness. Example, while Jacques is drowning, Pangloss stops Candide from saving him by proving that the bay was formed for Jacques to drown in. Therefore, at the end of course at the novels conclusion Candide rejects Pangloss' philosophies. If philosophical speculation is useless, what does Voltaire suggest you put in its place? Hard practical work in general. Therefore, it is somewhat surprising in that sense that this judgment against philosophy that is portrayed in the book becomes very dramatic when we think about Voltaire's own status as a philosopher.

What about the garden at the end of the novel? At the end of the novel Candide defines happiness in raising vegetables. On the one hand it is indicative of the turning away from the following of philosophy, from the abstract speculative nature of philosophy towards something hands on something pragmatic. Does the garden have a symbolic resonance to it? Is it related to the Garden of Eden? For Adam and Eve the garden is the beginning of their troubles, here it is the end of their troubles. It is the end of the narrative the end of their quest, their journey, and the end of their travails. This is where they wind up this is where they retreat. In the Garden of Eden Adam and Eve do not have to work to have fruits of the garden; this garden requires work, and constant tending. In that I think the garden here represents much, more in a very different way than the biblical garden represents. An embrace of life, but an embrace of life of what? For all the horror, hardships, and nightmares that these characters experience throughout the entire course of the text, at the end, they embrace life; they take it they say yes.

The status of knowledge in Voltaire, what do we know? The garden is a final retreat from activism, or social engagement in the world. Finally, what Voltaire is saying is look go back to the basics. Do not try to change, analyze the world, or try to speculate about the nature of our existence. Retreat into your own sphere and do not mess with the world around you, because ultimately you are powerless, to do anything in this world. I think Voltaire is commenting on in a sense the Utopian impulse and imagination. Specifically as it influenced enlightenment philosophers of the period with respect to the notion of progress and advancement.

Recommended reading for anyone interested in history, psychology, philosophy, and literature.

Voltaire's, Candide (ISBN 978-1-59308-028-0, 130 Pages, Translated by Henry Morley) is what many consider to be a venerated book detailing themes and theories consistent with the age of enlightnement and western literature. Voltaire glorifies reason and empiricism at the expense of optimism, blind faith, and societal institutions like religion and government. However, is it a true classic? Scholars and authors disagree to this day and William Bottiglia dubiously penned the phrase labeling Candide as a 'miniature classic'.

The fictional satire follows Candide of Westphalia through adventures that are comprised of true occurrences in the world and fictional odysseys such as the city of El Dorado. All the while tragedy after tragedy befalls our hero and the people surrounding him, making him stretch to justify his teacher Pangloss' philosophy of optimism and eventually question that mindset. Some events that transpire include: Candide's conscription into the army, the earthquake at Lisbon, an inquisition in Portugal that hangs dear Pangloss, the prostitution of Candide's beloved Cunegonde, and the discovery of El Dorado.

Voltaire's tale is short, humorous, and meaningful with constant quips directed at his contemporaries and critics. Despite the profound and poignant criticism of optimism and blind faith, the rapidity of the adventure both defines and hurts its impact. The very fact that Voltaire seeks to undermine and satirize traditional writing methods makes his own style the anti-classic rather than a miniature masterpiece. Perhaps I would presume too much in saying that he would appreciate this definition rather than others labeling it as a lesser version of some other bona fide novel due to its size.

Please do read the introduction by Gita May. Informative and analytical, she does an exemplary job of introducing and explaining the tale that will follow and how it connects with Voltaire's life and personal points of view.

I would personally recommend that most if not all should read this tale. The wit and style find their way into today's modern works and have influenced quite a few great minds. Just remember, far from falling short to the classics of antiquity and canon of modern day, Candide should honestly be considered an anti-classic set aside from any comparisons to larger traditional tales. It has been established as and most likely is the precursor and father to a category all its own.

Ordered for a friends granddaughter who said that the book was in great shape. Will enjoy using Amazon again. Thanks.

So this book surprised me at first in its shortness; I thought it was abridged until I realized Voltaire really was so concise.

The book (not the literature) is good for high school students; it has a timeline and introduction to give a brief historical overview, and the endnotes help to clarify intent. All in all a good book.

Candide's book-length longing for Miss Cunegonde was a constant reminder for me of Layla and Majnun with a bit of philosophy thrown in the mix. Candide's constantly putting his dear master Pangloss's philisophy of everything being for the best to the test (and always reasoning that he was), his endless travels, and hard times (along with everyone comparing their hard luck stories at various points in the story) makes for a quick, but deep and interesting read.

With "Candide," Voltaire proved there is no publicity like free publicity. He could have fictionalized his philosophical nemesis' names here, but, perhaps, direct hits are best in fiction.

And it needs to be noted that Gita May's twelve-page long Introduction was one of the best I've ever read from the Barnes aand Nobles Classics series. Usually the intros are biased in some way, but Ms. May's did not reek of this affliction at all. It was a pleasure to read that because it whetted my appetite for the text to come. - Donna Di Giacomo