Customer Reviews

Candide (A Norton Critical Edition)

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

 

 

No the story doesn't change from edition to edition, but the supplementary material provided does change. Candide isn't just some hectic adventure story. It really fails as literature in this regard, and certainly Voltaire's purpose was not to make you chuckle while you whiled away a few empty hours. He would weep to think that you missed out on what he was really trying to tell you. Rest easy. I am not going to launch into a stuffy monologue on Leibnitz and 18th century French Catholicism, but in essence you should know that this is the essence of the story. The philosopher Leibnitz (who with Isaac Newton independently invented Calculus) explained the existence of evil in the world thusly: God, in his infinite wisdom, thought of all possible worlds that he could create, and he chose this one; therefore this must be the best of all possible worlds. Voltaire was also continually chastising the Catholic Church for it's lack of tolerance of other beliefs, and for its aristocratic pomp.

Enter now the Norton Critical Edition of Candide. This book presents the 75 page story along with 130 additional pages of various articles and essays on the times in which it was written; commentary by Voltaire and by his contemporaries; and critiques of the story by modern writers. Sure there are always a few dull, academic essays making their mandatory appearance in a book like this, but my suggestion is just to skip them. After all there are a lot of them to choose from.

Learn the story behind the story so to speak. After all it is the background of Candide that makes Candide the forceful satire that it is.

"Candide," subtitled "Optimism" and purporting to be "translated from the German of Doctor Ralph with the additions which were found in the Doctor's pocket when he died at [the Battle of] Minden in the Year of Our Lord 1759," is the single work of Voltaire that continues to be read and recognized as a canonical work of Western literature. A mere seventy-five pages long, it is an amusing and, at times, cruel book that satirically lays waste to many philosophical ideas of its time while simultaneously illuminating the mind, the temperament and the personal conflicts of its author, a man who, perhaps more than any other, came to define the intellectual spirit of eighteenth century France.

At its most abstract level, "Candide" examines the age-old question of why a supposedly omnipotent, omniscient, benevolent god would create a world so afflicted with evil and suffering. This question particularly troubled Voltaire following the great Lisbon earthquake and fire in November 1755, which killed as many as forty thousand people.

Hence, in the very first page of "Candide," the reader encounters one of literature's most famous characters, Pangloss, the learned tutor of Candide, who "gave instruction in metaphysico-theologico-cosmoloonigology." Echoing the popularizers of Leibniz, the early eighteenth century German philosopher, Pangloss espouses the notion that there cannot be cause without effect, that we live in the best of all possible worlds:

"It is clear, said he, that things cannot be otherwise than they are, for since everything is made to serve an end, everything necessarily serves the best end. Observe: noses were made to support spectacles, hence we have spectacles. Legs, as anyone can plainly see, were made to be breeched, and so we have breeches. Stones were made to be shaped and to build castles with; thus My Lord has a fine castle, for the greatest Baron in the province should have the finest house; and since pigs were made to be eaten, we eat pork all year round. Consequently, those who say everything is well are uttering mere stupidities; they should say everything is for the best."

From the introduction of this philosophical idea, Voltaire proceeds to narrate a dizzying tale (really, a series of tales, like Chinese boxes or Russian dolls or the Arabian Nights) of the adventures of Candide, Cunegonde, Pangloss, Cacambo, and a host of other characters, adventures that include war, torture, dismemberment, and death and utterly confound any claim that we live in the best of all possible worlds. At the same time Voltaire satirically challenges certain prevailing ideas, however, he also introduces a plethora of personal, political and historical references, thereby making "Candide" a sort of literary and intellectual cornucopia of Voltaire's thought. In the words of Robert Adams, the able translator and editor of the Norton Critical Edition of the work, "`Candide' is at the same time a novel of abstract ideas with long, complex histories and a highly personal book, into which Voltaire poured an immense amount of himself-his experiences, his enmities, his learning, his desires, his anguish."

The Norton Critical Edition of "Candide" contains extensive and useful background materials on the text, including valuable discussions of the philosophical ideas adumbrated in Voltaire's tale and excerpts from critical studies, books and letters that have been published over the years since the book was written. Among these materials, "Gestation: `Candide' Assembling Itself", an excerpt from Haydn Mason's 1975 book on Voltaire, is particularly useful in understanding the context in which Voltaire wrote, including the effect that the catastrophe in Lisbon and the Seven Years' War had on his thinking.

In Candide, Voltaire raucously lampoons: religion, politics, philosophy, goverment and, specifically, Gottfried Leibniz and his Optimism. I won't ruin any of the fun for those of you who've never read it by spoiling a single thing about the story itself though. The best thing about Candide is, for me, how telling it is of Voltaire himself. He fancied himself an outsider and far removed from those he mocked; even during his lifetime he was considered a borderline philosopher and highly influential countercultural icon, in spite of this. Candide is one of the most laugh-out-loud stories of all time and has aged very well. I don't usually buy critical editions but I definitely recommend this one for all Candide fans as the contributions of praise and criticism include the *exact* same points. Which --- is very funny in a Voltairean sort of way.

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.

The Norton Critical Edition is the best way to read "Candide" since it has several essays illuminating the work through a modern and postmodern lens.

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

Candide is another one of those books I wish I'd been forced to read at some point in my education, whether in my comparative literature classes in high school (which as previously mentioned, wasn't very comparative if the teacher didn't care for the author) or in one of my several philosophy classes in university. Either way, it's been on my list of books to read for ages now, and seeing as David had it on a shelf, unread and lonely, I decided to pick it up and give it a go.

Candide is a fast read, something that I was three-quarters of the way through after my commute on Monday (thirty-five minutes each way) and finished after another half-hour of light reading this afternoon after returning from the doctor's surgery. The only real way to describe it is to imagine what would happen if Camus travelled back in time and decided to write a book with Swift. Candide is funny, sarcastic, satirical, and incredibly entertaining, which is surprising considering I didn't exactly have the best translation in the world at my disposal. It's the story of a young and naïve servant to a nobleman and how his journey in life, most of which is taken up with seeking after his unrequited love, is filled with sadness and joy, and how his outlook determines the course of his action.

Like most satirists, Voltaire did not stop to consider friends or enemies: he took shots at everyone from the Catholic clergy to Protestants and even his own philosophers who continue to espouse beliefs even after they no longer believe in them because "it is the proper thing to do." Brilliant, witty, and clever, this is probably one of my new favourite satirical works, right up there with "A Modest Proposal." It's definitely not something that would be enjoyed in a required university class, but anyone who's studied comparative religion or philosophy, or is at least familiar with the absurdities in all philosophical systems, should enjoy this book.

The French writer Voltaire's (1694-1778) novel 'Candide' is a biting, satirical, cynical, and inimical story of an inexperienced and innocent young man who is much misled early in life by Pangloss, his philosophy teacher. Tragi-comical in style, the whole work is certainly the spiritual forefather of 'Waiting for Godot', but it is vastly inventive, the satire is funny, and the action rollicks around the world in a rapid succession of colorful and exciting places. Candide alternately fights for his life, flees for his life, ponders the meaning of life, makes his fortune, or simply travels to stave off boredom. If this were a Mel Brooks film it would be a cross between 'Blazing Saddles', 'Men In Tights', and 'Life Stinks'. There is a grisly and surreal cartoon element to the proceedings with characters constantly being killed by sword, fire, hanging, earthquake, drowning, and whatever, who then come back to life when you least expect it, looking much the worse for wear.

Candide may be on a journey of discovery, but he is just not able to understand anything he discovers. In the school of life he is certainly bottom of the class, and seemingly aspires to stay there. Pangloss has taught him that however things appear, life is arranged so that, 'all is for the best in the best of all possible worlds' - which sounds to me like a parody of a famous scripture from the New Testament letter to the Romans. This absurdist Positive Mental Attitude is then slowly and relentlessly beaten out of the hapless Candide, who learns some of the practical lessons of life while never actually being in danger of learning anything about its meaning and purpose. All in all, anyone who believes in Judaism, Christianity, Islam, the empirical philosophy of the good and sensible British school, or any Eastern religion in general, will find their ideas roundly lampooned, insulted, and mocked herein.

Candide starts life in Germany, rattles around Europe, travels to South America and finds El Dorado, gains and looses a vast fortune, returns to Europe, visits Turkey and Persia, and is thrashed by three philosophers in Denmark. The narrative obiter dicta may state that 'In life everything grows wearisome', but the Candide view is: 'Everything is not so good as in El Dorado; but everything is not too bad'. An exhaustingly banal conclusion.

It is difficult to see what positive views are contained in this book. Everyone is denigrated. Nothing is sacred and therefore nothing really matters. Everything finishes downbeat, so this is a dangerous work to read with a too-open mind. In fact, the whole book reeks of what sociologists self-congratulatingly call the 'debunking motif', which explains the tenor of the whole. Voltaire was famed abroad and prolific in his lifetime, but time has proved that trenchantly 'being against things', however right you may be, does not bring a lasting fame worth having. 'Candide' is but a small sliver of Voltaire's life output, and his situation reminds me of the works of the ancient Greek Archilochus, who, a century after Homer and Hesiod was dubbed the first 'poet of blame'. But unlike the classics of Homer and Hesiod, only slivers of Archilochus' works remain to this day, whilst his waspish reputation has survived quite well.

Candide may seem to be just another adventure story at first, but farther and deeper into the book there is a beautiful maze of philosophy... anyone who likes to "read between the lines" and knows the true value of happiness will love this book.