| BookTalk.org News |
| • If you are having trouble with logging into your account or making posts please know that we are working to resolve this issue. Please delete your temporary Internet files and cookies (at least those for our site) and stay tuned to see if that resolves the issue. If not our web designer believes he can find the code that is causing the issue. |
| Show us where you live! |
 |
| Donate & Support BookTalk.org |
Please support our free community by making a credit card donation through our secure PayPal account. We appreciate and depend on the generosity of our members. Thank you!
•
See who supports us
|
|
| Author |
Message |
MadArchitect
Joined: 14 Nov 2004
Posts: 2609
Gender: 
Location: decentralized
|
 Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 10:17 pm Post subject:
|
 |
|
| Mr. P wrote: |
| An interesting thing about the character Candide...he is the vehicle for Voltair to speak out against the idea of Optimism, as espoused by Leibniz, but throughout all his horrible ordeals, Candide always seem to exit with a bright outlook. |
I hadn't thought of the possibility that "optimism" might also refer to Leibnitz's philosophy. I had always just assumed that it referred to Candide, who is rigorously optimistic throughout.
| Quote: |
| The naivete of many of these characters is mind numbing...but I assume that is the intention of Voltaire in making his targets so easy to despise. |
I don't know. I think maybe we're struck by their naivete because we se it from the privileged position granted to us by the author. If we saw the story from their perspectives, we might think our naivete more akin to realism.
| Quote: |
| ...while not a pessimist, not too fond of blissful optimists! |
Oh, I think he's very fond of Candide, who is the book's quintessential optimist. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Mr. Pessimistic 
Assistant Professor
Silver Contributor
Joined: 16 Jun 2004
Posts: 3449
Gender:
Location: NJ - www.myspace.com/mrpessimistic
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 12:51 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
| MadArchitect wrote: |
I hadn't thought of the possibility that "optimism" might also refer to Leibnitz's philosophy. I had always just assumed that it referred to Candide, who is rigorously optimistic throughout. |
It does refer to Candide, but the book is mainly, from my understanding, about attacking the philosophy of Lebniz regarding the Optimism of the time. Not the "look on the bright side" of today, but the "All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds" of the time Voltaire writes in. The two are similar as I see it, but I do also see the difference. To show how silly it is to be so blind to the reality. The intro to my edition, by Mark Wood, also suggests that Voltaire saw this Optimism as pessimism, because it would not admit reality and accepted the worst as the best. At least this is my take based on my reading of the book and the (limited) external sources I have looked up.
Pangloss (in the intro to my edition, the name is broken into Pan & Gloss or "All Talk") is used as the spokesperson for Lebnizian thought in this work...and is so blind to reality that we cannot but take him for the oblivious fool that Voltaire has made him. Candide only starts to really learn after getting kicked out of his sheltered and obviously false paradise. His own words show that he is, through his personal experiences, coming to reject the Optimism of his teacher: "If this is the best of all possible worlds, what must the others be like?" That was the best thing that could have happened to him.
What I feel Voltaire is also speaking to in this book is that we can all sit around and philosophize about the human condition, but until we actually experience life, we cannot honestly think we know much regarding human activity. The characters in Westphalia are in a snow globe world where they think everything is just grand because their life is grand. They never saw what was going on outside their realm until Candide first was booted. Then everything went to hell for all of them. Pangloss contracts Syphilis and ends up hanged, Cunegonde is raped and humiliated, her family killed (the brother survives only to be killed by Candide) and Cunegonde evidently (from my external reading) ends up aged past her years because of her real expereinces in life. Candide gets banged up through all this, but comes out stronger for it I think. We will see....I still have to finish.
| Mad wrote: |
I don't know. I think maybe we're struck by their naivete because we se it from the privileged position granted to us by the author. If we saw the story from their perspectives, we might think our naivete more akin to realism. |
Well, just because the characters might see it as reality does not make it so. Voltaire is presenting them in this state of ignorant bliss for a reason. This is a satire after all. The point is, they DID think it was realism...but had no real clue at all to what life was really about.
| Mr. P. wrote: |
...while not a pessimist, not too fond of blissful optimists
| Mad wrote: |
| Oh, I think he's very fond of Candide, who is the book's quintessential optimist. |
|
Candide is not one of the Optimists in the sense of this book, as I explained above. He seems to me more of a modern day optimist. Candide is indeed the hero here, but not because he buys into the Optimism of Pangloss...but because he actually has grown from his experiences and is still being positive...by holding on to his hope.
Mr. P. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MadArchitect
Joined: 14 Nov 2004
Posts: 2609
Gender:
Location: decentralized
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 6:37 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
| misterpessimistic wrote: |
| To show how silly it is to be so blind to the reality. |
In all fairness to Leibniz, Voltaire has distorted his actual philosophy in the interest of lampooning it. That isn't to say that Voltaire is entirely off the mark, either, since there were plenty of people who considered themselves good students of Leibniz who also subjected his philosophy to a great deal of distortion, but Leibniz's ideas aren't as plainly wrong as Candide likes to represent them in the person of Pangloss. In saying that this is the best of all possible worlds, the emphasis falls on possible, not best. Which is to say, it's futile to talk about things that aren't actually possible, so you have to condition your behavior to this world with a mind towards what actually exists. What isn't possible clearly cannot be what is best for the simple reason that whatever can exist will inherently be better than what cannot. Voltaire's critique amounts to the argument that Leibniz's philosophy ought not be taken as a moral justification. In other words, you can't excuse the injustices of civil institutions on grounds that nothing better is possible for the sheer fact of those civil institutions existing already. Nor can you excuse God (or more specifically, the Judeo-Christian notion of a all-powerful and benevolent God) for natural disasters like the Lisbon quake on grounds that this is the best possible world. That isn't, so far as I know, the purpose Leibniz had in mind when he developed his philosophy, but it's a use to which others were apparently subjecting it.
| Quote: |
| What I feel Voltaire is also speaking to in this book is that we can all sit around and philosophize about the human condition, but until we actually experience life, we cannot honestly think we know much regarding human activity. |
Which is part of why I'd insist that it's viewing philosophy too narrowly to suppose that it's something you can do from an armchair. With only a few exceptions, the most vital and influential philosophers have all been led to philosophy by experience. Socrates learned in the polis and on the battlefield and insisted on teaching in the public square. Boethius' philosophy was the product of an involved political life and the heartbreak of exile and estrangement from his family. Spinoza worked as a lens grinder and was excommunicated by the Jewish community. Rousseau was orphaned, apprenticed as an engraver, served as assistant to a Parisian diplomat, taught music, lived in Geneva, Paris, Venice (which he apparently disliked) and was given asylum by David Hume in the English countryside, pursued several romantic affairs and was exiled more than once. Camus was born poor, lived on two continents, was admitted to and then rejected by several political groups, married twice and witnessed the occupation of Paris during the war.
| Quote: |
| Candide gets banged up through all this, but comes out stronger for it I think. We will see....I still have to finish. |
I'll be interested to see what you think of how the book ends.
| Quote: |
| The point is, they DID think it was realism...but had no real clue at all to what life was really about. |
Right, but what I'm saying is, it's quite easy for us to see the disparity between how they perceive the world and how it really is because Voltaire is giving us a perspective that we wouldn't have if we were one of the characters. Not because they're particularly dull or short-sighted, but because part of the human condition is seeing things through the distorted lens of our own subjectivity.
| Quote: |
| Candide is indeed the hero here, but not because he buys into the Optimism of Pangloss...but because he actually has grown from his experiences and is still being positive...by holding on to his hope. |
I disagree, but I'll wait until you've finished before I talk about why.
Glad you're enjoying the book. It's one that crops up in all sorts of unusual places, so I can almost guarantee that you'll have occasion to think about it later on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Trish
Newbie
Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Posts: 4
Gender: 
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2007 7:04 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Let me say I haven't yet finished Candide, but I'm thoroughly enjoying it. I like ironic brisk hopping from word to word pace of the narrative befitting a light comedy to describe rape, murder, torture, disfigurement, etc.. I don't know if any author today could get away with marrying that tone with that intensity of evil. But getting back to the issue of optimism...
I think it's pretty clear Voltaire finds optimism in the traditional definition tragically absurd and a woefully inadequate response to human suffering. I think Candide has this attribute in spades at the beginning with a sheltered life in Westphalia. Candide then experiences exile, torture, war, witnessing the deaths of his friends, separation from Cunegonde. I think some people might be confused by Candide's mild response to these events. That's partly the irony of the tone but I think it means that Voltaire doesn't consider pessimism a reasonable alternative either. I couldn't help but think back to Elie Wiesel's "Night" about being in a Nazi concentration camp. He talked about an electric fence surrounding the camp would be an easy way for anyone who wanted to end their suffering to run into it. What is amazing that even at the worst period in the camps most people did not commit suicide. The old woman at the end of the 12th chapter says "In the different countries in which it has been my fate to wander, and the many inns where I have been a servant, I have observed a prodigious number of people who held their existence in abhorence, and yet I never knew more than twelve who voluntarily put an end to their misery." Is this optimism that makes people endure? I don't think so. Loss, sickness, death, cruelty is a universal experience. I think Candide finds his genuine humanity and will to live through suffering. As I've said, I haven't finished the book yet so I may or may not be completely wrong  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Recent Topics |
|
|
|
