You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
adventurous
dark
emotional
funny
inspiring
lighthearted
sad
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
i actually think this might be a work of pure genius 10/10
Entiendo que esta obra tiene un gran valor histórico, pero a mí me ha parecido un coñazo las dos veces que la he leído.
This didn't feel challenging in 2020 - 2 stars because the ending was nice.
not what I was expecting, but then again, I wasn't quite sure what to expect. It reminded me some (maybe a lot) of Don Quioxte with its fantastical stories, but with a more ribald, bloody edge to it. I realize that all the adventures of Candide and his cast of supporting characters are but allegorical or satirical commentaries on various philisophical ideas and thinly veiled attacks on various historical figures of his time (or earlier for that matter). It frankly left me open mouthed at times as some pretty franky outrageous actions are depicted therein - not surprising that it was banned and/or declared obscene by various powers of the time. I did enjoy it though, but many of the more obscure references and literary/philosophical concepts were lost on me as I expect they may be for a bunch of folks.
Not sure what I was expecting but it was better than I thought. Short quick chapters moved the story along. Much more entertaining than many of the classics I’ve read.
Is this the best of all possible worlds? Or is this the worst of all possible worlds? There does not seem to be another option.
Is the world the only way it can be, an "accept it as it is" Nietzschian Eternal Recurrence, that we must embrace with joy no matter the conditions? Or is it a palimpsest of tragedy, each story scratched on top of the other, no individual truly happy or even with the possible condition of happiness.
Is happiness only possible in micro-nations locked away from the corrupting influence of the rest of the world? Does happiness require both the abundance and simultaneous rejection of wealth? Should we even interpret such a fantastical place as a real lesson, or is the very unbelievable nature of it a chiding reminder that such happiness cannot exist?
It took me perhaps longer than it should have to recognize that Candide is not just a social and political satire but a dark philosophical treatise.
Do we follow the teachings of Pangloss, the eternal optimist, or Martin, the eternal pessimist? The book seems squarely on "Team Martin," but then again the book mocks every belief system, even its own.
Martin commands towards the end of the book:
But one can't trust him, because he also despairs:
One cannot take on faith that the quiet gardening of the conclusion is truly a balm for the unhappy soul, because even this is disgusting to Martin.
If one is to be an optimist like Pangloss, one must be an optimist even when sentenced to death and/or sold into slavery. And so it holds that if one is to be a pessimist like Martin, then one must be a pessimist even when one eventually settles down on a nice farm, away from the common tragedies of life.
Even more importantly, while keeping within the strict philosophical structure of the novel, Voltaire predicts Twitter culture:
Is the world the only way it can be, an "accept it as it is" Nietzschian Eternal Recurrence, that we must embrace with joy no matter the conditions? Or is it a palimpsest of tragedy, each story scratched on top of the other, no individual truly happy or even with the possible condition of happiness.
Is happiness only possible in micro-nations locked away from the corrupting influence of the rest of the world? Does happiness require both the abundance and simultaneous rejection of wealth? Should we even interpret such a fantastical place as a real lesson, or is the very unbelievable nature of it a chiding reminder that such happiness cannot exist?
It took me perhaps longer than it should have to recognize that Candide is not just a social and political satire but a dark philosophical treatise.
Do we follow the teachings of Pangloss, the eternal optimist, or Martin, the eternal pessimist? The book seems squarely on "Team Martin," but then again the book mocks every belief system, even its own.
Martin commands towards the end of the book:
"Let us work," said Martin, "without disputing; it is the only way to render life tolerable."
But one can't trust him, because he also despairs:
Man was born to live either in a state of distracting inquietude or of lethargic disgust.
One cannot take on faith that the quiet gardening of the conclusion is truly a balm for the unhappy soul, because even this is disgusting to Martin.
If one is to be an optimist like Pangloss, one must be an optimist even when sentenced to death and/or sold into slavery. And so it holds that if one is to be a pessimist like Martin, then one must be a pessimist even when one eventually settles down on a nice farm, away from the common tragedies of life.
Even more importantly, while keeping within the strict philosophical structure of the novel, Voltaire predicts Twitter culture:
"But is there not a pleasure," said Candide, "in criticizing everything, in pointing out faults where others see nothing but beauties?"
"That is to say," replied Martin, "that there is some pleasure in having no pleasure."
No because why is this book still printed?
This book is funny to laugh AT. not with. The author needed some sort of evaluation because this book is just wacky all over.
This book is funny to laugh AT. not with. The author needed some sort of evaluation because this book is just wacky all over.
While Voltaire is disagreeable, his satire on optimism is well written.
molt surrealista aquest llibre, 0 versemblança però m’ho he passat genial i he rigut molt,no m’ho esperava. potser no era aquest l’objectiu del senyor voltaire però jo li dono 4 estrelles igualment ale