One of my favorite books ever! There are countless reviews of this masterpiece, so I will not bore you with another, JUST READ IT! ( )

This is quite the silly book. It comes to more or less the same conclusions about happiness as Hermann Hesse's Siddhartha, if a touch more (okay, a lot more) cynically. That is, that life is best when one has a purpose, a way to spend their time. The plot in a nutshell: Candide desperately tries to retain his optimism as endless and increasingly unlikely calamities befall him and his cohorts. There are funny bits, there are disturbing bits, and there are bits that make you go "huh?" but all in all it's a decent read. And short enough that it isn't a chore to get through. ( )

Biting satire. Quick read. Some great passages. Happy to have read it, but I won't rave about it. ( )

Wish I knew what everyone sees in this one. I've known a few people who have claimed this as one of their favorite works, and to me, anyway, this book appears so slight when compared with other classical works. But then, allegory was never my favorite form of literature. I can completely understand Balzac, or Zola, or Flaubert. They were amazing writers, and you can get something new out of them with each reading, I think, depending upon what stage you are at in your own life. But it seems like there is a trend in French literature - the spare and esoteric work, the one that says, "this may not look like much, but it has Layers." I'm thinking especially of The Little Prince, this work, and possibly all of Camus. It may be very worthy. I'm sure the fault is mine here. But I just don't get it. ( )

A very good translation of a good book. And a hilarious cover to boot. If you haven't read this yet, I'm ashamed of you. ( )

A very thoughtful and socially relevant critique of certain philosophies. Bitingly funny at times, and quietly tragic at others, it is easy to see why it has become a classic. However, it doesn't seem to me to present any alternatives to what it criticizes - as much as the Leibniz-style optimism is unfounded and dangerous, it gave me a bit of an empty feeling when I was finished. If you deconstruct the fallacies of one or another worldview, you had better have your own worldview ready to bring forward. Candide is essentially a negative novel, it dismembers what is bad or false rather than affirming or promoting what is good or true. It is like an Anti-War rally rather than a Peace rally. While I think it was essential of Voltaire that he fight the forces of Absolute monarchy and rationalism, this is not a novel to build a society on. ( )

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. ( )

I enjoyed delving into the theological wanderings of this 17th century philosopher; the backgrounds and criticisms also helped to give the book more depth and context. It was thrilling for me to "get to know" a writer so bold and unflinching in his views, who lived 400 years before I was even born. Candide was delightful--a tease for the brain as well as a story for the soul. I'd recommend. ( )

It’s funny how many small coincidences there are in life. I picked up this book about a year ago with good intentions, only to let it sit on a shelf until I stuffed it into a box to move to Bracebridge. I was looking for something different to read a few nights ago and stumbled across it.

In other news, I’m currently preparing to preach a series of “Meaningless Messages” on Ecclesiastes. Imagine my surprise when I realized that Candide was essentially a retelling of Ecclesiastes!

Does life have a purpose? Do we live in the best of all possible worlds? What should we do in life?

"Then I realized that it is good and proper for a man to eat and drink, and to find satisfaction in his toilsome labor under the sun during the few days of life God has given him—for this is his lot." (Ecclesiastes 5:18, NIV)

"'Let’s work, then, without disputing,' says Martin. 'It is the only way to make life bearable.'” (130)

For an old classic, Candide is surprisingly readable. If you want to rethink your position on the meaning of life, this is an interesting place to start. ( )

Much shorter than I expected, funny in parts, delightful journey like the Odyssey ( )

This book does not stick so well in my memory in either a negative or positive way, but I think this comes from the book being a mixture of two things which I could not feel more differently about: allegory and satire.

The first I find to be as silly and pointless as Aesop or Passion Plays, and is part of the reason that The Wizard of Oz has always felt stilted to me. Characters in an allegory are oversimplified symbols, and so cannot comment on the nature of actual human beings. The style is already so firmly affixed to cultural states and norms that it cannot really say anything beyond the dichotomous, and dualists are blinded by their egos.

I do love satire, but that is generally because of the wit and skill it takes to subvert and re-imagine. Unfortunately, once one has drawn so deeply on hyperbole in a work, it loses its ability to find that necessarily uncomfortable 'grey area'--that rift between assumption and observation.

Voltaire is witty and funny, but his condemnation and praise falls only on unrealistic absolutes, and hence becomes only political rather than philosophical. In this, he becomes in many ways Shakespeare's opposite; whose characters were so vaguely sketched that they could be held representative of many disparate identities.

It is too easy to force and distort arguments when the accepted givens are so strictly defined and counterpointed. This problem should be evident to anyone in America today who sees how opposition to ideas is transformed into meaninglessly pejorative identities. The temptation of thought-terminating cliches grows ever more in the face of such opposing forces as Voltaire presents.

No doubt much of Voltaire's popularity stems from the fact that he is so narrowly applicable and divisive. In this way he almost works like a philosopher since his ideas are so forcefully professed. However, unlike a philosopher he represents his opponents in a state of utter ridicule, he is less convincing than polarizing.

The other part of Voltaire's popularity comes from his empty century. The Seventeenth had Shakespeare and Milton. The Nineteenth showed the ridiculously fecund blossoming of the Romantics. The Eighteenth, however, has Fielding, Voltaire, and Pope. Fielding has escaped as wide a reading because his satire was more social than strictly political. Pope was another satirist, but is of such a fanciful nature as to escape more simplistic and contentious forces. This leaves us with the more accessible Voltaire, who may be used to attack ideas, but not to build upon them. ( )

I laughed out loud reading Candide. It's vicious, biting, sarcastic, humorous, and outrageous. Voltaire didn't mince a single word. I'm so glad I finally read it. Note: I did not read this translation, I read the translation by John Butt. ( )

Absurd, impossible, vile, vicious and bawdy, Candide is a quick lampooning of Optimism, with a fine if simple final message: "We must go to work in the garden". And we must. All human ugliness is in this short book, but presented so shockingly it glances over your senses and remains in the absurd - so you can dwell in it at the time or think about it afterwards as much as you choose. Candide himself is good company on this short buffeting through horrible time. The horrors are diluted by the impossibility of characters' survival but the sense of witnessing people not learning is realistically frustrating! ( )

Being a French minor couldn't get me into this book. ( )

Call me a Philistine, but this is one of the most infantile books I have ever read. ( )

Voltaire - this is the first work I've read from him. I was thinking it was going to be heavily intellectual - and it had some deep themes, but they were at the same time, very obvious. Overall, the pleasant surprise was just how funny he is - I hadn't been aware. ( )

A quick read... easy to follow. To get the most out of the book I went to sparknotes.com and for free was able to get synopsis of each chapter to help explain some of the satrical quips and the specific incidents or practices Voltaire rendered ridiculous. ( )

This major work by Voltaire is not quiet the way I imagined it. While I thought of a philosophical fictional story when buying the book, probably something comparable to Nietzsche's Zarathustra, it eventually turned out to be a very easy read with tons of humor in it. The story doesn't take itself seriously, it describes the very unlikely life of the noble Candide and his beloved princess who get around both worlds in a dystopian, sarcastically carried out way. On their way they get to know people whose lives are even more miserable then their own. One man they meet quiet a few times is a philosopher who has the opinion that everything in the world is perfect and nobody can complain. This philosophy of Optimism however seems to be the complete opposite of the countless miseries the protagonists run into. Although the philosopher does not want to reject his world view, it is quiet clear that he must be in error.

I thought this book was both a good starting point for discussions about Optimism as well as an hilarious and easy read. ( )

Reading it for school.Not too bad, considering it's a satire about an era we do not live in (even if I'd studied it, and the notes explain the more obscure mocked ones).Too many farcical moments, where he does not press a point, but hammer it into oblivion. ( )

Before there was the opera by Leonard Bernstein there was the original, Candide: or, Optimism by Voltaire (nee Francois-Marie Arouet). The important thing to note about the title is the subtitle, optimism, for in all of literature there is hardly another work that argues more strongly for an optimistic approach to life. While Voltaire takes a cynical view of humanity that even denizens of the twenty-first century can appreciate, his cynicism does not lead him, or rather does not lead his character Doctor Pangloss, to reject an optimism that is best know by the phrase; this is "the best of all possible worlds". Yet, it is late in the book that we realize that Voltaire takes a view that man's life is made worth living by the exercise of hope, good nature, and industry. Indeed, the book ends with Candide saying to Doctor Pangloss, "we must cultivate our garden". And our garden, even for the skeptic Voltaire, is the one we inherited from Adam after his unceremonious exit from Eden. Voltaire's Candide is a delight for the reader almost two hundred fifty years after its first appearance from the fiery pen of one of the greatest thinkers of the Age of Enlightenment. ( )

It's easy to understand, after reading Candide, why Voltaire wasn't high on the hit-parade of the Church and certain aristocrats. ( )

Candide by Voltaire is a laugh out loud funny book, if you're in the right frame of mind. I read sections of it aloud to CJ and both of us ended up in hysterics. (Be warned, its comedy is often quite dark and unlikely to pass anyone's sensitivity test.) It was written in 1759 and it is clearly a product of its time; but it also still has much to say to us about the current state of the world, unfortunately.

The story concerns an idealistic, handsome young man, Candide, who finds his optimism repeatedly tested by the treacherous people he meets and the violent world he inhabits. As a youth, Candide, the son of a wealthy Baron, is tutored by Dr. Pangloss, a German philosopher, who's world view is summed up in the opening chapter, "It is demonstrated that things cannot be otherwise: for, since everything was made for a purpose, everything is necessarily for the best purpose...Therefore, those who have maintained that all is well have been talking nonsense: they should have maintained that all is for the best."

Candide clings to Dr. Pangloss' philosoply after Dr. Pangloss is hung and burned at the stake, even after he is driven from his home, separated from his beloved Cunegonde and forced into an unforgiving, hostile world. Candide travels the world looking for Cunegonde and for a place free from suffering. He is at times imprisoned, enslaved, starved, tortured, kidnapped, marooned, etc. etc., but all the while, he believes that all is for the best.

The result is a kind of Series of Unfortunate Events for adults. The situations become so comically awful that the reader cannot help but laugh at them and at Candide's reaction. At one point, towards the end of the book, Candide encounters six former kings attending the carnival in Venice. Each king tells his story, all of them stories of how they lost their thrones. Each king's story tries to top the injustice endured by the previous teller with very humorous results. Everyone Candide meets has a tale of woe to tell, yet no one can make a dent in Candide's optimism.

I was pleasantly surprised by how much I enjoyed Candide. I expected it to be heavy going, never having read Voltaire before. Instead I found a quickly paced adventure with witty dialogue and satire that I actually found humorous. Candide benefits from the novella form. Had this been a full length novel it would have undoubtedly become tedious. Brevity is the source of wit after all. (I think that's right, anyway.)

So, I'm giving Candide by Voltaire five out of five stars. I may end up putting it on my best of the year list this year. ( )

(This refers to the Peter Constantine translation from 2005.) This wonderful and short book ought to be first called philosophical, then satirical, then an adventure, and finally political. Unlike his contemporary Flaubert (such as in A Sentimental Education), Voltaire manages to keep contemporary references staggered in a perfect quantity to not overwhelm his 'main meal' with spices of political reference and opinionated controversy. While the story itself is a little unbelievable and facile, this fits perfectly with the satire Voltaire is able to exact on just about every nation, religion, political party, playwright, and idea he chooses--and he chooses to be inclusive! The bashful optimist Candide, the love of his life Cunegonde, and his troupe of intermittent companies such as a mulatto sidekick, a practical foil, an 'old woman', a womanizing abbot, and finally his lifelong tutor, Professor Pangloss, who teaches primarily 'metaphysico-theolog-cosmo-idiotology all serve to act out an adventure and a wonderful debate on how to think about and act toward this very hard thing called life. While not a Buddhist tract by any means, it certainly concludes with some telling signs supportive of 'calm abiding'; and resolves to a very simple, perhaps almost Theroux-esque philosophies. This is put together well on all levels and will be enjoyed by all except staunch and sensitive believers of their own religion. The book is tawdry and explicit at times, which dulls its impact.

The Constantine translation is light, wry and true. It feels as if this is most like what a contemporary reader must have transacted out of the book at the time it was written, certainly in terms of humor and light pique. The last time I read this was in French in middle school and it was much more of a pleasure in English in this version. ( )

I'm not a huge fan of early novels - it is amazing that when the form was emerging how much the authors packed in to such a small space. There is little character development in this, just event...flash...event... etc with a bit of philosophy thrown in for good measure. I didn't enjoy this. ( )

Classic French Literature