Interpreting, Conecting, Analyzing

While reading I did some investigation and found out that Voltaire’s uses the Oreillons as a criticism towards Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s philosophy. Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s was another French Enlightment thinker who believed, that humans were naturally good and that institutions of human civilization like property, business and so forth corrupt this goodness. He came to call man “noble savage”. Yet, Voltaire’s thought all the opposite, he refers to the Oreillons as men filled with prejudice and brutality as the people from the Old World. They killed people on their religious beliefs, “He’s a Jesuit! He’s a Jesuit. We shall have our revenge and enjoy a good meal. We’ll have Jesuit for dinner!” not to mention the practice of cannibalism. I agree more with Voltaire’s view point, for to me it is more realistic. We have to accept human nature, and deal with reality evilness does exist.

Cacambo saves Candide from being eaten. He speaks with the Oreillons and tells him he is not a Jesuit. Cacambo represents a balance of a man who is neither from the Old or the New world. As everything in excess is bad he is the perfect combination who thinks thoroughly and uses his understanding and experience of both worlds to create his wonderful personality. We can see this, “The Oreillons were impressed by Cacambo’s reasoning.” He eloquently and very diplomatically talked to the Oreillons and saved his friend from being eaten.

LIFE

While reading I came across, “I have wanted to kill myself a hundred times, but somehow I am still in love with life.” This quote really surprised me because being the daughter of the Pope, she shouldn’t say such things, for suicide is a terrible sin for the Catholic Church. It is also very ironic how this old lady refers to people not killing themselves because they “love life”, not because they are resigned or scared of eternal punishment (hell). I think maybe because of all the terrible events that have happened to her, maybe she doesn’t believe in god anymore or in the afterlife. I would completely understand her, for if god is so great, was he in all her suffering. Why didn’t he help her out? What did she do to have to go through all that? These are questions I often ask myself, for If god is so great why does he allow so much suffering and hurt to be caused. If he is so powerful, why doesn’t he help the one who really need it?

The old lady also says, “I should have never of my misfortunes if you had not provoked me a little, and if it were not the custom to pass the time on board ship by telling stories.” Even though the old lady is very pessimistic due to all the events in her life, she does not want anybody to feel sorry for her. By telling her stories she is not looking for sympathy, it is only to cope with the boredom. Yet, her sufferings have influenced greatly who she is. She now sees life as being misery, yet forced to love it.

Dual Message

As I read I found more elements of satire. You would never imagine how the old woman, now a servant, was once a princess. It was very surprising and unexpected to hear her, “My eyes were not always sore and bloodshot, my nose did not always touch my chin, and I have not always been a servant. I am the daughter of Pope Urban X and the Princess of Palestrina.” This case is very ironic to me, I asked myself how someone with so much power and so much wealth can end up being a servant? I also wonder what it feels like for her from being admired by many, respected, and praised to now being a servant: treated harshly and given orders. She says one of her dresses was worth more than all of the magnificence of Westphalia, by using this hyperbole the author emphasizes this old woman’s drastic change. Life is pretty unexpected therefore you must live life fully and not underestimate it, I bet this old lady never ever imagined herself as something less than a princess.

This old woman’s story can be interpreted in two ways. All these events and suffering she has gone through contradict Pangloss optimism. She has lived through the worst of the worst: rape, war, being a servant, being back stabbed and so on. Simply life can't be viewed in an optimistic way, after all.

It can also be viewed as criticism against religion. For, she is the daughter of the Pope, the highest member of the Catholic Church. How in the world does he not protect her and help her when she is suffering? It’s ironic how his wants to help people, and its his job, but when it comes to his own daughter he does nothing about it.

Chapters 6 & 7

While reading chapter six, I found it very ridiculous how, “The University of Coimbra had pronounced that the sight of a few people ceremoniously burned alive before a slow fire was an infallible prescription for preventing earthquakes.” How in the world is burning a person going to stop earthquakes from occurring? Obviously it did not work and towards the end of the chapter, another earthquake occurs.

While reading I detected a false choice fallacy- “The authorities of that country could find no surer means avoiding total ruin than by giving people a magnificent auto-da-fe.” It is saying the government had no other option than to kill these people. This is a complete fallacy and the government didn’t have to kill them, for he killed them and still the problem consisted.

In chapter seven Candide is take care of by an old lady. The strange thing about it is that he doesn’t know her. He keeps asking her, “Who are you?... and what makes you so kind to me?” Yet, she doesn’t reply. If I was Candide, I would start thinking something weird is going on, even more when she says, “Come with me and don’t speak a word.” Candide follows her, not even taking into account she is a stranger and could put in a risk full situation.

MLA

MLA stands for Moder Language Association. It is a standard of used while writing, using English language. It has specific text ciatations, work cited pages, first page format, and section headings. MLA has become very popular used by most people and institutions, it has become a standard for writing in many places.

General Guidelines
Type your paper on a computer and print it out on standard, white 8.5 x 11-inch paper.
Double-space the text of your paper, and use a legible font (e.g. Times New Roman). Whatever font you choose, MLA recommends that the regular and italics type styles contrast enough that they are recognizable one from another. The font size should be 12 pt.
Leave only one space after periods or other punctuation marks (unless otherwise instructed by your instructor).
Set the margins of your document to 1 inch on all sides.
Indent the first line of paragraphs one half-inch from the left margin. MLA recommends that you use the Tab key as opposed to pushing the Space Bar five times.
Create a header that numbers all pages consecutively in the upper right-hand corner, one-half inch from the top and flush with the right margin. (Note: Your instructor may ask that you omit the number on your first page. Always follow your instructor's guidelines.)
Use italics throughout your essay for the titles of longer works and, only when absolutely necessary, providing emphasis.
If you have any endnotes, include them on a separate page before your Works Cited page. Entitle the section Notes (centered, unformatted).
Formatting the First

Vocab Candide

I found it very funny when Pangloss gives his explanation of why syphilis is a positive thing, “It is indispensable in this best of worlds. It is a necessary ingredient. For if Columbus, when visiting the West Indies, had not caught this disease, which poisons the source of generation, which frequently even hinders generation, and is clearly opposed to the great end of Nature, we should have neither chocolate nor cochineal.” I found it very humorous how Pangloss priorities are very ironic. He doesn’t care about this harsh contagious disease, for it weren’t because if it we wouldn’t have chocolate or cochineal. For Pangloss having the disease spreading around is worth it, because now we have chocolate and cochineal. As a saying goes, you don’t miss what you have never had. Pangloss loses and eye and an ear due to syphilis, yet he still believes the disease is important. Can he say anything more ironic?


VOCAB
“She was disemboweled by Burglar soldiers after being ravished as much as a poor woman could bear.”
Disemboweled: remove the entrails of



Ravished: to seize and carry away by force


“This sovereign of hearts and quintessence of our souls.”
Quintessence: the pure, highly concentrated essence of a thing




“They produced these hellish torments by which you see me devoured.”
Hellish: highly unpleasant



“Who was indebted for it to a marchioness.”
Marchioness: A noblewoman ranking above a countess and below a duchess. Also called marquise




“Clearly opposed to the great end of Nature, we should have neither chocolate nor cochineal.”
Cochineal: vivid red




“The sailor rushed straight into the midst of the debris and risked his life searching for money.”
Debris: the scattered remains of something broken or destroyed; rubble or wreckage

One Question: No Answer.

As I began reading “Candide”, as early as the introduction I could connect with Voltaire. In the introduction he uses the rhetorical questions technique. For, with me at least as a reader it was very effective. The question which most impacted me, and I always ask myself he addressed as, “If the creator is good and all-powerful, as we are told he is, could he not have made a better world?” This question will never have an answer for we believe what we are told, yet what if it was all made up like some myths and legends from different cultures.

Even though I do think about this question constantly, never do I need a more urgent answer than when something bad happens. As Voltaire said, “In times of widespread disasters such questioning becomes more general and more urgent.” This is due to the fact that in a moment of desperation, you can’t seem to understand, how someone who supposedly is so good can’t prevent so much harm. I had this feeling Voltaire describes exactly with the September 11 attacks. Millions of questions like his kept draining in my head. How can such good creator, create such harmful beasts? Why do innocent people have to pay the consequences, for what some bastards decided to do? Why does evil exist if we were created by such good creator? I keep repeating the word good to emphasize that apparently he is not that good after all.

I find it really amazing and brilliant how Voltaire came up with these ideas all the way back in 1758, when there was a diminutive portion of the knowledge there is today. I admire him. I nowhere find him tragic, he is just a person who is not scared to face reality, like most are.

Yet, this is a topic that has gone on for centuries with many different opinions and perspectives. The point is no one will ever know the truth of our creator if there is any, but we are left with this uncertainty we must live on with.