Although satire is meant to be comedy I
haven’t found this two chapters funny. These I found out is because comedy can mock something (like optimism) and yet not produce an optimistic response from the audience. It doesn't have to be funny, to be comedy. I do like the tone Voltaire injects into
the book, yet I hate the tragedies in it. It is as if death was nothing but a
joke. I had the same problem with Slaughter
House Five, the author made emphasis on how death was to be taken lightly. I
find that way of thinking unpleasant.
When I was ten years old I had a traumatic
experience in which I almost drown. My fear of death has hunted me ever since. Although I have grown to accept that it will happen to me someday, I do feel
scared when the topic is touched specially tragedies were a lot of people
die. Voltaire added lots of those and maybe that’s why I’m not finding his absurd
situations funny. Maybe the book is ironically made not to be funny, since it
criticizes society and it’s brutal behaviors.
Candide is very naïve and vulnerable. I can
compare him to Sancho Panza from Don
Quixote, the usual humble friend that believes there is good everywhere. I pity those people they are blind in a world without Braille.
I had previous knowledge that Voltaire was
a French philosopher. Then why would he make Pangloss, the philosopher, such an illogical thinker? That answers
all situations with his irrational theories. Maybe that's what he thinks other
philosophers limit themselves like that to.
‘“There is certainly a vein of sulphur running under the
earth from Lima to Lisbon… I maintain is proved!’”- Pangloss p. 34
Pangloss reminds me of Harry Potter’s character Dolores Umbridge, she was peculiar. I
think fans hate her more than Voldermort. She felt everything she did had to be
done, because it was the right way, the only way, the Ministry’s way. Well we
knew she was wrong, as we know Pangloss makes no sense and confuses people with
his “universal rules”.
“Your previous instruction in this subject
has been disturbingly uneven. But you will be pleased to know from now on, you
will be following a carefully structured, Ministry-approved course of defensive
magic. Yes?” – Dolores Umbridge.
“That's right. Because deep down you know
that you deserve to be punished. Don't you Mr. Potter?”- Dolores Umbridge.
Find more Umbridge quotes clicking here or find a relevant video as well here.
Eugenia, I most admit that until this point I have found the book to be extremely humors and comical. However, I can see how you might have found no hilarity in it. Your comparison with Sancho Panza from Don Quixote, with Candide was sensational due to their similar personality, both so innocent and naïve.
RispondiEliminaEven though I found your comparison of Pangloss and Harry Potter's Professor Umbridge very interesting, I have to say that I disagree with the amount of similarities you suggest. It is true that she was trying to get everyone to think the way the Ministry thought, and it is also true that fans probably hate her more than they do Voldemort himself. Pangloss however doesn't inspire hate in the book, and even though he does try to convince Candide of the "ways of the world," he does it with good intentions, truly believing that everything he says is real. Umbridge does everything she does in the books looking for power. She tries to manipulate and scare people into thinking the way she does while Pangloss seeks only to teach what he believes. Furthermore, Pangloss never uses the sarcastic, know-it-all voice that is so obvious in Umbridge because he truly believes everything he is saying, he really thinks his teachings will help Candide. In the books, Pangloss really seeks to teach while Umbridge does the complete opposite: she tries to stop the children from learning anything at all. Obviously both characters are, as you mentioned, wrong in what they say but the similarity ends there. Pangloss says things that are not true and believes them, truly thinking he is unraveling the mystery of the world. Umbridge on the other hand, doesn't only say the wrong things, she acts the wrong way and she has no good intentions in her mind. Thus I conclude that the naive philosopher and the know-it-all witch don't really have much in common.
RispondiEliminaI feel your points are valid except one. Umbridge did feel she was doing the right thing, she wanted to teach them a lesson because in her mind they were wild and needed correction. The ministry felt this school needed corrections so they as Pangloss felt their "theories" were the absolute truth. They wanted to influence people with their knowledge like Pangloss did. I enjoyed your comment, thank you. I must say I think I found a Harry Potter related discussion partner. Cheers!
Elimina