Candide

topic posted Fri, December 30, 2005 - 2:25 PM by  offlineDruben
Rereading Candide these days and am struck by how it really was quite scandalous. Voltaire published it in 1758 at the heighth of his reputation as a tragic dramatist. I'm curious what the effects of this book had on his reputation in France. Also what was his relationship, if any, to de Sade? I know that he and Rousseau had a falling out at some point and if anyone can fill in the details of that I would be greatly "enlightened."
posted by:
Druben
Maryland
  • Re: Candide

    Mon, January 2, 2006 - 11:13 PM
    Sade would not have published anything in 1758; he was I think about 18 years old at the time. Voltaire's <i>Candide</i> was indeed irreverent but not "scandalous" in the way Sade would become. As you point out, Voltaire was very well respected among well-educated French and Europeans; he had been closely associated with the Enlightenment (especially its criticism of the clergy) but not thought of as immoral or decadent, as Sade was.

    In any event, Voltaire's reputation benefitted from being away from Paris from the early 1750s until the end of his life -- it helped him avoid getting caught up in the increasingly tense domestic politics of the time.

    A more controversial work, in the 1760s, was his <i>Dictionnaire philosophique</i>.

    Finally, indeed, Voltaire did write very critically of Rousseau, especially following the publication of his <i>Letter to M. D'Alembert on the Theater</i> in 1758; Rousseau's critique of high culture as socially decadent drew Voltaire's ire. However, as you no doubt know, <i>Candidate</i> was really much more a critique of Leibniz.

    A very good, readable discussion of <i>Candide</i> in 18th-century context is Daniel Gordon's introduction to his translation of the novella, published by Bedford Books in a cheap paperback.
    • Re: Candide

      Tue, January 3, 2006 - 6:26 AM
      Thanks Jessica,
      You have helped me put "Candide" in better context. Voltaire, I believe, did not so much go after Leibniz in "Candide" but rather the less gifted Leibnizeans who perpetuated a blanket optomism, much as Kierkegaard was not criticizing Hegel directly but the Danish Hegelians. I have found this often to be the case in the legacy of philosophical discourse. The true masters have articulated something important in the search for truth but later adaptations pervert it or overextend it in some manner.
      • Re: Candide

        Tue, January 3, 2006 - 9:54 PM
        Actually, from what I understand, Voltaire's was a direct attack on Leibniz.
        • Re: Candide

          Wed, January 4, 2006 - 6:05 AM
          Well now, we have a bit of debate here. From the introduction of my Peguin translation of Candide by John Butt I read, "Though he ridiculed Leibniz's terminology, the sufficient reason, the pre-established harmony, and the moral and physical evil which were bandied about by Leibniz's disciples, he attacked, not Leibniz's philosophy, but its popular perversions." That was the position of my professor who taught Leibniz and Continental philosophy of the 17th and 18th Century as well. If Voltaire we directly attacking Leibniz, he wasn't doing a very thorough job of it - since the Theodicy and the Monadology are very coomplex systems of reasoning that Candide doesn't come close to acknowledging.

Recent topics in "French Philosophy"

Topic Author Replies Last Post
New Hunter S. Thompson Documentary petunia 7 January 28, 2008
Chomsky vs. Foucault on YouTube barnaby 5 October 3, 2007
Jean Baudrillard dies at age 77 ... 3 September 8, 2007
does the marquis recant? curiosity 3 September 8, 2007