Shades Of Gray

Chapter 19 hosts the election of what would become the protagonist’s new companion and replacement of Cacambo after his departure. A scholar by the name of Martin is chosen and rapidly becomes a character of great importance in the novel, foreshadowing in his pessimist mentality the strongest message the book was to engrave on me. The first conversation the protagonist had with the scholar, on chapter 20, revealed that Martin believed the world to be a creation on the hands of evil and denied any encounter with “good.” Candide, much amused by the interpretation, proceeds to question his views and, as expected, mentions how his dead mentor, Pangloss, believed in everything happening for the best. Thus far, we start making some interesting connections with past events which the book relies on to get the message across. The first connection I established is the realization that Pangloss’ mentality and that of Martin present a dichotomy. Voltaire poses them both as erudite characters in the novel, making both of their mentalities strong and convincing by providing concrete evidence supporting them in different situations. By posing such a contradiction with no definite bias, the text may be trying to show us how everything is subject of personal interpretation, and that such subjectivity may always be right as paired up with the specific point of view taken.
Through the novel, it has been quite clear how Pangloss supported his optimist mentality in an almost too stubborn position. The previous reflects the difficulty incorporated in changing character and beliefs, idea that would be supported by Martin, his counterpart. Enveloped in conversation, Candide questions Martin by asking him if he thinks humans have always been as evil and corrupt. In the questioning Candide mentions the worst flaws of humanity as to demonstrate the absurdity of the situation, to which Martin cunningly answers: “Do you think that hawks have always eaten pigeons when they found them (96)?” The protagonist admits that he does think it is logical, to which martin adds: “if hawks have always had the same character, why would you suppose that men have changed theirs (96)?” By making this point, and reaffirming that humans have always been creatures of evil, Martin has given proof to human stubbornness and the impossibility of changing or molding a character and beliefs, or human nature.
As may be expected, which implies the unexpected in a way, it all starts to fit together in the final chapters, more precisely, in the final sentences. Candide’s final words read as goes: “that’s true enough, but we must go and work in the garden (144).” In the literal context we may connect this to the garden work previously mentioned in the chapter, but figuratively, the garden may be interpreted as all that which provides sustention for everything we dream and wish for: our lives. But then how does this all fit together? You see, no great project is accomplished by a single task: no matter how many plumbers you have, you will never produce the building. We all form part of a universal garden in which some of us are plumbers and others may be decorators, floor experts, electricians, engineers and all those roles which sum up to that final end product of a building. Referring back to the text, both Pangloss and Martin explain how individuals are born as such and molded into certain character which is then impossible to change, sort of how each specific individual covers a specific job in the garden, all of which are different but necessary for an integral garden. In the end it wasn’t Pangloss’ optimism that won the battle, nor was it Martin’s realist negativism that provided for a meaningful life. It is not you or I that will serve as model for everybody, but it is everybody that serves as a model for himself in his molding of a character.