Spotlight on the Genes

Have you ever had that moment when you go, "Aha!" Well, that was me a few minutes ago when I was reading the third chapter "Immortal Coils" of The Selfish Gene. In my earlier blog post, I have asked a few questions that came to my mind while reading the second chapter. One of these questions was "Why is the title of the book The Selfish Gene?" The third chapter pretty much gives you a straight forward answer.

No, I was completely off-track when thinking that the genes were selfish due to their "personality." It has nothing to do with characteristic traits. "The gene is a basic unit of selfishness" (pg 36). When we think about evolution and its process, we normally think about the organisms. They're the ones going through the process; they're the ones evolving into even more complex organisms. What Dawkins is trying to tell us here is that that is NOT the case. It's the genes. Genes are the ones going through all the different survival of competitions between different genes. It's the gene-centered view of evolution where all the genetic material, natural selection, and evolution are considered from the perspective of the genes.

Vocabularies that I did not know in this chapter:

1. cistron = a section of a DNA (or RNA) molecule that codes for specific polypeptide in protein synthesis
2. flotilla = a fleet of ships or boats
3. troupe = a group of dancers, actors, or other entertainers who tour to different venues
4. aggregation = collection; several things grouped together or considered as a whole
5. denizen = an inhabitant or occupant of a particular place
6. altruism = practice of disinterested and selfless concern for the well-being of others

Exactly what it's NOT suppose to mean...

Questions on The Replicators

Many people who saw me holding this book The Selfish Genes told me that it was the one of the best works they have ever read. Excited to read it, I started off with the second chapter The Replicators in class. In all honesty, I was disappointed. I felt like I was reading a biology textbook instead and probably didn’t understand half of the things Dawkins was trying to explain to us. However, here is a short summary of what I understood from this chapter:

Dawkins starts off with “In the beginning was simplicity” (pg 12). He starts explaining about the emergence of life and the evolutionary stages that occurred afterwards. I’m no biologist and although you don’t have to be a biologist to understand his work, I didn’t understand any of the first part he said until I got to the “primeval soup” part. The only thing I know is that he 100% supports Darwin’s theory of evolution. The primeval soup, which he didn’t explain too well so I had to look it up on Wikipedia later, is some type of ocean that contains a lot of chemicals or molecules (carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, hydrogen, etc). So in other words, life started from a chemical reaction that occurred inside that ocean. There were several chemical reactions, which soon left from one simple molecule to a very complex one. What I grasped from this was that there was a sudden transition from a non-life (or inorganic substance) to an actual living thing. Is this even possible? Obviously, one of those molecules was the DNA – also known as the Replicator. The name pretty much says it all. Replicators have an ability to produce copies of themselves; therefore, they soon started dominating the primeval soup because they start combining with other molecules. How did these replicating molecules lead to the creation of complex life? Well, they didn’t just stay as molecular kings but steadily became very complex through evolution. It was able to build bodies for protection – a wall of protein around itself. These bodies are what he calls “survival machines” in which when the replicator grew more complex, so did their survival machines. I’m not exactly sure how this happened, but we, humans, happen to be these survival machines.

This chapter left me with numerous questions that I probably need clarification on:

1)   Why exactly is the title of this book called “The Selfish Gene?” Is he claiming that genes are selfish?

2)   Do these primitive molecules exist today? Where are they now?

3)   I don’t understand if this primeval soup/ocean thing is a theory of Dawkins or it’s actually a fact in science, but if it was realm then…when did the ocean stop brewing up all these possible chemical reactions? When did this ocean go away? Clearly, looking at our world right now, such ocean doesn’t exist anymore.

4)   If believing what Dawkins said, “there is a tendency towards stability” – then why exactly is there such a variety of survival machines today? If it was so stable, then why didn’t one stable form occur and quickly become the norm?

A depiction of the primeval soup

Cultivate Our Garden

When I first received the book Candide, I didn’t know what to expect from it. I knew it was a satirical novel and I knew that it was mocking optimism. Yet, I didn’t understand the point of reading it.

"That's true enough, but we must go and work in the garden" (Page 144). What a perfect way of ending the book. In just one line, Voltaire was basically able to summarize his whole message and the purpose of him writing a satirical novel.

Basically, this line shows the character development of Candide. He obviously no longer believes in Pangloss' ridiculous philosophy of optimism. Through his experiences, he was, for once, not blindly following and believing what someone said, but he actually applied his experiences to the way he thinks now. Bravo Candide, I am so proud of you.

The "work in the garden" phrase is so symbolical. It alludes to Adam and Eve. As you all know, Adam and Eve were in this utopian place where everything was for the best. Once I thought it through, I realized that these gardens played a significant role, not just in the ending, but throughout the entire novel. The first Garden of Eden was represented through the Baron’s castle in Westphalia – a “little coppice, called the park” that was surrounded by bushes (Page 19). Candide, who I guess is a similar to Adam, is kicked out from this perfect, isolated place. Once he got out of there, he suffered the harsh reality of life.

The second garden was Eldorado, which was also another utopian society. It was like paradise and everything seemed to be perfect. However, Candide was not happy in that his “true love” was not with him. Therefore, he left Eldorado in search of Cunegonde. He, then, experienced several hardships.

Finally, there is Candide’s garden which is the most realistic and true to our world. It is literally a garden in which you have to sow, toil, and reap. This applies to his life in general as well. He must work for what they have and what they need. Life is unfair and one will face difficulties. However, it’s not as bad as Martin claims it is. One can obtain happiness, if one works for it.

I feel like the message that concluded the book was pretty inspirational. One must work in order to achieve happiness. Sometimes, we, humans, forget this valuable lesson. Sometimes, we expect happiness is awaiting us somewhere or believe that "time will solve everything." We don't work hard or take any actions to achieve this happiness that we constantly desire for. Happiness is not something you receive; it's something that you earn. Voltaire reminds us all about that.

Overall, I really liked the book. The first part of the book was full of giggles and laughter…towards the second half, it might have gotten a little bit tiring. I still hate the fact that Pangloss was alive and I absolutely cannot accept the fact that he still tries to spread the philosophy of "all is for the best." Come on Pangloss, just give up already. I didn't see any character development in him and that disappointed me. However, I’ll let that pass because I am just so happy that Candide was able to change. Although this isn’t the stereotypical happy ending, I felt that it was pretty fair because there is hope and a high possibility that Candide and his comrades will find happiness (some already did…like Cunegonde. I mean she still thinks she’s pretty, she’s married to the person she always wanted to marry, and she isn’t getting raped anymore!)

Superficial Love

     There's something that I must admit to all of you. I, Luna Yamashita, am a hopeless romantic. I am in love with love stories like Wuthering Height, Gone with the Wind, and all of Nicholas Spark books. I don't know what my life would be like without chick flicks like The Notebook, Titanic, etc. If two people are in love, I will always, most definitely, one hundred percent support them

…with the exception of Candide and Cunegonde.

     The problem with Candide and Cunegonde is that, first of all, their love is extremely shallow. I mean admit it, how many of you started crying or felt even a tiny bit of sadness every time Candide and Cunegonde got separated? Unless one had some dust in his eye while reading that scene or was thinking about something completely different, no one did. Why? Because we don't care. Candide and Cunegonde's supposed love for each other is so fake and has no depth whatsoever. I know I shouldn't treat Candide as a love story because it isn't a love story, but regardless, it's pretty obvious that Candide and Cunegonde's love for each other is nothing but absurd. To begin with, I can't seem to figure out if Cunegonde even has feelings for Candide…

     First of all, when the Baron "drove Candide from the house with powerful kicks on the backside," Cunegonde didn't even help him. Yes, she was unconscious, but after she woke up, couldn't she at least try to convince her brother to change his mind? (page 21)

     On top of that, Cunegonde causes nothing but trouble to Candide. This is a fact that no one can deny. First, because of Cunegonde, he got kicked out of the Thunder-ten-tronckh house. This is what started all of Candide's horrible events. In other words, romance is what causes Candide's hardships. The only message I get from here is "love is painful."

     It's also this oh-so-powerful love that causes Candide into committing numerous murders. First, he kills the Inquisitor and the Jew in Lisbon to free Cunegonde. Later, he attempted to murder her brother in South America so that he could marry her.

     Most importantly, Candide left Eldorado because of her. The first time he was in a place where the "all is for the best" philosophy worked, the first place where everything seemed to be perfect, the first place where nothing bad happened to Candide -- and he threw it all just to be with Cunegonde (who, I might mention, was about to marry the governor of Buenos Ayres then).

      The absurd lengths to which Candide sacrifices for his "love" are mocked by the fact that once Candide does reunite with Cunegonde, he ironically isn’t attracted to her anymore. His reaction in seeing her was actually pretty funny. He "drew back in aghast" at the sight of her…he doesn't even consider her as a woman, even worse, a human being (page 137). He sees her as an object. "The first objects which met [his] gaze were Cunegonde and the old woman" (page 137). [But then again, the readers never saw Cunegonde as a human being either; she's more of a puppet who has no thoughts or personality.] Why is Candide not attracted to her anymore? The answer is simple. Cunegonde is no longer the pretty girl that she used to be. I can't recall how many times the book mentioned her ugliness in the last couple of chapters. I mean that's basically what their love was all about…appearances. Now that Cunegonde no longer is the "buxom girl of seventeen with a fresh, rosy complexion," Candide does not love her (page 19). Of course, I'm pretty sure she was just aging. After all, who can stay that pretty after experiencing dreadful experiences one after the other and not even have the luxury to buy anti-aging cream? This just shows the readers that Candide mostly loved Cunegonde for her beauty and nothing else.

      As for Cunegonde, I have no idea if she even cares for Candide. Of course, there's the fact that she can't do anything to prove her love for him because she's a woman. There's a lot of discrimination in this novel and women seemed to not have much say in anything. They are merely used by the men (mostly for sexual purposes). Thus, it's not like Cunegonde could have done much. Yet, there is no denying in that she ditched and left Candide for the governor of Buenos Ayres. To be honest, I would have too. The governor of Buenos Ayres is so much more powerful and he's rich…after all that I experienced, I would want to be with somebody that would cause me less trouble. However, that's ONLY considering the fact that I don't love Candide and just think he's an idiot. Cunegonde is supposedly in love with him, but she still left him for the governor of Buenos Ayres. Doesn't that pretty much say she cares more about herself and money than Candide? If she really was devoted to Candide as Candide to her, then she wouldn't even have to hesitate or think or ask the old woman for her opinion when the governor proposed to her.

     Nonetheless, Candide still marries her. Now this, I really admire of Candide. He stayed true to his words and kept his longstanding promise. I feel like that makes Candide a moral and proper man.

     At the end, I could not help but think that Voltaire is simply satirizing Candide's love for Cunegonde.

A Utopian Society Can Exist

Utopia. Eldorado. Here, in Candide, these two words are interchangeable. Eldorado is a place unimaginable to a person like Candide. It has no organized religion, religious persecutions, religious hierarchies, etc. They believe in one God, follow one religion, and do not know about religious strife. This further proves Voltaire’s opinion on how religion only causes conflicts for the world (read previous blog). On top of that, there is an equal dispersion of wealth in that there is no poverty. Everyone is treated equally, jewels do not mean anything, and people do not get imprisoned. What is its meaning? Eldorado is a personification of Voltaire’s view of an “ideal society”. Its perfect traits further highlight the corruption of the real world.

The word “utopia” means an ideal community that consists of perfect characteristics but is unreal or unreachable. Just like that, Eldorado is also unreal – so unreal that Candide and Cacambo want to leave. Their original human nature of greed and selfishness disenables them from being able to live in Eldorado happily.

“If we stay here, we shall be no different from anybody else; but if we go back to the old world with a mere twelve sheep laden with Eldorado stones, we shall be richer than all the kings of Europe put together” (Page 82). This passage represents the philosophical meaning of a utopian society. A utopian society like Eldorado can exist, but is unreal due to us, humans. We are too greedy, too selfish, and too concerned about the physical materials of the world. We cannot accept to be the same as everyone else; we want to be better. That gluttony is what destroys the whole idealness because it causes social hierarchies, religious conflicts, etc.

I feel like this “Eldorado episode” is extremely philosophical and profound; it is so relatable to our world. We, humans, always want or expect something more out of our world. We want something better and we try so hard to change the world to make it one step closer to a perfect world. However, the only thing that is preventing this to happen is the ill characteristics of human nature. Perhaps, we need to change first in order to do better.

Is Religion Corrupted?

Many authors use literature as a way to speak out their opinion. Voltaire, author of Candide, is one of them. In the case of Candide, one of his messages includes the corruption and immorality of organized religion. He illustrates this by making important religious leaders look ridiculous and do sinful deeds.

First example is the Protestant minister. This man had just given a speech about charity for a whole hour and how everyone should get involved with selfless acts that benefit others. However, when starving Candide asks him for some food – a single piece of bread – he replies “You don’t deserve to eat! Be off with you, you villain, you wretch! Don’t come near me again or you’ll suffer for it!” (Page 27) Hypocritical much?  Voltaire emphasizes how immoral this man is by structuring it so that the Protestant minister is doing exactly the opposite of something that he just gave a speech about. To top it all off, his wife is as cruel, if anything, worse than him. Driven by religious zeal and uncharitable attitude, she dumps human feces on Candide’s head. Correct me if I’m wrong, but it is just outright WRONG for one to dump human waste on a complete stranger. Who does that?

Second example is the Inquisitor. The Inquisitor, who is someone of supposed religious devotion, fights with a Jew (Don Isaachar) over Lady Cunegonde. An officer of an Inquisition should most definitely not be using a mistress — to make matters worse, an unwilling mistress.

“I am the daughter of Pope Urban X and of the Princess of Palestrina” (Page 49). Did I read this correctly? This quote says it all. The daughter of the pope? Clearly, the pope defied the requirement of celibacy.

Finally, there is the Jesuit, Cunegonde’s brother. In just a flash, this man changes from a cheerful man who befriends Candide to a selfish man who suddenly strikes his supposed friend across the face with a sword. How did this happen? Well, Candide told him that he wanted to marry his sister. Considering the fact that Candide “rescued [her] from the arms of a Jew and of an Inquisitor” and have been devotedly in love with her for a long time, he has every right to marry her (especially since it is mutual). Nonetheless, he responds “You have the impudence to think of marrying my sister, who has seventy-two quarterings in her coat of arms, and you dare to talk to me of such a hot-headed notion? Have you no sense of shame?” (Page 67). This response illustrates how Jesuit Baron is more focused on issues of social status than with Candide’s actual compatibility with his sister.

Overall, these examples of religious figures that are either hypocrites or have done sinful acts show Voltaire’s intolerance against religion. He believes that religion is very corrupted and has nothing to do with what it teaches.

A Villain through My Eyes

Have you ever been happy by somebody’s death? I have – not in reality, but in literature. The deaths of the Green Goblin from Spiderman, Voldemort from Harry Potter, and James from Twilight are some examples. In the case of Candide, the death of Pangloss made me so pleased that I decided to write a blog about it.

Why do I hate Pangloss, you ask? Sure, he isn’t one of those stereotypical bad guys from the usual novels, but he’s close enough. To begin with, it is all Pangloss’ fault that Candide is so dim. Candide follows Pangloss’ “all is for the best” philosophy, which promotes blind optimism (Page 20). Please, if such philosophy was true, then why are there atrocious events occurring in every page of the book? The worst part is that Pangloss thinks he’s right. He is so full of himself and pretends he knows everything. He tries to justify obvious events that contradict his philosophy with the most idiotic reasons ever. For example, he tries to justify Syphilis in saying that chocolate and cochineal would not have been discovered if Columbus had not gone to and returned from the Americas.

Besides his ridiculous philosophy, he deserved to die because he’s a hypocritical and immoral man. The readers can already tell he is immoral by him manipulating his power. As “the greatest philosopher in Westphalia, and consequently the greatest in all the world,” he uses his reputation to take advantage of his students (Page 20). He uses his profession as an excuse to give “a lesson in experimental physic to [Cunegonde’s] mother’s waiting-woman” (Page 21). He exploits these people who probably know nothing better to satisfy his sexual desires. Couldn’t this be considered raping? Disgusting!

What made me dislike him even more was when he prevented Candide from saving James, the Anabaptist. James had drowned from honorably rescuing a sailor and could have been saved if someone went down there to get him. Yet, of course, foolish old Pangloss had to prevent this from happening by convincing Candide that the “Lisbon harbor was made on purpose for this Anabaptist to drown there” (Page 33). Really, Pangloss? If this was so, then you should have died a long time ago by Syphilis. If Candide could not save James because it would go against your “all for the best” philosophy, then why did you accept Candide’s offer to help you? Surely, you contracted Syphilis for a reason as well.

A complete hypocrite. I am so glad he died.