It is easier to understand someone’s actions if we know his motivation. The same applies to understanding his philosophy and literary style, especially when it incorporates innovations, controversy, or unorthodox features.
Historians have written extensively about the literary style of Michel de Montaigne (1533-1592), but their conclusions are rather unconnected and disorganized.
Literary critics point out that Montaigne loved to recount anecdotes, ask rhetorical questions, employ humour and irony, quote authors from antiquity and go on lengthy tangents. Those remarks are true, but why did Montaigne write like that? What is the rationale for his style?
I can answer that question by using one word: self-reliance. Montaigne’s strong self-reliance shows in his literary style. It shapes every one of his essays, every aspect of his logic, every anecdote he recounts.
Let me illustrate my argument with Montaigne’s essay titled “On Prognostications.” The key idea of the essay is that no one can predict our future with precision, and that we will do better if we rely on our own efforts to give direction to our life.
Michel de Montaigne’s essay “On Prognostications”
If Montaigne had stated his thesis in a couple of sentences, his arguments would have lost persuasiveness and strength. Let us not forget that he was writing primarily for himself; his goal was to cover the subject matter thoroughly and arrive at a solid conclusion.
Self-reliance preceded Montaigne’s literary activity: it was a key trait of his personality, a trait that was also present in his best friend, Etienne de La Boetie (1530-1563).
Montaigne’s essays constitute a philosophical journey where the author is driven by his self-reliance. It provides him with a point of view by default, and protects him against intolerance.
Self-reliance makes Montaigne’s essays stand apart from all other sixteenth-century works. It explains every characteristic of his literary style, method, and logic.
I regard the essay “On Prognostications” as an archetype of Montaigne’s literary style. It contains all stylistic features that historians have identified in Montaigne’s works, namely, the use anecdotes from antiquity, rhetorical questions, humour and irony, and a few tangents.
Let me explain how those style elements emanate from the author’s strong self-reliance.
Michel de Montaigne’s use of historical anecdotes
Montaigne recounts several anecdotes in this essay; the best known refers to the Roman Emperor Augustus (63 BC-14 AD). The imperial astrologer had once predicted that Augustus was going to die on his birthday. As a result, Augustus became so frightened that, during the ensuing years, he spent his birthdays in bed, afraid to do anything or go anywhere.
The little story makes Augustus look like a fool and drives Montaigne’s point home. Before recounting the anecdote, the conclusion was all clear in Montaigne’s mind, but he wanted to add weight to the argument.
Montaigne’s use of anecdotes comes to the same conclusion over and over. It doesn’t matter whether Montaigne is drawing the anecdotes from Cicero (106-43 BC), Plutarch (46-120 AD), or Julius Caesar (100-44 BC) because he is unusually selecting stories that speak for self-reliance.
Why was Montaigne employing anecdotes from antiquity? Because he mostly had books by ancient authors in his library. He was using the sources he had available. If he had lived in a monastery, he might have quoted the Bible or some theological treatise.
Michel de Montaigne’s use of rhetorical questions
Montaigne’s strong self-reliance also shows in his rhetorical questions. In the sixteenth century, it was fairly risky to attack the dominant opinions. Montaigne exercises critical thinking in a clear way. He refrains from direct attacks, but uses rhetorical questions to express his disagreement.
In his essay “On Prognostications,” he attacks everyone that claims to be clairvoyant about the future. Montaigne points out that “What is the point of predicting the future if we cannot even make the right decisions in the present?”
Montaigne also employs humour or irony with the objective of calling for self-reliance. He writes that “it is foolish to try to read our future in the stars when we are often unable to notice important clues here and now, right before our eyes.”
Even the tangential subjects addressed by Montaigne aim at reinforcing his call for self-reliance. The digression contained in “On Prognostications” jumps from astrology to vanity, and rates prognostications as vain attempts to reassure ourselves of our future success.
Montaigne’s self-reliance is the essential philosophical trait that explains his literary style. Let us learn the lesson and place on our own efforts more trust than on the movements of stars in heaven.
If you are interested in putting rational ideas into practice in all sort of situations, I recommend you my book “Against all odds: How to achieve great victories in desperate times.”