In the vast critical commentary on the essays by Michel de Montaigne (1533-1592), I haven’t found detailed explanations of Montaigne’s writing method.
The question is intriguing and worth answering: Montaigne proved capable of producing dozens of high-quality essays, but he lacked sophisticated tools.
He possessed a relatively small book collection, paper, ink, a feather, and a writing desk. How did he manage to produce such an extensive literary output? How did he manage to keep a high level of quality in his essays?
After studying Montaigne’s texts in detail, I have come with an answer to those questions. I have looked at the output and inputs, and developed a theory.
Montaigne wrote his essays by using a method that I have baptised “drill around the pain.” The method encompasses two elements: pain and drilling. Let me explain how it works.
Montaigne’s choice of subjects for his Essays
First, Montaigne selected subjects about which he felt very strongly or that bothered him in some way. He chose historical figures, current events, societal fashions, moral misconceptions and injustices that irritated him. That’s what I call “pain.”
Second, he started to throw arguments at the pain, trying to extinguish it once and for all, but as he drilled, the pain seemed to grow wider and stronger.
Montaigne kept drilling, but the pain kept growing. He gave solid arguments to terminate the pain, but at the same time, he found arguments that nourished and strengthened the pain. The tension of this fight is present in all Montaigne’s essays.
Let’s take a look at one example. I have chosen this essay precisely because, at first sight, it doesn’t fall into the paradigm of “drilling around the pain.” The essay carries the title “Not to counterfeit being sick.”
A superficial look at the essay reveals its subject as a study of the reasons why some people pretend to be sick. If we look at the subject from a distance, it seems anodyne, boring. Why would anyone bother to write an essay on this subject?
Nevertheless, Montaigne managed to turn a seemingly grey, anodyne subject into a thought-provoking essay. He did so by using pain as a starting point.
Montaigne’s essay “Not to counterfeit being sick”
Montaigne deeply disliked that people would pretend to be sick to escape their obligations or gain some advantages. As a general rule, he disliked all forms of misrepresentation, deceit, or falsehood.
He really felt strongly about this matter: His deep irritation prompted him to sit down and write “Not to counterfeit being sick” from beginning to end, without having bothered to design the structure, gather materials, or even organize his thoughts.
Montaigne seldom did specific research before writing. His choice of subjects varied from week to week, but his historical and literary sources would remain always the same.
In our century, it is hard to understand why an author would deliberately choose not to research his subject specifically, but if we look at Montaigne’s context, the answer comes forth right away: He had no newspapers, no magazines, no new books, no telephone, no radio, no television and no internet.
Montaigne did plenty of general research, but not specific, not tailored to a particular subject. He read his favourite books over and over again, but purchased just a few new volumes per year. In the sixteenth century, books were expensive and not readily available in the countryside.
As a result, Montaigne used the same historical and literary references in different essays. Quotations from Cicero (106-43 BC) and Julius Caesar (100-44 BC) came automatically to his mind, simply because he had read their works dozens of times.
I call Montaigne’s writing method “drilling around the pain” because, in each essay, he poured dozens of anecdotes, quotes and reminiscences on the page with the goal of extinguishing the pain.
He wanted to bury the pain under unassailable arguments in order to convince himself (and the reader, in case that someone else ever read his essays) of his ethical correctness. He wanted to be proven right by refuting all contrary opinions.
Montaigne wrote “Not to counterfeit being sick” to attack in a forceful manner people who fake an illness in order to further their personal interests.
I want to underline that Montaigne was not just “exploring the subject” or “trying to figure out what’s right.” No, his mind was already made before he put pen to paper. He had an axe to grind, accounts to settle, injustices to mend.
Michel de Montaigne’s motivation to write his Essays
Without this kind of fire, I doubt that an author would have the motivation to keep writing for two decades without barely any readers.
In his crusade against deceit, Montaigne draws nourishment from his favourite historians and philosophers, mostly ancient Greek and Roman authors. He quotes them and recounts little anecdotes that inexorably support his point of view.
Montaigne reveals himself as fierce moralist, but remains courteous enough to pass review to contrary opinions. He goes against people who feign sickness, not just to condemn them, but to promote honesty and truth.
Almost without exception, his conclusions are poignant and worth quoting. He characterizes as “great and noble” the hero’s willingness to show his true colours when things get tough.
It’s preferable to stick to the truth than sink in an abyss of mystification. Deceit inevitably engenders more deceit, leading to the demise of the deceiver.
If you are interested in applying rational ideas to all kind of situations here and now, I recommend you my book “Rational living, rational working.”