Renaissance art is reputed for its proportion and harmony. It represents the human figure in an idealized manner, which also remains realistic. Michel de Montaigne (1533-1592) represents the Renaissance in literature, but he cared more for results than for proportion, harmony, and idealism.
Montaigne did not even care to be entertaining or brilliant. I find some of his “Essays” chaotic in structure and unequal in style. Montaigne’s Latin quotations sometimes contain errors, and his retelling of anecdotes is not always accurate.
Yet, in contrast to all his contemporaries, he was totally and completely focused on results, that is, on finding the truth and presenting it in a convincing manner. For Montaigne, there was just on priority: he wanted to clarify difficult ethical questions, the keys to happiness and personal effectiveness.
I consider Montaigne the archetype of result orientation. He would take any subject, any ancient anecdote, any quotation or verse, and belabour it relentlessly in order to extract evert drop of philosophical knowledge.
Other Renaissance writers, like Giovanni Boccaccio (1313-1375) grew far more famous, but lack the results orientation in the sense of philosophical wisdom. Boccaccio was a highly gifted entertainer, but what do learn from reading his works?
I have never gained any important insights from reading Boccaccio. His most celebrated work, “The Decameron,” can help you pass a couple of pleasant hours, but will it make you wiser and more effective? I very much doubt it.
Personal dedication in Montaigne and the Renaissance
Boccaccio deployed massive efforts to study the legacy of ancient Greece and Rome. He spent his early years in Florence but then his father sent him to Naples to study law. The goal, in his father’s mind, was to enable Giovanni Boccaccio to become a merchant.
In Naples, Boccaccio devoted more time to reading novels, history and poetry than studying law. He soon started to write stories (such as “Filostrato”) in early Renaissance taste, that is, knightly love and chivalry adventures. If he had only written those, Boccaccio would have been quickly forgotten.
Montaigne never felt attracted to fiction stories that lack a philosophical message. Before writing his “Essays,” he had translated a theological treatise from Latin into French, but his results orientation had always been there. He did not care to be entertained; he just wanted to find the truth.
In the 1345, Boccaccio returned to Florence with the goal of settling down permanently. However, three years later, the city was devastated by the Black Death. It was an illness that killed a large part of the population, especially in the city. Those that lived in the countryside survived for the most part.
Boccaccio survived and cleverly used the Black Death as background for his next book, “The Decameron.” The writing took Boccaccio four years (1349-1353) due to the sheer size of the project.
From the very beginning, he planned to write one-hundred short stories recounted by ten people who meet coincidentally while escaping Florence and the Black Death. The tone of the stories varies (drama, comedy, satirical) as much as the topics (crime, humour, serendipity).
I don’t contest the entertainment value of Boccaccio’s work, and I can only praise his dedication in carrying out such an ambitious project.
“The Decameron” became highly popular, and the fact that Boccaccio earned relatively little as an author has more to do with the economics of books in the early Renaissance than with his own actions.
Boccaccio was results oriented in the sense that he carried out a major literary project, but not in philosophical terms. The world would not have lost a great deal of wisdom if Boccaccio had never written “The Decameron.” It’s a book that I can read a dozen times for entertaining purposes, but that’s it.
Practical wisdom in Montaigne and the Renaissance
Montaigne’s “Essays” play in a completely different league. The philosophical tone permeates every page, from beginning to end, even if Montaigne devoted two decades to writing and editing his essays.
His philosophical ambitions exceed Boccaccio’s by an order of magnitude. I could draw some wisdom from some stories in “The Decameron,” especially about human nature. Boccaccio’s portrayal of human vices and virtues is compelling, but does it teach you something that you did not already know?
Boccaccio also produced scholarly works. I am referring to his collection of biographies titled “On Famous Women” and his classical mythology compendium “Genealogy of the Pagan Gods.” Those are complex intellectual works, fair enough, but do they convey any philosophical truths?
When I speak of results orientation, I mean philosophical insights and practical wisdom. I mean works that make readers more effective in their own lives here and now. There is a great difference between compiling stories of classical mythology or biography, and making those philosophically relevant.
I hold Montaigne in high regard not because I agree with all his conclusions. In fact, I disagree with most of those, but that is not point. The point is that reading Montaigne prompts me to think and learn. It makes me wiser and more effective, if only because I need to understand why I disagree with Montaigne.
Life is short and wisdom is scarce. That’s why I find most beneficial to read authors that make me think, authors that are conveying a philosophical message in which they’ve invested a lot of research and thought.
If you are interested in applying rational ideas in today’s situations in any area of activity, I recommend you my book “Rational living, rational working.”