Features
of Montaigne’s essays:
1.
Casual/conversational tone, yet use of perhaps pretentious, albeit archaic
language
2.
Digresses, but returns to end at a solid point (clear purpose)
3. Erudite; allusions and quotes from the “classics”
4.
Male-centric (“he”, “his”, “him”, “man”, etc)
Of Those We May Call Loafers
Whilst I allow my mind to roam, I have
become acutely aware to not only the contradictions our individual minds
possess, but also those contradictions which occur in what one might refer to
as our culture’s collective mind. As is
often proposed to us from such an early age that a man could not recall when or
where he sat as he first heard the suggestion, our worth is determined by not
only what kind of person we become but the industry we submit our ambition to. The gentleness one’s hands may possess seems
half-so important as the gold that rests in them. The learned and powerful disseminate articles
and manuscripts to the masses (chief amongst them a so-called Monsieur Forbes,
most assuredly a collective nom de plume of executives), that celebrate
wealth and production, and seek to remind us all that these are the individuals
who captain our ship; that society follows where they bear their lantern. Upon viewing one such segment of writing, I
recollected a quote of one such “rough” inhabitant of the New World:
“If a man walks in the woods for
love of them half of each day, he is in danger of being regarded as a loafer. But if he spends his days as a speculator,
shearing off those woods and making the
earth bald before her time, he is deemed an industrious and enterprising citizen.”
(Henry David
Thoreau, Walden)
While we may say we respect the meek, the kind, the calm and
contemplative, we surely do not show it.
Men live their lives in aspiration of building a tangible legacy, a
physical evidence of his time among us.
This is more than accepted: this is encouraged. Yet before I would
start at making a legacy to be remembered, I think of Shelley’s poem regarding
such things. After all, it is not those
that build temples of ego and stain the sand red, but instead those who wander
in the desert whom we remember. We
forget the king but remember the hermit.
Ask any of your fellow men, and they will recall Bhudda before Śuddhodana, Christ before Tiberius.
The argument you make here is one I fully agree with and I think you used metaphor wonderfully with the reference to hands and lanterns and referring to the wandering of the desert I take to refer to Christ which you do at the end as well. The only thing I didn't quite understand was your reference to Shelley's poem, if you could dive into that further than I would follow your train of thought completely.
ReplyDeleteThanks Mary. The poem I was referring to is "Ozymandias" by Percy Shelley. The poem dovetails with the intent of the essay. I was going to elaborate, but I figured it would be more like Montaigne to just assume that readers know obscure references to classic literature in passing mention. The reference to the poem was actually the beginning of the desert/sand motif.
ReplyDeleteMary ought to know that poem, as we studied it together in 252!!!
ReplyDeleteTristan, this is an uncanny emulation. Not only do you make some nice points, but it's the occasional cloudiness (and non-sequiturial nature) of those points that seems most like Montaigne to me. As you pointed out in class, his assumptions are part of his charm, as are his digressions.
I'd also say that this seems to be an emulation of Robert Louis Stevenson, maybe before the fact. The essay echoes the ideas of "An Apology for Idlers," so that is a very happy coincidence!
Strong work. Read over this to clean it up. Do you mean "acutely aware of. . ."?
DW
Hi Tristan, this is really well-done composition from an obviously talented writer. It comes off a bit pretentious, which is probably due to emulation and not personal.
ReplyDeleteI read this for the first time yesterday, and I didn't realize you had written this before we read the Stevenson pieces- they share so much common thread, message-wise, it's uncanny.
I identify with your hesitation in dismissing the "rat race" of life, and agree that inherent value of a person shouldn't be measured through external possessions.
I thought this was completely brilliant, and the writing is excellent! If someone snuck this essay into a collection of Montaigne essays, I would not be able to determine the difference - at least, not until I took into account the fact that Montaigne predates Shelley and Thoreau.
ReplyDeleteI also love that your essay contains many great aphorisms. My personal favorite: "The gentleness one’s hands may possess seems half-so important as the gold that rests in them."
This is absolutely brilliant. I would expect to see this with some of Montaigne's essays. I loved your line that says "While we may say we respect the meek, the kind, the calm and contemplative, we surely do not show it."
ReplyDelete