> A friend of mine the other day turning over my tablets, found therein a memorandum of something I would have done after my decease, whereupon I told him, as it was really true, that though I was no more than a league’s distance only from my own house, and merry and well, yet when that thing came into my head, I made haste to write it down there, because I was not certain to live till I came home. As a man that am eternally brooding over my own thoughts, and confine them to my own particular concerns, I am at all hours as well prepared as I am ever like to be, and death, whenever he shall come, can bring nothing along with him I did not expect long before. We should always, as near as we can, be booted and spurred, and ready to go, and, above all things, take care, at that time, to have no business with any one but one’s self.
I'm very happy to see Montaigne on HN, there must be some affinities with the community here and I like that :)
This is my favorite philosopher by far (I'm not saying that because I'm french!). Partly because his essays are not too "abstract" and this allows me to truly understand it, partly also because I found his essays still valid today.
One little and unimportant anecdote I liked: his parents forced themselves and his tutor to speak only in latin when he was a child. Later, Montaigne thanked his parents a lot when he saw how others were struggling with this language.
I like to think of him as the last known native speaker of latin!
I made the pilgrimage to visit his study when I last visited your country. I had read about the quotations set into the rafters and was surprised to find so much greek!
Montaigne is one of my favorites. Essays old enough that Shakespeare read them, but still totally approachable today (or, at least the translation I read was).
Ooh! Subscribed, and just finished the Montaigne segment a few seconds ago.
Runciman's "History of Ideas" series on political thought was excellent, and pairs well with a number of other philosophy podcasts I follow (Peter Adamson, Stephen West, Cecil Adams, Nigel Warburton, amongst others).
Interestingly, there still is no complete scholarly edition of the Essays, because he published three different versions during his lifetime (to stay ahead of copyright expiration), and he made so many additions and changes between editions that it's practically impossible to represent them all on paper. What we need is an online digital edition, and nobody's done that yet AFAIK.
There is a "last edition", the so-called Bordeaux exemplary, with annotations from Montaigne's hand; then there is a later, posthumous edition which is the basis for most modern ones, but has been modified by his family on some important points (in particular politically or religiously sensitive ones).
You can also go with "La Pléïade" version, however it's based upon the posthumous version, and in typical Pléïade's fashion, punctuation is altered/modernised from the ancient versions.
I've read both and my advice is to go with the first, cheaper one :)
I think the French Pléiade edition is a scholarly/critical edition? Montaigne himself said that the main changes between editions are additions. From On Vanity (Penguin translation):
>I make additions but not corrections: firstly, that is because when a man has mortgaged his book to the world I find it reasonable that he should no longer have any rights over it. Let him put it better elsewhere if he can, not corrupt the work he has already sold. From such folk you should buy nothing until they are dead. Let them do their thinking properly before they publish. Who is making them hurry? My book is ever one: except that, to avoid the purchaser’s going away quite empty-handed when a new edition is brought out, I allow myself, since it is merely a piece of badly joined marquetry, to tack on some additional ornaments. That is no more than a little extra thrown in, which does not damn the original version but does lend some particular value to each subsequent one through some ambitious bit of precision. From this there can easily arise however some transposition of the chronological order, my tales finding their place not always by age but by opportuneness.
Although I agree that a digital edition that allows you to toggle between the different editions would be a wonderful idea. Charles Rosen talked at length about the inadequacies of the Pléiade edition in this regard in his review[1].
Right. I did a prototype digital edition of one of the Essays for my master's thesis 20 years ago, and it was surprising how much interesting stuff was just plain missing from the standard editions. I would have expected some Montaigne scholar to have published at least a partial digital edition by now. If it's not been done by the time I retire, I'll be tempted to do it myself.
Not really the same. Those were privileges granted one book at a time. As far as I can tell the Act of Anne was the first law describing the modern concept of copyright as a right not a privilege.
My complete Penguin edition notes all the different changes between versions. It’s rather ungainly to read though. The changes between versions are rarely that extensive, usually just some different phrasing here and there
I guarantee it does not include all the changes between versions. It would be impossible to read. I chose an essay pretty much at random for a prototype digital edition in 2002, and it was eyebrow-raising how many differences there are among the three primary versions.
it's true that the Essays was published in three versions by Montaigne over his life but they did not have copyright regulations until much later (in the 18th century) and there are a number of critical and scholarly editions the Essays...
Is that the case? The M.A Screetch translation published by Penguin seems to be just that, with copious annotations, notes, scholarly apparatus and indications of the multiple versions of the text in parentheses.
The Screech translation is excellent but it's a translation, not an edition, and it's not based on a complete critical edition because there was none in 1991 when the translation was published.
The Donald Frame translation I read a long time ago had numbers or letters marking the different editions within the text. I didn't study the essays carefully enough to say how useful these were but they were there.
You should checkout Michel De Montaigne The Complete Works: Essays, Travel Journal, Letters published under Everyman's Library Classics (hardcover edition).
I think his direct influence on English speakers has definitely dropped off a lot. I first learned about him from an essay Virginia Woolf wrote on him.
It’s illegal to do that in The Glass Bead Game however, isn’t it? If I remember correctly - it’s been a decade since I read the book - that’s one of the thing the magister ponders for a long time while a student at the monastery, how his own memory and experience colours his perception and how that’s lost to the game. That’s a part which stayed with me.
Huh... I'll have to re-read. (it's been 3+ decades for me)
I had been recalling that the raw materiel (the "beads", see millefiori in neighbouring thread) was shared, part of the "extant literature" if you will, but that plays were supposed to be novel as well as good. (a bit like an LZ decompressor, where each additional bit of input both recalls something in the dictionary and adds a new entry)
I have been assuming it was the players' personal styles that provided the novelty, but upon reflection that could easily be my US background more than the source text speaking!
Edit: come to think of it, maybe that's a valid criticism of the game as played in Castalia — that the castalians had become too conventional, losing the playfulness of their play?
(in possible relation, I was watching a national championship final over a decade ago with the mother of one of the contestants: she was very critical of her daughter, and correctly predicted the other would become champion. Why, I asked during the match? Her response: her daughter always came up with the classical textbook plays, whereas the the eventual champion knew how to exploit gambits: plays that were, on paper, weaker, but in practice, strong due to the element of surprise)
Links have to be interesting but based on intrinsic quality of the linked elements and not the player experience as far as I remember but the rules are kept deliberately fuzzy in the book anyway. I don’t think the game is ever played outside of Castalia. I’m not entirely sure to be honest with you.
I do remember that Hesse description of how the past colours our experience of the present and his thoughts on both the nature of subjectivity and the place of spirituality made a strong impression on the young me at the time.
I probably should read this book again. It seems like the time is right.
> The owner of the memex, let us say, is interested in the origin and properties of the bow and arrow. Specifically he is studying why the short Turkish bow was apparently superior to the English long bow in the skirmishes of the Crusades. He has dozens of possibly pertinent books and articles in his memex. First he runs through an encyclopedia, finds an interesting but sketchy article, leaves it projected. Next, in a history, he finds another pertinent item, and ties the two together. Thus he goes, building a trail of many items. Occasionally he inserts a comment of his own, either linking it into the main trail or joining it by a side trail to a particular item. When it becomes evident that the elastic properties of available materials had a great deal to do with the bow, he branches off on a side trail which takes him through textbooks on elasticity and tables of physical constants. He inserts a page of longhand analysis of his own. Thus he builds a trail of his interest through the maze of materials available to him.
Montaigne incorporates classical material (by reference) into the personal trails of his essays. Like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millefiori beads, Glass Bead Game (Hesse) players incorporate old material into new contexts of their own devising...
> A friend of mine the other day turning over my tablets, found therein a memorandum of something I would have done after my decease, whereupon I told him, as it was really true, that though I was no more than a league’s distance only from my own house, and merry and well, yet when that thing came into my head, I made haste to write it down there, because I was not certain to live till I came home. As a man that am eternally brooding over my own thoughts, and confine them to my own particular concerns, I am at all hours as well prepared as I am ever like to be, and death, whenever he shall come, can bring nothing along with him I did not expect long before. We should always, as near as we can, be booted and spurred, and ready to go, and, above all things, take care, at that time, to have no business with any one but one’s self.