Shakespeare's Montaigne: The Florio Translation of the Essays, A Selection

by Michel de Montaigne, Peter G. Platt (Introduction), John Florio (Translator)

An NYRB Classics OriginalShakespeare, Nietzsche wrote, was Montaigne’s best reader—a typically brilliant Nietzschean insight, capturing the intimate relationship between Montaigne’s ever-changing record of the self and Shakespeare’s kaleidoscopic register of human character. And there is no doubt that Shakespeare read Montaigne—though how extensively remains a matter of debate—and that the translation he read him in was that of John Florio, a fascinating polymath, man-about-town, and dazzlingly inventive writer himself.Florio’s Montaigne is in fact one of the masterpieces of English prose, with a stylistic range and felicity and passages of deep lingering music that make it comparable to Sir Robert Burton’s Anatomy of Melancholy and the works of Sir Thomas Browne. This new edition of this seminal work, edited by Stephen Greenblatt and Peter G. Platt, features an adroitly modernized text, an essay in which Greenblatt discusses both the resemblances and real tensions between Montaigne’s and Shakespeare’s visions of the world, and Platt’s introduction to the life and times of the extraordinary Florio. Altogether, this book provides a remarkable new experience of not just two but three great writers who ushered in the modern world.

Genres: Essays, Philosophy, Shakespeare, Nonfiction, Classics, France, Literature

481 pages, Kindle Edition

First published January 1, 1603

About the author

Michel Eyquem de Montaigne (1532-1592) was one of the most influential writers of the French Renaissance. Montaigne is known for popularizing the essay as a literary genre. He became famous for his effortless ability to merge serious intellectual speculation with casual anecdotes and autobiography—and his massive volume Essais (translated literally as "Attempts") contains, to this day, some of the most widely influential essays ever written. Montaigne had a direct influence on writers the world over, from William Shakespeare to René Descartes, from Ralph Waldo Emerson to Stephan Zweig, from Friedrich Nietzsche to Jean-Jacques Rousseau. He was a conservative and earnest Catholic but, as a result of his anti-dogmatic cast of mind, he is considered the father, alongside his contemporary and intimate friend Étienne de La Boétie, of the "anti-conformist" tradition in French literature.

In his own time, Montaigne was admired more as a statesman then as an author. The tendency in his essays to digress into anecdotes and personal ruminations was seen as detrimental to proper style rather than as an innovation, and his declaration that, "I am myself the matter of my book", was viewed by his contemporaries as self-indulgent. In time, however, Montaigne would be recognized as embodying, perhaps better than any other author of his time, the spirit of freely entertaining doubt which began to emerge at that time. He is most famously known for his skeptical remark, "Que sais-je?" ("What do I know?").

Remarkably modern even to readers today, Montaigne's attempt to examine the world through the lens of the only thing he can depend on implicitly—his own judgment—makes him more accessible to modern readers than any other author of the Renaissance. Much of modern literary nonfiction has found inspiration in Montaigne, and writers of all kinds continue to read him for his masterful balance of intellectual knowledge and personal storytelling.

Reviews

[Cheryl · Rating 5 out of 5]

I was sure I would like this book because of the positive feeling of reading Montaigne's essays, Shakespeare's sonnets and learning how the French writer's words could be absorbed by the English playwright. And who was John Florio, the Frenchman who made this possible?

Added to this 2014 NYRB edition is Stephen Greenblatt who was a co-editor with Peter G. Platt. Greenblatt wrote an outstanding introduction, and Platt annotated the sixty plus pages including the Bibliography, Notes, and Floriolegium. An example of the latter is a quote from Montaigne compared to a line from Shakespeare's Hamlet.

"Life in itself is neither good nor evil; it is the place of good or evil according as you prepare it for them." (1.20/1.19)

"For there is nothing either good or bad but thinking makes it so." (Hamlet, II.ii.244-45)

Shakespeare possibly knew Florio who was twelve years older. In 1580 when Shakespeare was sixteen years old with no future prospects, Montaigne was forty-seven and had published his first two books of essays. Shakespeare shared Florio's ("I am an Englishman in Italian") translation with contemporaries in England. It is believed that the translation of Montaigne's Essays lay on Shakespeare's desk when he wrote The Tempest. "It is long been recognized as a source upon which Shakespeare was clearly drawing." The reference is to the essay, "Of the Cannibals."

Here is a sample of the twenty essays selected in the book.
1. Of Friendship
2. Of the Cannibals
3. Of the Affection of Fathers to Their Children
4. Of Repenting
5. Upon Some Verses of "Virgil"
6. Of Experience

Shakespeare, Nietzsche wrote, was Montaigne's best reader. Read Montaigne in order to live wrote Gustave Flaubert.

You can write your quote here...after reading "Shakespeare's Montaigne".

[Tom Wascoe · Rating 4 out of 5]

The title of this book is somewhat deceiving. Greenblatt (a Shakespeare scholar) tries to build the case that Shakespeare was heavily influenced by Montaigne. While it is true that Montaigne's translator (Florio) was a contemporary of Shakespeare and that they probably knew each other, I believe the case Greenblatt tries to build is more marketing than reality. Who would read the essays of a 16th century author? The essays themselves are thought provoking. The difficulty is that some of the old English, the copious footnotes (that must be read) and the fact that Montaigne backs each of his ideas with quotes from Homer, Plato, Socrates, etc. (which I understand was the fashion of the day)makes this book a difficult read.

[Peter Crofts]

Here's all of Florio's translations of the Essays.

https://warburg.sas.ac.uk/pdf/ebh610b...

The NYRB edition is a cynical cash grab. There are over 70 pages of endnotes, which are nothing more than definitions of obscure Elizabethan words. The format was chosen, rather than footnotes, simply to increase the size of the volume.

There's nothing in either Greenblatt's or Pratt's introductions that warrant the need for this particular volume either.

If you're new to Montaigne, then go with either the Frame or Screech translation into modern English. Both also offer excellent introductions. You can give this volume a pass and feel confident doing so; you're not missing anything at all.

[C. Lee Hodges · Rating 3 out of 5]

Who edited the endnotes? It was mildly distracting to have certain words (seely, froward, sottishness being the most frequent) notated anytime they showed up in an essay. Public domain rehash with a Shakespearean spin that other than one certainty and one fairly certainty, seems shaky and irrelevant. Montaigne himself is enjoyable but he didn't say anything that floored me or made me wish to reread in the foreseeable future.

[Seth · Rating 5 out of 5]

The original English translation of The Essays, apparently read by Shakespeare. Not the most precise translation. But if you want to read Montaigne and prefer the poetry and majesty of the King James version over the blandness of many contemporary translations, here's your Montaigne. This edition contains some 75 pages of must-read footnotes; they translate antiquated words, point out Florio's many mistranslations/interpolations/flights-of-fancy, and indicate parallels to Shakespeare.

[kristen tan · Rating 2 out of 5]

(for hum) “read” is such a strong word for what i did w this book that i almost feel bad counting it on goodreads but then i remembered that i don’t care. this was so fucking boring. so many words to say so little things, even less of which mattered at all. and this motherfucker wouldn’t stop saying like “this day and age sucks” ALL DAYS AND AGES SUCK EVERYONE FROM EVERY DAY AND AGE HAS SAID THAT LITERALLY ALWAYS SO CAN U SHUT UP ABOUT IT. the “good old days” don’t exist and never have. this book could have been summed up in 1 page double spaced times new roman i swear to god. most of the essays weren’t even about what they were titled until the last couple pages and even then he had nothing new to say that hasn’t already been said

[Tori · Rating 2 out of 5]

when it’s interesting, it’s quite interesting, but when it’s dull, it’s really, really dull.

[Adrian Alvarez · Rating 2 out of 5]

Yes, I read this book but I think it would be more accurate to say I endured it. The small amount of Montaigne I have read in other translations left me exhilarated by his humor and wit, maybe a little overwhelmed by every direction each essay spiraled into, but in the end, inspired and entertained. The essays as translated by Florio, around 500 years ago, did not twinkle with the same light. I think the version of English used here, along with Florio himself, add a level of formality and distance which greatly takes away from the eccentricity and exuberance I've gotten from more contemporary translations. I don't work in French so I couldn't say if this were a difference of language or of translator but I have to think the essays are not only worse off for the archaic language to all but scholarly pursuits, but that I gained nothing by having an added layer of grammatical awkwardness as far as any insight I may have gained into Shakespeare's interest in the material.

My rating is for anyone in a similar position as me, ie, those without a scholarly interest in the material. For the courageously curious, there are better views from other climbs.

[Eugene Shcherbinin · Rating 5 out of 5]

Montaigne is an amazing thinker - he seemed so close and admirable in his acceptance of life. You understand that his weak sides are true: he is wordy, unstructured, getting lost in his own thoughts; it is a labour to work through his essays (my pace was 20 minutes per 10 pages). But it feels like you are sitting next to a fire with someone who has a lot of life experience, and tells what he understood about life as it is, confusedly but sincerely and vulnerably.

I read a different collection of essays, in translation of DMF from 1943

[Ilya · Rating 5 out of 5]

The first English translation of Montaigne: if Shakespeare read "The Essays," it would have been Florio's version. To read Montaigne in a beautiful, if occasionally difficult, Elizabethan English, is an incomparable delight.

[Ali Shehzad · Rating 5 out of 5]

THIS is english prose; alive and kicking.

Frankly, I don’t care much for the Greenblatt intro; but, until somebody brings out a complete edition of Florio’s translation, or I find an older edition that doesn’t cost an arm and a leg, this will have to do.

[Veronica · Rating 5 out of 5]

Exciting.

[Zachary Waltz]

“Shakespeare, … was Montaigne's best reader.” - Neitzsche

As the introduction acknowledges, there is no explicit reference to the Essays except in King Lear and the Tempest. Hamlet was published too early before the complete Essays came out, and, even then the connection is uncertain. So that Montaigne’s influence seems to be a latecomer, though it is quite possible that these geniuses developed the same thoughts and conclusions in parallel, as it were. But, in that case, though they complement, they do not exactly interpret each other. I therefore felt it unnecessary to read it at this point as I read through the works of Shakespeare.

Quote:
- How Shakespeare and Montaigne differ (xxx)
- What Shakespeare and Montaigne share (xxxii)
- Montaigne on choosing the contemplative life, quoted from Frame’s translation