Before getting to Montaigne’s subject, regarding the proper strategy to deal with people we’ve offended, it might be useful to back up a step and ask why we need to allay the concerns of the offended at all. Certainly there are some human beings who plow through life never apologizing for the offenses they touch off.
So there’s an assumption in this essay that people either should not behave in a way to cause offense, or they will come across circumstances where they have no choice but to rationalize their offenses. Judging at least from the examples given, Montaigne is not making a moral claim, he’s engaging in strategy. If we need to dampen anger turned against us, in Montaigne’s telling, it is likely because the angered person has the ability to do us harm.
Therefore, this is an essay about power. When confronted with powerful people who have the ability to harm us — and we have done something to offend them — Montaigne asserts that the default human reaction is to appeal to their mercy, to acknowledge their power and back off. But he questions whether this is effective, that at least in some circumstances, it might work out better to stand your ground and show courage in the face of retribution.
But Montaigne is not giving a definitive answer here either way. He writes:
People are wonderfully vain, diverse, and undulating. It is difficult to base a constant and uniform judgment upon them.
Here in his first essay, Montaigne offers advice as far from Machiavelli as one could imagine. Instead of claiming to know the proper way to handle the situation, Montaigne shrugs and shares a number of examples in history of how situations turned out either way. It is a signal to readers: don’t expect firm answers in the pages ahead. People are confusing and life is messy. Learn to enjoy and appreciate it.
Leave a Reply