When connections are prominent, one can safely say Montaigne skirts the borders. Montaigne's works are loosely connected and more of a stream of individual thoughts than a well planned string of connected ideas. Unlike the Essays, Pride and Prejudice has the reasonable thought process we as people are not intimidated by. While Montaigne does paint a literal picture of what is going on in his head, it is hardly an organized set of events like the story told by Austen.
The Essays are a formidable read due to their volatile and unpredictable nature. While it does a good job in providing the views of Montaigne, it's unfortunate to say that's all it does. It seems that Montaigne is half way there in covering Mr. Wallace's quote; He has the large concept, and the small sketches, but what escapes his pieces, in my opinion, is the tie off. He goes about on his own happy thought pattern, but its just that; his thought pattern. To him it would connect but to others, it would be more difficult. This is the opposite in the case of Pride and Prejudice.
In Pride and Prejudice, the progression of ideas were more linked to a big picture. However it is needless to say there are less big ideas than there are in the Essays. Through the story we see Elizabeth's thought process advancing, while in the Essays Montaigne's attention can be described as... Deficit almost.
In truth, what these two stories have nothing in common except the fact that they're so different and were created in somewhat similar eras. One is a steam of consciousness set of works while the other focuses on individuals and can hardly be argued as existential. (you might have trouble stating Montaigne's work i as well, but it is more likely).
No comments:
Post a Comment