Scan barcode
A review by thomp649
Essays by Michel Montaigne
3.0
I bought this edition/translation of [b:Montaigne: Essays|30733|Montaigne Essays|Michel de Montaigne|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1614752764l/30733._SY75_.jpg|79408950] off a sale table. It was fine for my purposes, but the [a:J.M. Cohen|592001|J.M. Cohen|https://s.gr-assets.com/assets/nophoto/user/u_50x66-632230dc9882b4352d753eedf9396530.png] translation and selection is more than a half century old. I think I will probably get around to reading a more complete version of this work if I live long enough. My three star rating reflects this particular edition, rather than an opinion on the Essays, as a philosophical work.
As for Montaigne's essays themselves, you read them because you like to read philosophical essays, because you have some interest in 16th century Europe, or because someone told you had to. This third reason is the worst reason, but we all have to do what we have to do. The book has been around for 500 years, and there are already reviews on Goodreads that would give you a pretty good idea of what to expect. One advantage of reading an editor's selection from Montaigne's Essays rather than attempting to pick and choose for yourself is that the titles he gave to each essay are often quite misleading, at least as far as a 21st century reader's perspective would be concerned. I am not a reviewer with enough familiarity to have an opinion about Cohen's choices, but I will say that none of them bored me.
As for Montaigne's essays themselves, you read them because you like to read philosophical essays, because you have some interest in 16th century Europe, or because someone told you had to. This third reason is the worst reason, but we all have to do what we have to do. The book has been around for 500 years, and there are already reviews on Goodreads that would give you a pretty good idea of what to expect. One advantage of reading an editor's selection from Montaigne's Essays rather than attempting to pick and choose for yourself is that the titles he gave to each essay are often quite misleading, at least as far as a 21st century reader's perspective would be concerned. I am not a reviewer with enough familiarity to have an opinion about Cohen's choices, but I will say that none of them bored me.