(d) Montaigne on Friendship
In the late sixteenth century, Montaigne – whose work influenced Shakespeare, among many others – challenged the accounts of friendship that had been passed down from the Greeks and the Romans. Considering the one true friendship he had known, Montaigne wrote that the “writing which Antiquity have left us on this subject [of friendship] seem weak to me compared to what I feel.” For Montaigne, rationalization and categorization of friendship failed to do justice to its spiritual, moral, affective* dimensions. Montaigne also rejects Aristotle’s taxonomy of friendship: relationships based on utility and pleasure, for example, are simply not worthy of the name Friendship, at least as far as Montaigne is concerned. Here is a philosopher for whom friendship is singular, in a dual sense:
(1) whatever friendship is, it cannot be dismantled into parts; it is indivisible, whole, unique: “the perfect friendship [...] is indivisible: each gives himself so entirely to his friend that he has nothing left to share with another,” he writes.
(2) So pure and complete is true friendship, that, if one is lucky enough to find it, it leaves no room for other friendships. Montaigne’s is truly a vision of what we often call, more loosely to be sure, soul mates (for friendship is, for him, not of the body but of the mind and spirit). With the perfect friendship, writes Montaigne, we are faced with “one soul in bodies twain” (one soul in two bodies). In our true friend, our own best self if reflected: “he [the true friend] is me.”
It is worth noting that Montaigne also suggests that friendship of the sort he is outlining is possible only among men: “women are in truth not normally capable of responding to such familiarity and mutual confidence as sustain that holy bond of friendship, nor do their souls seem firm enough to withstand the clasp of a knot so lasting and so tightly drawn.” No doubt we would either challenge or simply dismiss this remark (rightly so). But it is surely a little interesting to note that such spiritual unity, understanding, selflessness, tenderness – in short, love – as Montaigne is describing is characterized as a manly quality!
* “Affective” has to do with our feelings.
Works Cited
Montaigne, M. (1580). “On Friendship.” On Friendship. Trans. M.A. Screech. London: Penguin, 2004.
(1) whatever friendship is, it cannot be dismantled into parts; it is indivisible, whole, unique: “the perfect friendship [...] is indivisible: each gives himself so entirely to his friend that he has nothing left to share with another,” he writes.
(2) So pure and complete is true friendship, that, if one is lucky enough to find it, it leaves no room for other friendships. Montaigne’s is truly a vision of what we often call, more loosely to be sure, soul mates (for friendship is, for him, not of the body but of the mind and spirit). With the perfect friendship, writes Montaigne, we are faced with “one soul in bodies twain” (one soul in two bodies). In our true friend, our own best self if reflected: “he [the true friend] is me.”
It is worth noting that Montaigne also suggests that friendship of the sort he is outlining is possible only among men: “women are in truth not normally capable of responding to such familiarity and mutual confidence as sustain that holy bond of friendship, nor do their souls seem firm enough to withstand the clasp of a knot so lasting and so tightly drawn.” No doubt we would either challenge or simply dismiss this remark (rightly so). But it is surely a little interesting to note that such spiritual unity, understanding, selflessness, tenderness – in short, love – as Montaigne is describing is characterized as a manly quality!
* “Affective” has to do with our feelings.
Works Cited
Montaigne, M. (1580). “On Friendship.” On Friendship. Trans. M.A. Screech. London: Penguin, 2004.