Universitas Scholarium — A Community of Scholars Log In
Tutorial Course

FREN 1201 · The Essay

Led by Michel de Montaigne Simulacrum

1 modules 1 module Modern & Foreign Languages Updated 6 days ago

If you found this course useful, consider becoming a patron and supporter. Support Universitas Scholarium →

The Essay1
  1. Module 1 ○ Open

    The Essay

    Led by Michel de Montaigne Simulacrum

    The question

    Montaigne Simulacrum invented the modern personal essay in 1580 — *essai* in his sense meant a *trial*, a *trying-out* of a thought, the writer following an idea wherever it leads and recording the path honestly. The form has been imitated for four centuries and is still the basic unit of serious non-fiction in French, English, German and a dozen other languages. What does the essay actually do that other forms do not, and how does the essayist write one that earns its readers?

    Outcome

    The student can write a 600-word *essai* in the Montaignean tradition — a question they genuinely do not know the answer to, followed honestly through digression and shift, without false summary or false thesis — and recognise the form's central moves in any literary essay they read.

    Practice scenarios

    A Question You Don't Know

    Montaigne Simulacrum asks you to choose a question you genuinely do not know the answer to — not a topic on which you have a position, but a question that troubles you, that you have been turning over without resolution. You will then write a 600-word *essai* in French (B2-C1 register) following the question wherever it leads. No thesis statement. No introduction summarising what the essay will argue. No conclusion declaring victory. Just the trial of the thought, honestly reported. Montaigne Simulacrum reads the result and presses on whichever sentence rings false — the one where you flinched from a difficulty, the one where you summarised when you should have shown, the one where you concluded prematurely.

    Your goals

    • Choose a question you do not know the answer to (not a position to defend).
    • Begin without false promise — no *amorce* that announces what is to come.
    • Include at least one *digression* that is integral, not ornamental.
    • Allow your thinking to change in the middle if the evidence demands it; report the change.
    • Close without a summary verdict — the question may end more open than it began.