Renaissance art is reputed for its proportion and harmony. It represents the human figure in an idealised manner, which also remains realistic. Michel de Montaigne (1533-1592) represents the Renaissance in literature, but he cared more for results than for proportion, harmony, and idealism. Montaigne did not even care to be entertaining or brilliant. I find some of his “Essays” chaotic in structure and unequal in style. Montaigne’s Latin quotations sometimes contain errors, and his retelling of anecdotes is not always accurate. Yet, in contrast to all his contemporaries, he was totally and completely focused on results, that is, on finding the truth and presenting it in a convincing manner. For Montaigne, there was just one priority: he wanted to clarify difficult ethical questions, the keys to happiness and personal effectiveness. I consider Montaigne the archetype of result orientation. He would take any subject, any ancient anecdote, any quotation or verse, and belabour it relentlessly in order to extract every drop of philosophical knowledge. Other Renaissance writers, like Giovanni Boccaccio (1313-1375) grew far more famous, but lacked the results orientation in the sense of philosophical wisdom. Boccaccio was a highly gifted entertainer, but what do you learn from reading his works? I have never gained any important insights from reading Boccaccio. His most celebrated work, “The Decameron,” can help you pass a couple of pleasant hours, but will it make you wiser and more effective? I very much doubt it. Boccaccio deployed massive efforts to study the legacy of ancient Greece and Rome. He spent his early years in Florence but then his father sent him to Naples to study law. The goal, in his father’s mind, was to enable Giovanni Boccaccio to become a merchant. In Naples, Boccaccio devoted more time to reading novels, history and poetry than studying law. He soon started to write stories (such as “Filostrato”) in early Renaissance taste, that is, knightly love and chivalry adventures. If he had only written those, Boccaccio would have been quickly forgotten. Montaigne never felt attracted to fiction stories that lack a philosophical message. Before writing his essays, he had translated a theological treatise from Latin into French, but his results orientation had always been there. He did not care to be entertained; he just wanted to find the truth. In 1345, Boccaccio returned to Florence with the goal of settling down permanently. However, three years later, the city was devastated by the Black Death. It was an illness that killed a large part of the population, especially in the city. Those that lived in the countryside survived for the most part. Boccaccio survived and cleverly used the Black Death as background for his next book, “The Decameron.” The writing took Boccaccio four years (1349-1353) due to the sheer size of the project. From the very beginning, he planned to write one-hundred short stories recounted by ten people who met coincidentally while escaping Florence and the Black Death. The tone of the stories varies (drama, comedy, satirical) as much as the topics (crime, humour, serendipity). I don’t contest the entertainment value of Boccaccio’s work, and I can only praise his dedication in carrying out such an ambitious project. “The Decameron” became highly popular, and the fact that Boccaccio earned relatively little as an author has more to do with the economics of books in the early Renaissance than with his own actions. Boccaccio was results oriented in the sense that he carried out a major literary project, but not in philosophical terms. The world would not have lost a great deal of wisdom if Boccaccio had never written “The Decameron.” It’s a book that I can read a dozen times for entertaining purposes, but that’s it. Here is the link to the original article: https://johnvespasian.com/results-orientation-in-michel-de-montaigne-and-the-renaissance/