The real difference between a cultivated mind and a snob, and why loving beautiful things has nothing to do with looking down on anyone.
He’s read the right names. He drops them at dinner, timed well, and watches the table to see where they land. He owns Proust and hasn’t finished him. He quotes Pascal and has never once wept over him. Every conversation is, for him, a small ranking exercise, and the ranking is the point… not the books.
The trouble is that a great many well-meaning people can’t tell him apart from someone else entirely: the person who has spent thirty years reading slowly and asking to be corrected. Same vocabulary. Same museums. Opposite directions of travel. The snob is trying to rise above other people; the cultivated person is trying to kneel in front of something larger than himself. One’s a social project. The other is closer to a discipline. Confusing the two has done real damage, because it has persuaded a lot of people that taking beauty seriously is itself a form of aggression, and that the decent, democratic move is to shrug at Bach and Balzac alike and call all preferences equal. This is an argument against that shrug.
Montaigne wrote in the 1580s, in the tower of his château near Bordeaux, and gave French letters one of its founding gestures: the essay as the record of a mind testing itself against its own ignorance. His motto was cut into a beam of his library ceiling. Que sais-je? / What do I know? That isn’t the question of a man angling for a salon. It’s the question of a man who has read everything within reach and arrived, honestly, at humility. Snobbery can’t survive twenty pages of him, because snobbery needs certainty, performance and an audience, and Montaigne supplies none of the three. He wrote largely for himself, revised for twenty years, and confessed his own inconsistency on nearly every page.
…