> is French for "to try."

Which looks to be where the English word assay comes from too: https://www.etymonline.com/word/assay

In Spanish we have ensayo = attempt or try, frequently is used to refer to attempts before the real show or performance (in a music festival, a theater, ..). Also ensayo is just equivalent to what Montaigned introduced when referred to a text composition.

Similarly, Portuguese's "ensaio", which means "rehearsal".

It also carries the same literary meaning, “ensaio sobre …” == essay, usually only seen in academia, or alternative cinema.

The distinction seems to be different expected outcome for the subject

To "assay" is to engage in an "investigative (analytic) procedure" upon some thing [0].

To "essay" (je vais essayer) is an attempt to achieve a specific thing.

The former seems more like an exploration without initial expectations, like a fact finding, focus group, or initial prototype.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assay

That site doesn't seem great, but according to Wiktionary "assay" is a doublet of "essay", i.e. the origin is the same but they were borrowed into English via two different sources.

"Assay" came via Norman, "essay" came via French.

There are lots of other examples like this where one word came from Norman and the other from French, e.g. warden + guardian, warranty + guarantee

Good comment. It surprised me that a definition of essay wasn't sought before asking questions about the supposed best. But that tentative approach actually struck the essence in an interestingly performative manner.

Well pg has written a lot about what essays are and what they're for before this one.

So you're saying that Paul Graham is trying? :)

From that same Wiki definition I notice that "In English, essay first meant a trial or an attempt.

That implies an iteration on some seed, or maybe just the intent to grow and iterate on the initial essay.

Personally I find that true. Most of my "essays" I keep for myself, or sometimes share just with close friends who I trust to bounce ideas off as they mature.

Later they become collections of essays in a folder, and I might join the dots between them to perhaps see the potential for something of a book, or a new essay that synthesises them.

So I think calling something an "essay" grants the author one special privilege; the right to revise and "re-attempt" the same piece without moral judgement.

That's problematic in the Internet age, where the provenance of a document is judged by dates, by diffs to archived versions etc. It wouldn't seem right to actually change the contents at the same URL.

Nor would it seem right to insist on tracking edits, because a writer always has the right to forget and disown old and weak ideas they've moved beyond.

So I think essayists have our permission to keep approaching the same idea over and over. The way composers would sometimes write ten different versions of the same piece.

What makes a "best" essay then is its improvement with respect to the author's previous attempts.

All we can ask is, "Is this Mr Graham's best essay so far?"

> I think the concept of a best essay is somewhat illogical, but exploring the idea like this makes an interesting post.

pg does specifically address this objection btw:

> I love questions that seem naughty in some way — for example, by seeming counterintuitive or overambitious or heterodox. Ideally all three. This essay is an example. Writing about the best essay implies there is such a thing, which pseudo-intellectuals will dismiss as reductive, though it follows necessarily from the possibility of one essay being better than another.

> Writing about the best essay implies there is such a thing, which pseudo-intellectuals will dismiss as reductive, though it follows necessarily from the possibility of one essay being better than another.

Preemptive dismissal of any criticism of the idea of a best essay is stupid. In particular, even though I buy the "possibility of one essay being better than another", the criteria for ordering will be necessarily subjective.

As someone who has read many essays in the European tradition (Montaigne, Sartre, etc.), I cannot bring myself to see the essays by E. B. White, for example, to be superior in any sense. Yet, I know that White's essays are held in high-regard in this part of the world. This points to the fact that there is no universal ordering function for essays, which mostly invalidates Graham's argument above.

Note also that "pseudo-intellectuals" is ad hominem.

Jesus Christ, Anselm’s ontological argument but for essay quality? Is he making a joke?

"...though it follows necessarily from the possibility of one essay being better than another."

This is false unless you further assume that "better than" is a total order.