Exploratory essay

I'm a little more excited about the prospect of an exploratory essay than I anticipated. This is, more or less, because it seems to be a pretty easy mechanism through which to bring my theoretical orientation into discussion, but without cramming it down the reader's throat. It seems, for example, much more palatable to bring theorist in to support, enhance, or change the scope of an exploratory essay than to foreground the theories. In other words, to show why theorists are relevant to the issue, rather than how issues are relevant to the theorist (which is how many paper seem).The dialectical thought process that Bacon & Co. advocate seems essential to keeping the reader's interest; this point was driven home by two essays on creativity. In one, the question was closed immediately; in the other, it was left open allowing the essay to generate a synthetic answer. I have a tendency not to write in this way. I start with the answer and try to show why it's the answer. This never works very well.Speaking of other poor writing habits, as annoyingly zen-like as Boice's advice can be, I can't help but feel that heeding his advice has the potential to let me develop a set of something that I could actually call writing habits.Now, I know that his advice of “Wait” (which I understand as actively working on the problem without an eye towards any final end) and “start before you're ready” seem kind of paradoxical (and in a way they are) but the problem I see him trying to solve is a real one, and on top of that, one that applies to me. I felt that all the examples he gave of reasons why a person's writing can get stunted or stumped apply, in some way, to me. I'm in a convenient position of entering an MA program knowing fairly specifically what I am doing. All I need to do is start, which is kind of the problem. I'm willing to give his strategies a chance.