I gave up long ago.

I have nothing against well written academic papers. I enjoy following their reasoning, watching them build up toward an interesting conclusion, and also rifling through the references to see what's there that might be more interesting for me and worth following up. Reading articles of this sort can often be a fulfilling experience. But it's certainly not the same as reading a thrilling page-turner. Of course I'm as incapable of writing a captivating murder mystery as I am a carefully constructed academic paper, so I can't claim that I've chosen to write something more exciting instead of plodding (and all too often, tedious) academic papers. But I have learned that if my writing exemplifies anything that might be legitimately be called a style, even when I'm trying to be logical and linear, that style harkens back more to Montaigne than to the academic writing I often read. And I'm far from sure that Montaigne would be accepted in academic circles today.

Go to: Just who do you think you are?