Writing Analytically, 6th Edition - Rosenwasser, David & Stephen, Jill [231]
As in the sciences, methods of analysis in the humanities are empirical— grounded in close observation of evidence. But, as we argued in Chapter 6, “Making Interpretations Plausible,” the authority of a writer’s interpretation of evidence relies on other scholars accepting it as plausible. This is true in the sciences as well, a fact somewhat hidden by the nature of scientific evidence and the very detailed character of the process of investigation.
Here is a typical set of guidelines for writing introductory paragraphs in a humanities paper—in this case, in English. Introductions are not the same across all disciplines in the humanities, but much in the following guidelines is representative.
An introduction is not a conclusion. You do not need to announce, in short form, your whole argument. In English papers, the intro paragraph is an opening gambit. The thesis you state at the end of paragraph one should be an idea, not a statement of fact. For example, you might offer an idea about what you think is the most important difference and/or similarity between the poem you have chosen to analyze and “Ode to a Nightingale.” This statement will get qualified and expanded and tested in the paper. You should not simply march the statement through the paper and prove you are right.
The intro offers readers some representative piece of your evidence— some data from your poem: perhaps a binary that you see in both poems or some other tendency of the language in both that you found interesting and that you think is worth exploring. The reader should come away from your opening paragraph knowing what you found interesting and worth pursuing and why.
Resist dumping a great lump of background into the intro. You should do some contextualizing in the opening, but don’t overdo it. Stay focused on the poem and what you notice about the kind of thinking it is inviting us to do.
Resist what is known as “freshman omniscience”—recognizable by sweeping claims and a grandiose tone … “Since the beginning of time poets have been …”
The last sentence of the paragraph should make some kind of claim. It should not be the standard tri-partite thesis of the 5-paragraph form essay.
HOW MUCH TO INTRODUCE UPFRONT: TYPICAL PROBLEMS
Introductions need to do a lot in a limited space. To specify a thesis and locate it within a larger context, to suggest the plan or outline of the entire paper, and to negotiate first relations with a reader—that’s plenty to pack into a paragraph or two. In deciding how much to introduce up front, you must make a series of difficult choices about what to include and exclude.
The danger is trying to turn the introduction into a miniature essay. Consider the three problems discussed next as symptoms of overcompression, telltale signs that you need to reconceive, and probably reduce, your introduction.
Digression
Digression results when you try to include too much background. If, for example, you plan to write about a recent innovation in video technology, you’ll need to monitor the amount and kind of technical information you include in your opening paragraphs. You’ll also want to avoid starting at a point that is too far away from your immediate concerns, as in “Communication has always been a necessary part of being human.”
As a general rule in academic writing, don’t assume your readers know little or nothing about the subject. Instead, use the social potential of the introduction to set up your relationship with your readers and make clear what you are assuming they do and do not know.
Incoherence
Incoherence results when you try to preview too much of your paper’s conclusion in the introduction. Such introductions move in too many directions at once, usually because the writer is trying to conclude before going through the discussion that will make the conclusion comprehensible. The language you are