Writing Analytically, 6th Edition - Rosenwasser, David & Stephen, Jill.original_ [153]
A Note on the Syntax of Good Thesis Statements
Before we move on to concentrated applications of the procedure for making a thesis evolve, take a look at the shape of imprecise thesis statements:
Environmentalism prevents economic growth.
Tax laws benefit the wealthy.
The economic situation today is bad.
Women in contemporary films are more sensitive than men.
All four are simple, declarative sentences that offer very broad assertions. They are both grammatically and conceptually simple. More than that, they’re slack—especially the first three, in which the primary claim stands alone, not in relation to anything else.
The very shape of these weak thesis statements is a warning sign. Most effective working theses, though they may begin more simply, achieve both grammatical and conceptual complexity as they evolve. Such theses contain tension in their syntax, the balance of this against that. Thus, they begin with “although” or incorporate “however” or use an “appears to be about x but is actually about y” kind of formulation. (See “Appears to be about X…” in Chapter 4.)
Here, by contrast, are three possible versions of the fourth weak thesis above:
Although women more readily cry in contemporary films, the men, by not crying, seem to win the audience’s favor.
The complications that fuel the plots in today’s romantic comedies arise because women and men express their sensitivity so differently; the resolutions, however, rarely require the men to capitulate.
A spate of recent films has witnessed the emergence of the new “womanly” man as hero, and not surprisingly, his tender qualities seem to be the reason he attracts the female love interest.
THE RECIPROCAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THESIS AND EVIDENCE: THE THESIS AS LENS
What we have said so far about the thesis does not mean that all repetition of ideas in an essay is bad or that a writer’s concluding paragraph should have no reference to the way the paper began. One function of the thesis is to provide the connective tissue, so to speak, that holds together a paper’s three main parts—beginning, middle, and end. Periodic reminders of your paper’s thesis, its unifying idea, are essential for keeping both you and your readers on track.
As we’ve also argued, though, developing an idea requires more than repetition. It is in light of this fact that the analogy of thesis to connective tissue proves inadequate. A better way of envisioning how a thesis operates is to think of it as a camera lens. This analogy more accurately describes the relationship between the thesis and the subject it seeks to explain. While the lens affects how we see the subject (what evidence we select, what questions we ask about that evidence), the subject we are looking at also affects how we adjust the lens.
Here is the principle that the camera lens analogy allows us to see: the relationship between thesis and subject is reciprocal. In good analytical writing, especially in the early, investigatory stages of writing and thinking, the thesis not only directs the writer’s way of looking at evidence; the analysis of evidence should also direct and redirect (bring about revision of) the thesis. Even in a final draft, writers are usually fine-tuning their governing idea in response to their analysis of evidence. (See Figure 11.1.)
The enemy of good analytical writing is the fuzzy lens—imprecisely worded thesis statements. Very broad thesis statements, those that are made up of imprecise (fuzzy) terms, make bad lenses. They blur everything together and muddy important distinctions. If your lens is insufficiently focused, you are not likely to see much in your evidence. If you say, for example, that the economic situation today is bad, you will at