Difference between revisions of "Literary and Cultural Studies:Writing academic texts"
Olaf Simons (Talk | contribs) |
Olaf Simons (Talk | contribs) (→Introduction: Justify your work) |
||
| Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
::The paragraph to write here should reflect what you have said under the last two headings.0 | ::The paragraph to write here should reflect what you have said under the last two headings.0 | ||
| − | The introduction is to some degree the most important part of your work. You sell yourself in front of an audience - as an isolated voice who wants others to accept her view without further words? As an observer of the debate who takes a modest step to reconsider some of its points? Aim at the second role if you are a beginner. Be able to summarise the debate and to make your own statement with a certain amount of self awareness: You want to make a point, you know of other positions, you know what approach you took to deal with | + | The introduction is to some degree the most important part of your work. You sell yourself in front of an audience - as an isolated voice who wants others to accept her view without further words? As an observer of the debate who takes a modest step to reconsider some of its points? Aim at the second role if you are a beginner. Be able to summarise the debate and to make your own statement with a certain amount of self awareness: You want to make a point, you know of other positions, you know what approach you took in order to deal with this question, and you structured your work accordingly. |
== Your Chapters: Make points == | == Your Chapters: Make points == | ||
Revision as of 15:14, 28 June 2009
Contents
Choosing a topic: Your paper has to be a contribution to the ongoing scientific debate
Do follow your interest and your curiosity. Think of something that startled you when first looking at the thing. Think, secondly, of readings you came across and that convinced you or did not convince you. Think of clarity you could try to offer.
Your paper is supposed to be a contribution to the ongoing scientific debate. Whatever you did, you will have to sell it to an anonymous audience of experts (e.g. at a conference or in a scientific journal). The story of how you dealt with the problem, what your learned in the seminar, what you felt when you first read the book... etc. is not part of your work.
Can you have personal views? Yes. But to win the audience you must sell these your results as results others can accept as simply advantageous in the ongoing debate. The absolute no go is the statement you define as personal with the assertion that others can have their own views and hence should not challenge yours. Some students feel they received a bad mark, because their professor did not like their view. You misunderstand the role of your professor and your work if you come to this conclusion. Your professor should discuss your work to find out: what is merely personal opinion and what has the power to make point in the ongoing debate (as for instance an interesting refutation of views, or a viable substantiation of positions you dealt with).
Cover page
See the style sheet for detailed information
Table of contents: Make statements, be transparent
The interesting piece of work is problem oriented. The headlines offer solutions to problems. See “Your Chapters: Make points” for further information.
Be aware of the following general problems:
- Some students feel compelled to offer a new introduction into “The Elizabethan Period” or “Shakespeare’s Life and his Work”. Do not offer any such chapter. Do not compete with handbooks.
- Avoid what is self evident rather than leading towards results. You are writing about the minor characters of Anthony and Cleopatra. It is self evident that you will have to take a look at them. Do not let this be into the reason why you will write a chapter on each of them, and finally a conclusion. Your paper is the result of your work. So write with the conclusion in mind. You can show that these characters have basically three functions in the play? If that is your conclusion, then do write chapters on these three functions and discuss them. It is your conclusion that research has misunderstood this play as one of love, whilst it is actually a work of social criticism as soon as one looks at the minor characters? If that is your conclusion, then do offer the conventional readings and your own on the basis of your observations.
- Be careful if you offer too many chapters. A 12-15 page assignment might have an introduction of three pages, three or four chapters of three to four pages each and a conclusion of another page. If your chapters are of one page each you will not have risked the scientific exploration with a debate of possible views and a reflection of your work.
Introduction: Justify your work
The introduction is almost the most important part: It is designed to sell your topic in front of an scholarly audience.
- Problem horizon: The field you enter
- What is your question? Why is it or why should it be a question of scientific interest. Can we hope to get beyond personal views, that is towards positions a further debate will have to take into account?
- The aim of your work
- You want to prove a certain position, to substantiate an observation, to balance a position with a look at a another work, to question an argument recently brought forth, to point at material that require a new interpretation...
- The debate: Research, discussions in the media
- Give a summary of the ongoing debate. Differentiate between a public and the scientific debate (your audience is located in the latter, even if address a topic of wider public debate). Summarize the debate as an exchange: What positions have been prominent following whose interventions. Can one discern movements? Did feminist research change our perspective? Did a certain event create a watershed? See our Literary Studies:Research guide to find research.
- Your own work and its position in the debate
- Give an outlook of what you are doing in the field you have just opened.
- Methodological assertions
- Be aware of your own methodological decisions. If you feel that a certain interpretation failed to take an certain observation into account which you want to stress with your own work - then ask yourself: Was the interpretation you want to attack merely a personal point of view or rather made under assumptions we should not share. Be self critical at the same moment. You have a feeling like you know what character Jane Austen really was, and you want to re-interpret her work on the basis of this your view of her. Be aware that your reading will attract certain questions on your assumptions. (How have you created your picture of Jane Austen? Can you be sure that the work is like the author?) Reflect the validity of your own approach in about one paragraph of a 12-15 page assignment.
- A brief outline of the following
- The paragraph to write here should reflect what you have said under the last two headings.0
The introduction is to some degree the most important part of your work. You sell yourself in front of an audience - as an isolated voice who wants others to accept her view without further words? As an observer of the debate who takes a modest step to reconsider some of its points? Aim at the second role if you are a beginner. Be able to summarise the debate and to make your own statement with a certain amount of self awareness: You want to make a point, you know of other positions, you know what approach you took in order to deal with this question, and you structured your work accordingly.
Your Chapters: Make points
Good work has a certain rhythm. It raises questions and answers them, it leads to conclusions. Make sure that your reader is not lost. You have lost as soon as your reader asks him or herself: why am I reading all this. An effective chapter has a certain length. If it is too short (e.g. a page or two) it is likely it does not contain any observation plus an analysis of the results. Think of 3-5 page chapters and the points you want to make with them. To what result do you need this chapter. Some tips:
- A good headline does already make a point.
- Open your chapter with an outline of what you are trying to say with the following. What is your statement, how will you prove it.
- Your statement has to be based on observations.
- Observations remain - on the other hand - worthless if they do not substantiate your statement.
- Make sure that you are aware of alternative readings. Read research in order to be aware the debate.
- End every chapter with a conclusion - if possible with a conclusion in which you show what you have done up to here and what remains to be done.
The audience of your paper has an academic background. There is but one way to find the appropriate style and tone: read academic work. Take it for granted that your audience has read the text and the research that involved (only if you do that you will be prepared to answer the more interesting questions); on the other hand write as if this audience has its own unpredictable amnesia. If you quote a passage of a novel tell very briefly where we are. If you refer to a statement of research - give half a sentence to remind us of the situation in which this statement was made.
Take a look at the Literary and Cultural Studies:Style sheet for further information about how you quote other texts.
Conclusion: What have you done
The general question is here: What is the use of my work. What did you try? What did you achieve? How would you continue research on this question.
Bibliography
Structure you bibliography
- General resources (not always necessary, yet sometimes the heading under which you note e.g. standard biographies you used)
- Primary sources (the materials you analysed)
- Secondary sources (research dealing with your materials)
The usual structure is alphabetical. It is often more interesting to bring the items into a chronological sequence. Take a look at the Literary Studies:Research guide to quote your materials consistently.
A general question is what editions you should use. You might have read the cheapest edition of a novel, your reader might, however, be unable to get hold of that old and outdated 1963 edition. Use good editions with a reliable text source. Read critical editions if you are dealing with books that developed a complex publishing history, i.e. editions that tell you something about the different versions that existed. If you have access to editions published in the period you are dealing with (e.g. through EEBO and ECCO) use them. Should you use the first edition or the last the author modified before his/her death? There is no general answer on that question. If the editions differ immensely you will rather use the edition that helps you to make your point and speak about the choice in the methodological assertion in the introduction.
