Essay Writing Tips
– Things to Avoid
• We – as in ‘we can see’
o This is
a) very informal and
b) quite condescending. Yes, I know that’s the sort of thing that Prof Brian Cox says, but he is presenting a TV programme for a broad audience.
You are writing an essay that is meant to be a formal and analytical piece of writing.
o Don’t be conversational.
• ‘Historians argue’; ‘It is argued’; ‘it has been argued’ o Oh really, all historians argue this? It has been argued – great…by whom? Is that view a mainstream one or is it controversial?
o Talking about what historians argue is great but you have to go all the way. ‘Historians argue’ – so f—ing what? Tell me, are they right or wrong to make that argument? Is it a well-constructed argument or one that has methodological or interpretative issues?
o A quote by a historian proves nothing. It only proves that historian’s particular view. You need to assess – is it a good view; does the evidence back it up; is it a reasonable interpretation of events? • ‘It can be argued’ o Stating ‘it can be argued’ prior to delivering your interpretation of events is poor form. I understand that many of you were told to do this in school – but don’t. Many things can argued. I want to know what you are arguing. • ‘X is obviously true’; ‘Y is undeniable’
o Wow, those are extremely strong statements. And you are welcome to make them…as long as you can say, with a straight face, that you have possess enough expertise on a topic to make such a very, very deep pronouncement about how other academics should think by default.
o Is it really obvious, or do you just think it is? Seriously, think about it… • Do not use contractions o Don’t, won’t, can’t, etc. o Do not use slang or colloquialism. • Conclusion jumping o ‘Thing X happened therefore condition Y is proven’. It can be easy to jump to conclusion, to assume that because one thing has happened it can be linked to another set of circumstances of actions. Ask yourself, have you really proven something to be true? Have you shown a direct and irrefutable link between two conditions? • Over blown adjectives o ‘X is obviously true’; ‘the United States will never lose a way’; ‘condition X is always the case’.
o Obviously, never, always – these are all very big words. Can you really justify them being used? • Quoting historians as evidence
o Making a point and then following it up with a quote by a historian saying (more or less) the same thing is not proof of anything – other than you and the historian agreeing on something. OK, historian X agrees with you. So f—ing what? Engage with them critically. Why is their argument so important and worth believing? Is their methodology sound? What about other historians who disagree with them? Engage with the texture of a historic debate. o Ridiculously large paragraphs
If it’s more than a page long, something has gone wrong.
USE paragraphs to help organise and structure your text. A paragraph break gives your reader a chance to catch their breath. They collect common ideas or focused discussions together in a bubble of text. When a paragraph gets overlong it usually means you, the author, have drifted from one point, or one discussion, into another without realising it. This means that your points will run together in the final text and quite possibly lose much of their potency. Be concise – end a discussion at logical point. The next paragraph can, and indeed should, be related to the one that went before it. You may have one large point to make but that point can be broken down into three smaller points; don’t write one massive paragraph in that case, write three smaller ones.
Remember to edit. When reading over your essays try and identify natural stopping points and micro-conclusions in your essays. Break up paragraphs (and, in some instances, combine them) when and as required. • Quote historians (without critical analysis of what they are saying)
o Quoting a historian does not necessarily provide your case with evidence. Saying something and then quoting a historian who, basically, says the same thing is proof of nothing – other than that historian’s particular interpretation of the evidence at hand. o If you are going to quote a historian, be critical of them. Off the quote up as proof of their interpretative position and then engage critically with that position. Do you agree? Is the historian using right evidence? What is it about this argument that convinces or does not convince you? Tear them a new one, if necessary… • Getting on a soapbox o Yes, slavery was bad. It was awful, nasty, and vile. But your academic papers are not a place for you to preach to your reader about how bad it was.
No one thinks that slavery was good – you don’t need to convince them otherwise o Careful about using emotional language. Your essay is meant to remain formal. This does not only apply to slavery! • Using non-specialised texts o Use peer reviewed articles and quality academic books. Don’t quote from a generalised text book, quote from a specialist. And Some Things to Do… • Be critical – take historians to task o It is not enough to recognise that historian(s) X makes an argument. Assess that argument – is it one the reader should believe? • Read specialised texts • Be Specific • Read your essay aloud o Be critical. If it doesn’t sound right to your ears, it probably doesn’t read well either. Listen to what you are saying. How would you rephrase it so it sounds better verbally? Read the re-write aloud. Does it sound better? If so, keep it in the revised document. • Ask yourself, does this essay answer the question or does it try and tell a story instead? Ask that same question of every paragraph and discussion in your work. Does paragraph X actually help you to build your case?
