One way to think about writing an analytical paper is to imagine you are a lawyer making a case. A lawyer begins by making an opening argument in which she makes a clear claim (e.g., “the defendant did not commit the crime”) with reference to specific evidence (e.g., “I will show the jury that my client did not have motive, was otherwise occupied during the time the crime was committed, etc.”). The lawyer will frequently provide a “roadmap” to her argument, telling the jury how she will prove her case (I will show you this evidence first, then present an alternative argument of the crime, etc.). The body of your paper should be clearly organized and each part should relate to the main argument. A good lawyer presents only that information which helps her make her case. A good writer ties every paragraph into the main argument, and clearly transitions from one point to another. Finally, the conclusion of your paper is akin to a lawyer’s closing argument. A lawyer will restate her case and remind the jury of the evidence she brought to bear to support it. Your conclusion should restate your main argument and reference the evidence you used in the body of the paper. The conclusion can also reference broader themes or questions, as long as it does not present new information that is critical to your argument; and it does not contradict your thesis.
Leave a Reply