Writing Tips II

Writing Tips II:
Examples for Building a Sound Argument

Michael Trotti
History Department
412 Muller
(607)274-1591

This is an exploration into a single topic -- an essay on the life and significance of Steel magnate Andrew Carnegie. I will take you through a series of points illustrating a number of ways to develop a strong argument in an essay.

Key points I will stress:

Arguments are BUILT from the facts of a situation. They are not obvious, essays don't imply their own significance -- you have to do that work.
Facts are important to history, but just as important is your argument for what is significant about the facts.
Three elements of a paper are particularly important for developing an argument, and are what I discuss below:

Introduction,
Conclusion, and
Transitions between your thoughts/paragraphs.

To best benefit from this exercise, pause at each of my questions, and at least mentally answer them for yourself before you move on to what I have to say about the issues.

If someone turned the following in as their essay on Andrew Carnegie, what would be the problem?

Henry Clay Frick was his right-hand man
He gave away $350,000,000
Andrew Carnegie grew up poor
Bessemer process was a way to make large amounts of steel rather cheaply.
He ordered that wrecked trains be burned - the practice became standard on all railroads.
The Homestead strike was a mess, many died, and the strikers lost.
He died in 1919
He didn't help Tom Scott, the man who had helped him advance in the Railroad
He was in Scotland
He was the richest man in the world
1848 was an important year - he worked as a telegrapher

What is wrong here? The facts are accurate. . . isn't that enough for a history course?

Problems, among others:

chronology -- these are out of order, making it unclear what the point of the whole thing is.
more importantly, this has no context at all, no reflection upon what facts are significant, which are tied to others, more important to others, etc. Lacks any sort of introduction, conclusion, etc. Facts are here, but nothing is built from them.

Obviously, no one would turn this in, but this to make a point:

Facts are necessary, and they need to be accurate.

But good writing is as much about crafting an argument that makes sense, using the building blocks (facts, dates, concepts) to build something meaningful.

As important as factual accuracy is building the best argument out of the material. Here comes the building metaphor:

Building an argument is like building a house. Facts are merely the raw materials. If you just dump them on the ground, they will not speak for themselves, nor will they arrange themselves into logical groupings. That is the builder's job. Out of the same raw materials (in this case, accurate facts), builders can erect a number of different structures -- some of them might be rickety, some sturdy, some inventive, some plain. Facts get us started, but good writing, like good building, has many more steps.

The two elements needed to construct a strong argument in support of your thesis are having a strong:

Introduction and conclusion (provides the framework, the context), and
transitions between your ideas (the glue holding the pieces together)

Building that sort of strong argument is what the rest of this web page is about.

Introduction/Conclusion

These are the places where you can give your answer meaning by setting the context in which it matters. Think of this as an opportunity to add a whole new layer to your argument - the facts are one layer, this will be another whole layer of meaning. In essence, this is where you start to build something out of the raw material of the facts.

You have much leeway regarding how to write introductions and conclusions. The body of the paper does a certain job (leading the reader logically through each point of your argument and the support you have for them), but the introduction and conclusion are places for much more creativity, for broader, more expansive thinking, for making connections and showing what context makes your argument more meaningful.

Introduction

You can start with an "opening vignette" (a very brief example that draws the reader in close to the theme you explore), a broad issue/theme/problem, or with almost anything as long as it is meaningfully connected to the theme you are trying to develop. However you decide to open the essay, the introduction needs to accomplish certain goals.

What an introduction HAS TO DO:

give the context you want to use to make your paper meaningful to American history, and
state clearly your thesis (your argument or answer to the question)

This is your opportunity to add a layer of meaning to the raw facts you've accumulated.

Example #1. Intro that loses that opportunity:

Andrew Carnegie's life was amazing. He started out poor but ended up the richest man in the world. He worked hard and ended up giving away much of his money. Forever Carnegie will be remembered as a man who changed America.

What is wrong here?

Remember to try to answer this sort of question on your own before you move on to see what I have to say about it all.

Nothing is wrong here [nothing is factually wrong], but it could do so much more to make the paper meaningful, to give it context and significance. This is not bad, exactly. But it is superficial, and therefore an opportunity lost. It might have made the whole paper much more rich, but instead it sets a rather vague context -- "amazing" and "changed America."

Example #2. An introduction that takes advantage of opportunity - and there are endless possibilities for this:

Example

America itself was growing up in the 19th century, changing from a rural society on the periphery of the world into an industrial power competitive with the most vibrant economies. The steel industry was one of the foundations for that growth, and the man who changed the steel industry the most in the late 19th century was Andrew Carnegie. Carnegie's life exemplifies more than one trend in America as a whole in this era - abounding riches, a desire to make the world a better place, and yet also the growing inequality between himself and the impoverished workers he employed to gain his riches. These contradictions in Carnegie were also contradictions in American society, and are therefore worth a closer look.

Comments

Broad opening -- doesn't even mention Carnegie but focus instead on context.

Then moves toward his field -- Steel -- and finally to him and his place in it.

Finally, this example strengthens the ties between Carnegie and the era in America, making the rest of the paper more meaningful.

Strength here: a clear answer to the question why does all this I'm about to tell you about Carnegie matter? Factually it is not much different -- in fact, the first example gives more factual data about Carnegie than this one! But an introduction is not supposed to give facts; it gives argument, meaning. This intro makes the entire essay more meaningful by tying Carnegie to larger themes in American history. Now when the paper explores his poverty, his riches, his treatment of workers, etc., it will be reflecting naturally upon wider movements in American life. For an introduction, that is a job well done.

There are many other ways to accomplish the goals of the introduction -- open with a moment in Carnegie's life that in some way exemplifies his place in America in the period, for example. Then move from there to a statement of your thesis and what is meaningful here. There are many other possibilities.

Key point here:

Every paper needs to reflect upon something meaningful in American history. The facts don't do that themselves, you need to set up that context in your introduction (and conclusion), adding layers of meaning to the spare facts that serve as your support.

Conclusion

Similarly, a conclusion is a place appropriate for creativity and a focus upon what is meaningful. Don't simply reiterate what you've already said in the body of the paper -- that squanders the opportunities of a conclusion to be meaningful.

Example #1. Conclusion that loses the opportunity:

Andrew Carnegie had an amazing life. He was poor, but grew into wealth. He played a big role in developing the steel industry. He could also be cutthroat to his competitor and to his workers. At the end of his life, he gave millions away. He was truly an amazing man.

What is the problem?

Factually this is fine, again, but it is "empty" -- essay would be essentially the same whether or not this were here. Each of the points would already have been developed, and all this does is restate them. You want a conclusion to have a purpose, to do something meaningful.

Rather than simply summing up what you've said, try to push further. You can go further in time, focus in on a particularly telling moment, or in some way use this opportunity to again stress what is meaningful here. The best conclusion in some way convincingly states what we've learned by exploring this paper -- how we can see the subject more clearly in the wake of exploring the issue.

Example #2. Conclusions that reflects meaningfully upon the theme of the paper:

Example

Andrew Carnegie made fortunes and gave them away. He rose from poverty, but kept his own workers shackled to machines and to the clock, permanently impoverishing them. In this, Carnegie embodies several different sides of American life in the late-19th century: its progress and its poverty, its growth and its divisions. Toward the end of his life, Carnegie was celebrated as the nation's premier philanthropist, and yet a colleague could also call him "the arch-sneak of the age". Another critic quipped that no philanthropy could ever make up for his treatment of his own workers. But if Carnegie were flawed, they were faults found in all of America in this age.

Comments

Begins by referring to points made in the body of the paper, but briefly and serving to heighten the contrast in his life.

Final note here is to give an overall evaluation of his place in the era and to end emphasizing the major point of the essay -- how he represented in some ways all of America.

Key point:

Make the Conclusion do some work for you. You don't need it to reiterate what you've already said, and you don't need it to give new facts. What you do need is for the conclusion to tie up the essay into a meaningful bundle -- to emphasize the theme and take it a bit further.

Transitions

Much of the argument and context for the paper will be explicitly addressed in the introduction and conclusion. For the most part, the job of the body of the paper will be to give particular parts of the argument with its support. But there is another very important opportunity in the body of a paper to add this layer of meaning and context to your argument.

Transitions between paragraphs/ideas should connect your points to your theme and to each other. No paragraph should seem like it is out of place, raising the question of why it is there at all. You should have a logic for why you discuss each point where you do -- if you don't, think about it, outline the paper, and develop such a logic. Get in the habit of briefly connecting your thoughts to the theme of the essay, as well as making connections between the point you just made and the one you are making. The best argument flows, and every argument needs to show how its individual points are meaningful and related to the theme of the essay.

Example #1. Transition that loses this opportunity to reinforce your argument:

yada yada yada - body of a paragraph on treating his workers badly, ending with: Carnegie's workers suffered from long hours and low pay.

Carnegie was cutthroat with his competitors. He . . . yada yada yada. Paragraph on that.

What is the problem here?

Again, nothing here is wrong (factually). But this transition does nothing to set the context for these points, losing the opportunity to make these issues meaningful. It jumps from one point to another without demonstrating that the author knows there is a connection between the two.

Example #2. Transition taking advantage of the opportunity:

yada yada yada - body of a paragraph on treating his workers badly, ending with: Carnegie's workers, like so many American workers, suffered from long hours and low pay - their opportunities were not nearly as many as Carnegie's had been.

If Carnegie showed his cutthroat nature by treating his workers as another line on his cost sheet, he was at least as ruthless with his competitors. Like all robber barons, he . . . yada yada yada. Paragraph on that.

This example does two things that make the transition much more meaningful:

It shows that the point before and the point after are very closely connected, both reflecting on the negative side of his history (If Carnegie . . . he was at least . . ."). This connection strengthens both points by adding them into a more overarching point about his ruthlessness. As important, it shows that the author understands this connection.
It also makes brief connections to wider changes - how America more broadly is experiencing the things we find in Carnegie's history ("like so many American workers", "like all robber barons"). This reinforces the essay's argument that the subject has broader historical significance.

Having these sorts of transitions is not a huge change, but it nevertheless makes a tremendous difference, showing how your pieces fit together. This is like (watch out! returning to building metaphor) having sufficient glue/nails/screws holding the individual pieces of your argument together into a whole. Every essay needs to have its main points both connected to the large theme and connected to each other in some way. Otherwise it falls apart.

Transitions come in all styles and don't need to be elaborate. The important thing is that you show that you know how your argument fits together, and that you are weighing what is important here. Try to find ways to insert brief comparisons into your transitions, showing that you see the differences and similarities between the points you are discussing.

Weak transitions:

none (just switching topics)
"also", "another" (or anything similar -- those are not really connecting your thoughts at all).

Stronger transitions (there are dozens -- this is in no way a complete list):

"In contrast to . . . [last point], [this new thing I'm introducing] . . ."
"This development [whatever it was] was even more important in . . ." [or "even more apparent" or "almost as important" or . . . endless possibilities]
"While Carnegie was . . ., other Robber Barons were . . ."
"Carnegie's workers were hard pressed, but his effect on America went far beyond his own workers. . . ."
Although Carnegie . . .[last point], [this new thing I'm introducing] . . ."
But his impact was much more complex than simply . . . . He was also . . ."
Although not as important as . . . [what I just talked about], Carnegie also had an impact upon . . ."
and a bazillion other possible phrasings for such connections and comparisons.

Need more guidance?

Come talk to me
Contact the Writing Center -- 274-3315
Buy and read Strunk and White's The Elements of Style. There are other very good writing guides out there -- find one that works for you. I simply find this to be a wonderful book.
Look over my other writing tips page to see if it helps: Writing Tips
Keep working on it -- this is simply too vital a skill to ever stop trying to improve.

Return to top of page

This website is occasionally maintained by Michael Trotti.
(Last update: 8 August 2001).