Essay structure

An important caveat when it comes to structuring an essay is that these aren’t rules. In fact, many of the best essays will deviate from the structures that this post recommends, because ultimately, the types of arguments you raise and the way you choose to frame your essay would affect the effectiveness of the structure chosen.

However, there are general guidelines:

This post illustrated how the CA-R or CA-R1-R2 structure often works best for absolute questions (given the recommendation that one should avoid arguing an absolute stand).

This post considers a common mistake of “cherry picking” arguments, and, as implied by the sample paragraph, recommends that a CA-R (or by extension, CA-R1-R2) structure should be adopted if one disagrees with a given statement.

From these posts, it seems as though a pattern is emerging, in terms of the recommended essay structure for various questions:

1. For absolute questions: CA-R or CA-R1-R2
2. For questions where we choose to disagree with a given statement or opinion: CA-R or CA-R1-R2
3. For questions where we choose to agree with a given statement or opinion: A-CA-R (argument, counter-argument, rebuttal)

Note: (3) is based on adopting the opposite structure from (2)

 

Generic counter-argument #2 (evolution)

A lot of the time, we assume that things don’t evolve. This may result in us making statements like:

“Globalisation results in the loss of local cultures, and the Westernisation of many indigenous cultures”

“Technology has killed the simple pleasures of life because we now prefer to spend time on the computer to taking a stroll in the park”

“The media is destroying our moral values”

“The rise of e-books shows how the book has no place in modern society”

However, if we consider that the concepts above – culture, simple pleasures of life or moral values – are not static and that they evolve, we might argue that technically, globalisation doesn’t cause cultures to disappear, they merely evolve (as they always have). Similarly, as a concept, simple pleasures haven’t disappeared, it’s just that their nature has changed. Where we once might have seen a walk in the park as a simple pleasure, we now redefine our simple pleasures as things like lying in bed while listening to our iPods. Likewise for moral values – the concept of having moral values hasn’t vanished, it’s just that our moral values might have evolved with the times (as they always have). With e-books, technically, the very presence of e-books shows that there still is a place for the book – just in an evolved form.

Task

Go through past-year GCE A level essay questions, and identify concepts where this argument applies.

Sample introduction: Why read the book when you can watch the film?

It’s important to read widely and expose yourself to a variety of styles. If you are a regular reader of this blog, you might have noticed that I have a particular style – I use certain words and phrases more often than others, and there are certain stylistic techniques that I have a particular fondness for.

Here is a sample introduction, courtesy of Ms Elaine Lo and her class (2T35), which is quite different from my style, and certainly worth a read:

Why read the book when you can watch the film?

I admit, I am a fan of Twilight. One of many among the screaming hordes of fans who would queue up for tickets overnight for the film premiere. Yet, when I enter the darkened hall, and Robert Pattinson looms luminous on screen, somehow, that luminosity never sparkles as much as it does in my imagination. And that, perhaps, is the best reason for reading the book despite the availability of a film. A book invites the reader into its world and to make meaning of it. A film makes its own meaning of the book and invites you to accept it. In today’s world of convenience and trifles, leading to an ennui of human intellect and spirit, it is perhaps even all the more crucial now to read the book even as the film once again offers us the easy way out.

 

Task

1. Identify the elements of style used in this introduction.
2. Identify how personal voice is used to show the writer’s personality.

Generic counter-argument #1 (It’s not you, it’s me)

There are many “universal” counter-arguments. Counter-arguments that keep cropping us, or that can be used in response to a certain, class of arguments.

The “it’s not you, it’s me” counter-argument

A common break-up cliche, this applies to arguments that blame one thing for another problem.

For example:

“Globalisation is a problem because it has resulted in the loss of local cultures”
“Scientific research is used to advance a political motive, and this makes it problematic”
“Technology has has killed the simple pleasures of life because nowadays we are more likely to entertain ourselves with a dizzying array of technology-based options, rather than engage in simple pleasures like taking a stroll in the park”

In all examples, one could counter-argue that it’s not the fault of globalisation, or scientific research, or technology (which are all neutral) – it’s man that doesn’t act to stop cultural erosion (which has always existed, even before globalisation), it is man that is politically motivated (not scientific research) and it is man that chooses to play with gadgets rather than walk in the park.

It’s not you, it’s me.

Essay skills: The atypical absolute terms

Typically, when we think of absolute terms, we think of words like “never”, “ever”, “always” or ”nothing”.

These are fairly standard, and common:

2010: The book has no place in modern society. Discuss.

2010: No politician’s reputation can survive the judgement of time. How true is this?

2009: Should every country have the right to carry out unlimited scientific research?
2008: Can the presence of a foreign power ever help a country with problems?

2007: The view of the majoriy is always right. Do you agree?

In these cases,  ignoring or not engaging with the absolute term will mean that we will not pass for content.

However, there are some questions that masquerade as regular (non-absolute) questions, but sneakily include atypical absolute terms in them. Usually, if we don’t engage with atypical absolute terms, we’ll still pass (although exceptions exist). However, because most people don’t realise that there’s an absolute term in the question, dealing with it and engaging with the term will make your essay stand out – and make you more likely to really score.

Some examples of atypical absolute terms:

Technology has killed the simple pleasures of life. Do you agree?
How far do you agree that men have lost the battle of the sexes?
No price is too high in the pursuit of perfection. Discuss. (Note: “no” is a typical absolute term)

 

Considering the first question:

Technology has killed the simple pleasures of life. Do you agree?

A common argument would go along the lines of:

Technology has killed the simple pleasures of life because nowadays, many people, particularly the youth, are more likely to choose a game of Call of Duty: Black Ops than a stroll in the park. With the exception of parts of the world where such technology is limited, we are now able to entertain ourselves with a dizzying array of technology-based options – readily-available options that saturate the lives of people. In light of this, the probability of engaging in an activity that is technology-based is far greater than that of engaging in a simple pleasure that is untouched by the pervasive influence of technology.

However, this doesn’t really engage with the term “killed”. To show an engagement with the (atypical) absolute term “killed”, one might say:

Some might argue that technology has killed the simple pleasures of life because nowadays, many people, particularly the youth, are more likely to choose a game of Call of Duty: Black Ops than a stroll in the park. With the exception of parts of the world where such technology is limited, we are now able to entertain ourselves with a dizzying array of technology-based options – readily-available options that saturate the lives of people. In light of this, the probability of engaging in an activity that is technology-based is far greater than that of engaging in a simple pleasure that is untouched by the pervasive influence of technology. However, does this actually mean that the simple pleasure has been killed by technology? Despite the fact that technology is pervasive and omnipresent, can a person, if they wish, choose not to engage in the (somewhat puzzling) pastime of catapulting Angry Birds at green pigs on their iPhones? If a person wishes, can they still go for that stroll in the park? And we see that technology hasn’t actually killed these simple pleasures, because one still has the option of engaging in them. All technology does is give us more choice. Where we find simple pleasures absent from our lives, it is not technology that killed them – it is us.

–

When it comes to atypical absolute questions, it is worth noting that such questions are far more common in college examination papers (across various colleges) than in the actual ‘A’ Level papers. However, they are interesting questions nonetheless, and they do occur occasionally in the ‘A’ Levels. In addition, unlike regular absolute questions, atypical absolute questions do not require you to deal with the absolute term – but I would always advise students to engage with the term, as it shows a greater appreciation of language and its nuances.

Task 1

Consider the other questions with atypical terms given above and write an argument showing how you would engage with each of these atypical terms.

Task 2

Identify and explain how personal voice was used in the arguments above.

Blog recommendation: CJC General Paper

Check out the CJC General Paper blog for useful articles. Because to ace the General Paper, we have to read, so we have something to think about, so we have something intelligent to write about.

Blog recommendation: Progress in G.P.

Check out this excellent GP blog, by Mr Marc Kenji Lim:

http://cjcpig.wordpress.com/

GP Essays: Common mistake #6 (cherry picking arguments / discussing the non-contentious, rather than the contentious)

Consider this question:

‘The tourist does not see the country the inhabitants know.’ How far is this true of your country?

General form: The question presents an opinion, then asks you to contend with this opinion.

Common mistake:

If we disagree with the opinion presented, a common mistake is to “cherry pick” arguments that support your stand. Here, we might show instances where tourists see the real country:

Singapore is a multi-racial, clean and green society, and this is evident to tourists.

However, this is not convincing enough because we’re picking issues that aren’t contentious to begin with. Instead, to convincingly disagree with this stand, we should pick arguments that are contentious, and refute them:

Some argue that tourists will not get a feel of the day-to-day lives of heartlanders because attractions are in “touristy” areas. However, one must recognise that it is the tourist’s fault for not visiting the heartlands – if they choose, they can go “off the beaten track”. In fact, this is becoming more common thanks to initiatives like “Couchsurfing”, which encourages tourists to explore a country through the eyes of a local, and benefit from a more authentic experience by living with them, interacting with them – and (quite literally) sleeping on their couch.

 

Note: This mistake is more likely to occur when we disagree with this particular stand; if we agree, we will tend to focus on the contentious issues anyway.

 

Task:

Considering the same question above, write one weak argument that deals with something non-contentious, and one stronger one that zooms in on a contentious issue.

Essay skill: Attention to detail (in examples)

For some essay questions, attention makes a huge difference; for others, attention to detail may be deemed trivial, unnecessary or a slight digression. Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to be a particular signal, word or question type that helps us identify these detail-loving questions, so it comes down to assessing each question as they come.

Here’s one example of a question where attention to detail really brings our response to a new level:

Why read the book when you can watch the film?

 

This calls for us to look specifically at film adaptations of books, and identify ways in which the book adds something the film doesn’t. Note that we don’t actually have to prove that the book is better than the film – it is not a “more than” comparison; it’s another form of comparison.

 

Less detailed:

 

Even though one could watch the film, one should read the book because it does justice to the author as it truly tells the story as the author envisioned. This is because film adaptations are often trimmed down to fit into a two-hour movie, and certain scenes, sub-plots or minor characters may need to be cut out of the film. In addition , after these cuts, changes to the sequence of scenes, or other changes, may need to be made to the movie for it to make sense to the viewer. This was evident in JK Rowling’s Harry Potter series, particularly in later installments, where large sections in the books needed to be cut, as the 400-page long books would never be able to be presented completely in a two-and-a-half-hour movie.

 

Another reason why one should read the book even when they can watch the film is that movies might omit details from the book, and this might falsely portray the author as being a poor writer who did not fully conceptualize and think through the little details in a story. This is unfair, as movie-goers might judge the author for these “mistakes”, without realizing that it was actually due to constraints faced in making the movie, or because the director had a different vision for the movie. This was seen in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (Part 1), where the attention to detail and complete, detailed explanation of certain events was omitted in the film.

 

The above arguments work, but for this particular question, adding specific details really helps in the illustration:

 

Even though one could watch the film, one should read the book because it does justice to the author as it truly tells the story as the author envisioned. This is because film adaptations are often trimmed down to fit into a two-hour movie, and certain scenes, sub-plots or minor characters may need to be cut out of the film. In addition , after these cuts, changes to the sequence of scenes, or other changes, may need to be made to the movie for it to make sense to the viewer. This was evident in JK Rowling’s Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, where close to nothing was mentioned about Hermione’s involvement in setting up the Society for the Promotion of Elfish Welfare (SPEW), despite the fact that this sub-plot was crucial for an appreciation of the role of house elves (including Harry’s own house elf, Kreacher) in the last installment, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. Seeing that the director of the Goblet of Fire omitted SPEW from the movie, it appears that he did not read the last book and failed to realize the significance of SPEW – illustrating that more than just reading the book the film is based on, in the case of a series, one might need to read all the books before watching the film – especially if one is a director! A similar situation was seen in the film adaptation of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (Part 1). Here, the opening scene shows Hermione erasing every trace of herself from the lives of her parents, before wiping their memory of any knowledge of her. In the book, this was revealed much later – a good 300 or so pages in. Outside the Harry Potter franchise, a far more drastic deviation from the book was seen in Philip Pullman’s Northern Lights (where the film released under the US title, “The Golden Compass”). While the book has clear, strong references to the evils of the Catholic Church, the movie showed cowardice by staying clear of all religious undertones, lest ticket sales are affected by the Pope declaring the movie sinful – which the Pope did anyway. In all these examples, the story in the movie is not told the way the author envisioned it, and it does the original work an injustice if one does not read the book.

 

Another reason why one should read the book even when they can watch the film is that movies might omit details from the book, and this might falsely portray the author as being a poor writer who did not fully conceptualize and think through the little details in a story. This is unfair, as movie-goers might judge the author for these “mistakes”, without realizing that it was actually due to constraints faced in making the movie, or because the director had a different vision for the movie. This was seen in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (Part 1). In the film, nothing was mentioned about how the trio kept getting caught by death eaters (there was a taboo placed on the name “Voldemort”, which made one’s location known by Death Eaters the minute the name was mentioned). It is this detail, the little things, which show JK Rowling’s complete conceptualization of the wizarding world. And because the absence of these details may keep movie-goers wondering about the gaps in the explanation, making it look almost as though it was an oversight on the part of the author, watching the movie without reading the book really is a slap in the face of literary genius.

 

Granted, the above paragraphs show an over-reliance on Harry Potter examples, and this is a limitation of the paragraphs. However, the skill to note is that for this particular question, the attention to detail really makes a difference to your answer. However, it is crucial to note that this skill cannot be unthinkingly applied to all essay questions – some essay questions, because of the nature of their demands, will not credit (and may even penalise) such specific detail.

 

 

Task

“The tourist does not see the country the inhabitants know.” Do you agree?

Consider how attention to detail can improve the quality of an argument for the question above. Write one less detailed argument and one more detailed argument to illustrate this.

 

 

 

Essay skills: (1) How to write effective counter-arguments and (2) How to structure your essay (absolute terms)

Recap:
Dealing with absolute terms

It is usually easier to argue against (disagree with) terms like “always”, “never” and “nothing”. Conversely, it is usually easier to argue for (agree with) terms like “ever”.  In other words, you should always disagree with the absolute stand. This is because the abovementioned approach merely requires you to identify one instance which proves the point. With this in mind, how then do we incorporate good balance in absolute-term essays? After all, a good counter-argument would require us to prove “always” or “never”, or to disprove “ever”!

While there are several ways of incorporating effective counter-arguments into absolute-term essays, perhaps the easiest and most straight-forward one would be to use big, generally true arguments that people commonly put forth in an attempt to argue “always” or “never”.

For example:

There is nothing optimistic about the future of the environment. Do you agree?

Counter-argument
Some people argue that there is nothing optimistic about the future of the environment because globalization has opened up markets and has resulted in an unprecedented increases in the demand for goods. In addition, advances in technology which give rise to more efficient manufacturing processes, coupled with access to cheaper labour in developing countries means that we can now produce goods more cheaply. With further advances, costs of production will only go down. Cheaper prices, in turn, will result in goods being demanded in greater quantities. To meet this demand, we extract more raw materials, fell more trees, burn fossil fuels, fill landfills to capacity – all of which damage our environment. There is no reason for optimism because this process shows no sign of stopping – consumerism continues to rise, and with it, the production of more goods and services that will continue to damage our environment.

This counter-argument works because it does make sense – consumerism had been increasing, globalization continues, we do not expect a drop in demand for goods. However, does it prove that there is nothing optimistic? No, because exceptions exist. And that’s the function of your rebuttal:

Rebuttal
However, where we have consumerism, we also have groups of people that raise awareness above the problems of consumerism – an example is the popular “The story of” videos, which began with “The story of stuff”, and went on to produce “The story of plastic bottles” and other related videos. The fact that people are more aware of the problem and of possible solutions – thanks to the very same force of globalization – is a reason for optimism.

The CA-R Structure [Recommended]

The structure illustrated above (a counter-argument, followed by a rebuttal to show where the exceptions lie) may be repeated for a further two arguments, giving six paragraphs in your main body. Within these six paragraphs, you should have covered a minimum of three aspects or levels, and provided a range of examples for each.

The CA-R1-R2 Structure [Recommended]

Here, the structure follows the one illustrated above, but adds on another level of rebuttals:

Counter argument
(see above)

Rebuttal
However, where we have consumerism, we also have groups of people that raise awareness above the problems of consumerism – an example is the popular “The story of” videos, which began with “The story of stuff”, and went on to produce “The story of plastic bottles” and other related videos. The fact that people are more aware of the problem and of possible solutions – thanks to the very same force of globalization – is a reason for optimism. [Rebuttal 1] In addition, consumers are beginning to request greener products, and even though consumerism persists, at the very least, we are making an attempt to consume greener products, as seen by the trend of companies producing and advertising greener products to cater to the more environmentally conscious consumer. Again, this is reason for optimism. [Rebuttal 2]

The CA-A Structure [possible, but not preferred]

Although the above two structures are recommended, there is another possible method. If you struggle with finding an appropriate rebuttal that deals with the particular counter argument you’ve chosen, you would still meet requirements if you gave an unrelated argument (rather than a rebuttal) after the counter argument.

For example:

Counter-argument
(as above)

Argument
Admittedly, our consumerist culture may make us pessimistic. However, there still exist reasons for optimism because advances in technology have been helping us reduce the damage done to the environment. Such examples include the use of catalytic converters in cars and nuclear technology.

Take-away skills:

1) Use big, generally true arguments (that are commonly used to support the absolute) as your counter-arguments
2) Rebut these by showing where the exceptions to these general rules lie.
3) Conclude by saying that because there are, in fact exceptions to common arguments put forth by opponents, it is not true that there’s nothing optimistic (or whatever the absolute stand is) . There are, in fact, glimmers of home when it comes to the environment.