How do you guys usually go about concluding humanities papers? My go-to strategy is to briefly philosophize on the broader implications of the argument or to suggest other potentially fruitful avenues of inquiry. Both seem kind of cheesy and inappropriate in the case of these papers, however.
My Rhetoric 103A teacher says that summarizing the preceding arguments in a short paper is insulting to the reader's intelligence. I'm not sure I buy this, since at least some crystallization of the thesis seems useful.
Any ideas?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I guess what I do is I write what I'm gunna say and then go back and read the paper and if I need to clarify or reiterate connect or extend anything then I do that int he last paragraph. I don't think it should be a rule to never write conclusions, see how the piece hangs together, then decide.
ReplyDelete