ttTH

EY SAYtt

Starting with What Others Are Saying

N ot LoN G A co w e at t endeda t alk ar an academ icconf er ence where the speaker'scentral claim seemedto be that a certain sociologist-call him Dr. X-had done very good work in a number of areasof the discipline.The speakerproceeded to illustrate his thesis by referring extensively and in great detail to various books and articles by Dr. X and by quoting long passagesfrom them. The speakerwas obviously both learned and impassioned,but as we listened to his talk we found ourselvessomewhatpuzzled:the argument-that Dr. X's work was very important-was clear enough,but why did the speakerneed to make it in the first place?Did anyonedispute it? Were there commenrarorsin the field who had argued against X's work or challenged its value? \7as the speaker's interpretation of what X had done somehownovel or revolutionary? Since the speakergave no hint of an answerto any of these questions,we could only wonder why he was ourhypo' going on and on about X. It was only after :['lT:.,,,, the speaker finished and rook questions from the il;;"; audiencethat we got a clue: in responseto one ques- p.4reacts tioner, he referredto severalcritics who had vigorously similarly. r9

'tTxev SAY" questionedDr. X's ideasand convinced many sociologiststhat Dr. X's work was unsound. This story illustratesan important lesson:that to give writing the most important thing of all-namely, a point-a writer needsto indicate clearlynot only what his or her thesisis, but also what larger conversation that thesis is responding to. Becauseour speakerfailed to mention what othershad saidabout Dr. X's work, he left his audienceunsureabout why he felt the need to say what he was saying.Perhapsthe point was clear to other sociologistsin the audiencewho were more familiar with the debatesover Dr. X's work than we were. But even they, we bet, would have understoodthe speaker'spoint better if he'd sketchedin someof the largerconversationhis own claimswere a part of and reminded the audienceabout what "they say." This story alsoillustratesan important lessonabout the order in which things are said: to keep an audienceengaged,a writer needsto explain what he or she is respondingto-either before offering that responseor, at least,very early in the discussion. Delayingthis explanationfor more than one or two paragraphs in a very short essay,three or four pagesin a longer one' or more than ten or so pagesin a book-length text revefsesthe natural order in which readersprocessmaterial-and in which wrirersthink and developideas.After all, it seemsvery unlikely that our conferencespeakerfirst developedhis defenseof Dr. X and only later cameacrossDr. X's critics.As someoneknowledgeablein his field, the speakersurelyencounteredthe criticismsfirst and only then was compelledto respondand, as he saw it, set the record straight. Therefore, when it comes to constructing an argument (whether orally or in writing), we offer you the following advice: remember that you are entering a conversationand therefore need to stalt with "what others are saying,"as the 20

Starting with What Others Are Saying title of this chapter recommends, and then introduce your own icieasas a response.Specifically, we suggestthat you summarize what "they say" as soon as you can in your text, and remind readers of it at strategic points as your text unfolds. Though it's trr,rethat not all texts follow rhis pracrice, we think it's important for all writers to master it before they depart from it. This is not to say that you musr start wirh a detailed list of everyone who has written on your subject before you offer your own ideas. Had our conference speaker gone to the opposite extreme and spent most of his talk summarizing Dr. X's critics u'ith no hint of what he himself had ro say, the audience probably would have had the same frustrated "why-is-he-going-onlike-this?" rezrction. What we sllggest, then, is that as soon as possible you state your own position and the one it's responding to together,and that you think of the rwo as a unit. It is generally best to summarize the ideas you're responding to briefly, at the start of your text, and to delay detailed elaboration until later. The point is to give your readersa quick preview of what is moti. vating your argument, not to drown them in details right away. Starting with a summary of others' views may seem to contraclict the common advice that writers should lead with their own thesis or claim. Although we agree that you shouldn't keep readers in suspensetoo long about your central argument, we also believe that you need to present that argument as part of some larger conversation, indicating something about the arguments of others that you are supporting, opposing, amending, complicating, or qualifiring. One added benefit of summarizing orhers' views as soon as you can: you let those others do some of the work of framing and clarifying the issue you're writing about. Consider, for example, how George Orwell starts his famous essay"Politics and the English Language" with what others are saying. 21

rr:

:

ttTHEy

Starting with What Others Are Saying

SAYtt

that Most people who bother with the matter at all would admit assumed generally is it but way, bad a is in the English language

were two geniuseswell met. "No," I replied. ,,Absolutelynot," I wanted to yell, and fling my Barnes& Noble bag at his feet. Instead,

Our civthat we cannot by conscious action do anything about it. rtlnsilization is decadent and clur language-so the argtlment

I mumbled something apologeticand melted into the ..o*d. There's a new piety in the air: the self congratulationof book lovers.

must inevitably share in the general collapse' ' ' ' Enghsh . . . is fuli of bad [But] the process is reversible. Modern is willing t. take the ncchabits . . . whlch can bc irvoicled if one essary trouble. GEoncrf)R.wrr.t.,"Politics:rntlthcEnglishL'angu:rgc"

CHrusrrNaNrHnrNc, "Books Make you a Boring person" Nehring's anecdote is really a kind of "they say": book lovers kcep telling themselves how great they are.

Orwell is basically saying, "Most people assume that we cannot dO anyrhing about the bad state of the English language.

Teuplares FoR lrurnoouclnc Wxer "THEy SAy"

But I say we can." Of cotrrse, there are lnany other powerful ways to begin' Instead of gpening witfi sotne()ne else's views, yt-rucould start with ar-rillustrative qLl()tatiL)n,a revealilg fact or statistic' oras we do in this cfiapter--a relevant anec.dgte. lf yor-rchoclse one of these formats, however, be sure that it in stlme way illusview trates the view yctu're addressing or leads you to that Jirectly, with a tninimum of stePs. In ctpening this chapter, for example, we devote the first para' graph to an anecdote about the conference speaker and then move quickly at the start of the second paragraph to the misconception about writing exemplified by the speaker. In the foliowing opening, from a 7OO4 opinion piece in the Neq.u York Times Book Reuiew,Christina Nehring also moves quickly from an anecdote book illustrating something she dislikes to her own claim-that

l-here are lots of conventional ways to introduce what others rrre sirying. Here are some standard ternplates that we would lrave recommenclecl to our conference speaker. > A n u m b e ro f s o c i o l o g i s thsa v er e c e n t l sy u g g e s t etdh a t X ' s w o r kh a s s e v e r af lu n d a m e n t aplr o b l e m s . >

l t h a s b e c o m ec o r n m o nt o r j a yt o d i s r r r i s s

>

I n t h e i r r e c e n tw o r l < ,Y a n d z h a v e o f f e r e d h a r s h c r i t i q u e so f for

Teuputrs

FoR lrurnooucl lrrc

" S t A N D A R DV t E w s "

lovers think too highly of themselves' ,,1,ma reader!" announced the yell0w button. "How about you?" I looked at its bearer,a strappingyoung guy stalking my town's Festival of Books."l'll bet you're a reader,"he volunteered,as though we 22

The following templares can trelp you make what we call the "sttrndard view" move, in which you introduce a view that has l'rccomeso widely accepted that by now it is essentially the convcntional way of rhinking about a topic. 23

,'

"THEY

Starting with What C)thers Are Saying

SAYt'

> A m e r i c a n sh a v ea l w a y sb e l i e v e dt h a t i n d i v i d u ael f f o r tc a n t r i u m p h

> A l t h o u g hI s h o u l dk n o wb e t t e rb y n o w ,I c a n n o t h e l pt h i n k i n gt h a t

o v e rc i r c u m s t a n c e s . > At the same time that I believe

C o n v e n t i o nw a li s d o mh a s i t t h a t

, I also believe

C o m m o n s e n s es e e m st o d i c t a t et h a t T h e s t a n d a r dw a y o f t h i n k i n ga b o u tt o p i cX h a s i t t h a t

T e u p u r e s F o Rl n r n o o u c l l , r c SourrxtNGlMpLtED oRAssuMED

I t i s o f t e n s a i dt h a t M y w h o l e l i f e I h a v eh e a r d s a i dt h a t Y o u w o u l dt h i n kt h a t

Another sophisticatedmove a writer can make is to summarize a point that is not directly stated in what "they say" but is implied or assumed.

M a n y p e o p l ea s s u m et h a t These templates are popular becausethey provide a quick and efficient way to perform one of the most cotnmon moves that writers make: challenging

widely accepted beliefs, placing

them on the examining table ancl analyzing their strengths and weaknesses.

> A l though n oneof t hemhaveeversaidsodir ect ly, m yt eacherhave s o f t e ng i v e nm e t h ei m p r e s s i ot hna te d u c a t i owni l lo p e nd o o r s . > One implicatioo n f X ' s t r e a t m e not f

is that

> X a p p a r e n t lays s u m e st h a t > W h i l et h e yr a r e l ya d m i ta s m u c h ,

often take for granted

that Teuplares FoR MlrtNG WHAT "THEYSAY" SouerntNc

You SAY

Another way to introduce the views you're responding to is to present them as your own. That is, the "they say" that you respond to need not be a view held by others; it can be one that you yourself once held or one that you are ambivalent about.

These are templatesthat can help you think analyticallyro look beyond what others say explicitly and to consider their unstatedassumptions,as well as the implicationsof their views.

T e u p u r e s F o Rl r u r R o o u c l t t c AN ONGoING DEBATE

I ' v ea l w a y sb e l i e v e dt h a t m u s e u m sa r e b o r i n g W h e n I w a s a c h i l d ,I u s e dt o t h i n kt h a t 24

Sr>metimesyou'll want to open by summarizing a debate that presents two or more views. This kind of opening 2\

.

:i

"THEY

SAY"

demonstratesyour awarenessthat there are conflicting ways to look at your subject,the clear mark of someonewho knows the subject and therefore is likely to be a reliable, trustworthy guide. Furthermore, opening with a summaryof a debate can help you explore the issueyou are writing about before declaringyour own view. In this way, you can use the writing processitself to help you discoverwhere you stand instead of having to commit to a position before you are ready to do so. Here is a basictemplate for opening with a debate. >

I n d i s c u s s r o nosf X , o n e c o n t r o v e r si isaslu eh a sb e e n On the one hand, O n t h e o t h e rh a n d , e v e nm a i n t a i n

Srarrlngwith Whar Others A r e S a y l n g e n d s ,h o w e v e ri,s o n t h e q u e s t i o no f s o m ea r ec o n v i n c etdh a t

. Whereas , o t h e r sm a i n t a i nt h a t

The political writer Thomas Frank uses a variation on this lnove.

That we are a nation divided is an almosr uni'ersal lament of this bitter elecrion year. However, rhe exact properry that divicre elemental though it is said to be-remains

a matrer of some

controversy.

Taouas FnaNx, "American psyche"

argues contends . My o w nvi ewi s Keep WHlr

,,THEv

SAy" tN VtEw

The cognitive scientist Mark Aronoff uses this kind of template in an essay on the workings of the human brain. Theories of how the mind/brain works have been dominated for centuriesby two opposingviews.One, rationalism,seesthe human mind as coming into this world more or less fully formedpreprogrammed,in modern terms. The other, empiricism, seesthe mind of the newborn as largely unstructured, a blank slate. Manx AnoNorr, "Washington SleepedHere" Another way to open with a debate involves starting with a proposition many people agree with in order to hlghlight the point(s) on which they ultimately disagree. > W h e n i t c o m e st o t h e t o p i co f agreethat

z6

, m o s to f u s w i l l r e a d i l y t sually W h e r e t h i s a g r e e m e nu

we can't urge you too strongly to keep in mind what "they say,, irs you move through the rest of your text. After summarizing rhe ideas yoLl are responding to at the outset, it's very importirnt to continue to keep those ideas in view. Readers won't be ,ble to follow your unfolding response, much less any complications you may offer, unless you keep reminding them what claims you are responding to. In other words, even when presenting your own claims, y.u should keep returning to the motivating "they say." The longer and more complicated your text, the greater the chance thar readers will forget what ideas originally mori''ted it-no marrer how clearly you lay them out at the Ireginning. At strategic moments thror_rghoutyour text, we rccommend that you include what we call "return sentences.,, Ilere is an example.

27

:r

"THEy

hav'ertTlruPi'i.starting wirh,what "il.m;Iijl?*

SAy"

I n c o n c l u s i o n ,t h e n , a s I s u g g e s t e de a r l i e r ,d e f e n d e r so f

a . our experiments suggestthat there are dangerous revers

c a n ' th a v ei t b o t hw a y s T . h e i ra s s e r t i o tnh a t

of chemical X in the Ohio grounrJwarer.

i s c o n t r a d i c t ebdy t h e i rc l a i mt h a t .

We ourselves use such return sentences at every opportunity in ,ou\6*r\ J ',O1t\P . this book to remind you of the view of writing that our book good writing means making rrue or smarr or \:t!r, ^5'snquestions-that \

tt ^ n,'$7 t-t\'" \

iJ\"

r

logical statementsabout a given subjectwith little or no refer. ence to what others say about it. By reminding readersof the ideas you're responding ro, return sentencesensurethat your text maintainsa senseof mis. sion and urgencyfrom start to finish. In short, they help ensure that your argumentis a genuineresponseto others'viewsrather than just a set of observationsabout a given subject.The dif. ferenceis huge. To be responsiveto others and the conversation you're entering, you need to start with what others are sayingand continue keeping it in the reader'sview. E x e rc l s e s

AU,ente Y - t 1 p a/ t 7

1. The following is a list of argumenrsthar lack a "rhey Say"any senseof who needs to hear these claims, who rnight think oth.rrvirllilkJ the speakerin the carroon ; pG + who declaresthat The sopranospresenrscomplex characrers, theseone-sidedargumenrsfail to explain what view they are respondingto-what view, in effect,they are trying ro correct, add to, qualify, complicate,and so forth. Your job in this exerciseis to provide each argume a counterview. Feel free ro use any of th. r@ ,.rT", you find helpful.

z8

b . Material forcesdrive history. c . Proponents of Freudian psychology quesrion standard

notions of "rationalitv." d. Male studentsoften dominate crassdiscussions. e. The film is about the problemsof romanric relationships. f- I'm afraid rhar remplateslike the ones in this book wilt stifle my creativity. 2. Below is a template that we derived from the opening of David Zinczenko's"Don't Blame the Eater,,(p. 195). Use the template to structure a passageon a topic of your own choosing. Your first step here should be to find an idea that you support that others not only disagr". *ith b.rt acttrally find laughable (or, as zinczenko ptrts it, worthy of a Jay Leno monologue).you might write about one of the topics listed in the previous exercise(the environment, sports,genderrelations,the meaning of a book or movie) or any other topic that rnterestsvou. >

l f e v e r t h e r ew a s a n i d e a c u s t o m - m a d ef o r a J a yL e n o m o n o . l s n ' tt h a t l i k e t W h a t e v e hr a p p e n e dt o ) I h a p p e nt o s y m p a t h i z ew i t h though, l o g u e t, h i s w a s i t :

,

p e r h a p sb e c a u s e

29