paper 1
About the two paper types for this course:
“Compare and Contrast Primary Sources” Papers
For this kind of paper, the goal is to show the similarities and differences between two primary sources, for example two historical documents. Your paper should focus on the two documents themselves as the main point of the paper, and the thesis statement should address what the comparison and contrast of the two sources, NOT comparing and contrasting other things. This is not meant to be a paper primarily comparing and contrasting two different parts of the world or two different periods of history, but rather comparing and contrasting two different pieces of evidence that could help with making those larger comparisons.
For example, instead of comparing and contrasting two eras in Chinese history in your thesis, it should be comparing and contrasting two different documents from Chinese history. In comparing and contrasting those two specific documents in detail, you may be able to come to some larger, broader conclusions about the two authors, the two contexts they come from, etc., but only after diving into what the sources actually say.
A comparison/contrast thesis sentence is often kind of clunky at best, and it is a challenge to make an elegant one, but the most important thing is to be as specific, narrow, direct, and clear as possible. The comparison and contrast thesis must include both similarities and differences at some level, but this does not mean you must give equal attention to both similarities and differences. In fact, it is highly unlikely you will find two documents in which the similarities and differences are equally important. Usually the best comp/con thesis argument is in one of two basic forms:
Even though the two are similar in ____, they are different in _____.
Even though the two are different in _____, they are similar in _____.
(Note that this is the “bare bones” form. These sentences on their own are not specific enough to be adequate thesis sentences. See the Thesis Tips guide for some good examples.) Your paper will probably naturally focus more on similarities or differences between the two. One of the most remarkable moments in studying history is finding two historical figures who are amazingly similar in some aspects despite much more famous differences (Richard Nixon and John F. Kennedy), or discovering that two sources that have similar backgrounds come to amazingly different conclusions (Gloria Steinem and Andrea Dworkin).
The best way to organize the comp/con paper is thematically, for example according to areas the two have in common or specific categories you want to highlight, for example a paragraph comparing and contrasting the writing style of the two documents. It is much more sophisticated, accomplished, and intellectually rewarding to compare and contrast as you go along. A good comparison/contrast paper will also include specific moments of overt comparison and/or contrast, like “in sharp contrast to Garvey’s approach, Nkruma’s approach relies more heavily on…”
Usually some similarities will be more pronounced than others, and some differences will be more pronounced than others. You should make distinctions between “major differences” and “subtle differences” when you come across them. It is rare that you will give equal weight or attention to all the kinds of similarities or differences you find, and that’s okay. You are under no obligation to focus on “the biggest similarities” or “the major differences” instead of smaller or more specific ones. You definitely should not exaggerate similarities or differences in order to add strength to your thesis. Saying two things are “opposite” or “exactly the same” when they are not will only hurt your argument, not help it.
True opposites are much rarer than many people think. Just because two things are very different does not mean they are actually opposite, more likely opposite in a particular way but not in all ways. For example, contrary to popular rhetoric, “male” and “female” not actually polar opposites. There may be some aspects associated with masculinity and femininity that seem opposite (asking for directions vs. not asking for directions), but that does not mean that those two genders are opposites of each other. And this is assuming that there are only two genders, which is itself a flawed assumption. If I order pizza and my dining companion orders a salad, we are not eating “opposite meals.”
The same is true for similarities. (See what I did there?) Very rarely are two things exactly the same. Even identical twins raised in the same household show real differences.
A very poor way to compare and contrast is simply to put the two documents next to each other, like a section all about the first document, then a section all about the second document, a section about their similarities and then a section about their differences. This approach generally results in a very superficial paper that says very little of any use to the reader. This approach generally produces a very wimpy or nonexistent thesis argument.
“Putting a Primary Source in Context” Papers
The point of this paper is to present a primary source document as a key piece of evidence to say something about the context that it comes from. Think of the document as a window into that time and place. You are going to look through the window into the past and make an argument based on what you see. This is a kind of “synthesis” paper where you will combine information from the primary source and the rest of the textbook. It may seem a little circular sometimes, because the paper should go back and forth between the source and the context. The source reveals the context, and the context shapes the source.
It is very important to stay “close” to what the document says. I recommend reading the primary source over and over several times, taking note of every kind of clue you can find that would tell you some of the background to the source. Choose quotes and ideas that jump out at you as being loaded with historical meaning. For example, does the source have a particular emotional content? (angry, inspirational, shocking, etc.) Is the source trying to explain something that just happened?
Use every piece of the source that you can to support your interpretation. The body paragraphs should generally have quotes or paraphrases from the document within them.
What NOT to do: Do not simply use the document as a “touchstone,” mentioning it briefly and then launching into a paper all about the background without ever talking about the source again. Instead, you should pay a lot of attention to the specifics of the document itself: the language that the author uses, the tone, the intended audience, the evidence and argument it uses, its function, etc.
The basic, skeleton form of a “document in context” thesis is something like:
[Document X] reveals the _____ that [People Y] experienced during [Context Z].
Or
[Document X] shows the role that ______ played in _______.
Or
[Document X] was a product of ______, ______, and ______.
Notice how the thesis statement actually mentions the document in it, and it mentions some specifics about the context the document comes from.
Effects are NOT context. For the purposes of this paper, “context” is another word for “background,” i.e., things that led up to the creation of this document, or the forces shaping the document as it was created. The effect that the document had, or the legacy of the source, is not actually background. To talk about the effects of a document requires an entirely different set of evidence. You cannot tell from a document what effect the document had, but you can tell from a document what the context seems to be. Just because a primary source is in the textbook does NOT mean that it had a big impact on historical events – don’t assume the source is a “milestone” just because it’s quoted in a textbook.
A paper that explains the effects or legacy of Hammurabi’s code, for example, will fail to meet the paper assignment. A paper that explains why Hammurabi’s code takes the form that it does will meet the paper assignment.
However, the concluding paragraph is often a good place to mention the legacy or aftermath of the document’s context, if you want to talk about later events. For example, perhaps the same things that shaped the creation of the document shaped later events as well.