Revise Essay

profilehester008
Emerson-PIE.docx

PIE – A Way to “think” about Paragraph Structure

One should be wary of neat and convenient formulas that explain how to write. While they can certainly be helpful, if always followed to the letter— instead of using them as an organization guide— one can end up with very formulaic writing devoid of variety. In its simplest sense, PIE breaks down to the following.

P = Point (basically the main point of the paragraph; in other words, what everything in your paragraph relates to)

I = Illustration or Information (these are the examples, quotes, summaries, bits of essential information that you provide to further illustrate your points)

E = Explanation (I prefer to think of this as the point where you address your illustration / information / Quote because not all those things need to be further “explained”—though it is often necessary. To address an illustration is to justify its presence, to do something with it, to give it relevance, to relate it to the controlling idea of your essay the thesis).

One needs, as soon as possible to work on addressing the most significant pitfall that can arise from following this too closely: falling into the trap of thinking that every paragraph you write should be a process of making a Point, then offering an illustration followed by an explanation. The main idea is the following: every paragraph needs at least one point, and every point benefits from information (illustration, quotes, etc.), and all information needs to be addressed. It is quite possible to begin a paragraph with information that leads to an explanation and then leads to a point. The point is: every paragraph needs “something” that the “illustrations” and “explanations” relate to. Also … do not forget that every point must support and relate to – which must be the controlling idea of your essay (your thesis).

Finally, one can write sentences that combine points with explanations and illustrations …

Read this example

Next, Emerson shifts from the reverence and awe one might feel for the stars to reverence for the many facets of nature down here on earth, writing that that the stars are “inaccessible,” that we can never touch them and that, in the end, this is an essential part of the reason why they “awaken a certain reverence” (10) He then shifts to explaining how the wise person— i.e., the person whose mind is open to the influence of nature— recognizes that nature does not act meanly, that nature is not a trivial toy to be played with, that nature never ceases to amaze and intrigue the person who experiences it, and, perhaps most importantly, the truly wise person realizes the best moments experiencing nature as an adult return one to the wonder which childhood was often filled with, to a time before the experiences of being an adult deadened and dulled the innocence and curiosity of childhood experiences in nature. Emerson then connects this reawakened mind to a “most poetical sense” of how we see things. He offers the example of the woodcutter— who sees a tree only for its potential materials— and the poet, who sees the tree for what it is: as a whole tree with all the beauty one might associate with a tree. He further explains this poetical perception by describing a walk through a variety of farms and woods, in which he sees all these parcels of individually owned land as one landscape and not a landscape divided by ownership.

This paragraph is basically information (illustration)—with very little explanation (addressing) of that information. By addressing the information, one can expand the paragraph into two paragraphs and offer the essential analysis necessary for an “analysis essay.”

Now Read this example

Next, Emerson shifts from the reverence and awe one might feel for the stars to reverence for the many facets of nature down here on earth, writing that that the stars are “inaccessible,” that we can never touch them and that, in the end, this is an essential part of the reason why they “awaken a certain reverence” (10)— “awaken” implying our senses and spirit have been asleep or dulled and that through this experience those inactive senses are stirred up, excited, and aroused. And this is precisely where Emerson associates that same awakening, that same awe, that same reverence for the majesty of the nighttime sky with all and any “natural objects” (10), the phrase “kindred impression” (10) connecting the stars to all “natural objects” (all of which we can touch, unlike the stars, if we choose). “Kindred” denotes there is a definite similarity between the stars and the natural objects of the earth, but even though they are not the same, they do, in a sense, come from the same natural origin (later in the essay, the “Universal Being”). “Impression” indicates the effect something has on the mind, the conscience, and one’s feelings. So, when combined in this context, these two words indicate, once again, that Emerson is drawing a connection between the intensity and awe we hold for the stars and the awe and reverence that we might have for any natural object, but, for this to happen, the mind must be “open to their influence” (10). “Influence” is the key word here, for it indicates that experiencing these natural objects and surroundings can affect one’s moods and feelings, that one can experience the same awe for the stars in the entirety of nature if one is open to seeing that influence, that, ultimately, nature is as grand and awe-inspiring as those stars (and, by connection, one can also experience God in and through nature).

Emerson then shifts to explaining how the wise person— i.e., the person whose mind is open to the influence of nature— recognizes that nature does not act meanly, that nature is not a trivial toy to be played with, that nature never ceases to amaze and intrigue the person who experiences it, and, perhaps most importantly, the truly wise person realizes the best moments experiencing nature as an adult return one to the wonder which childhood was often filled with, to a time before the experiences of being an adult deadened and dulled the innocence and curiosity of childhood experiences in nature. In other words, one of the deepest consequences of opening one’s mind to the influence of nature is that it awakens, in part, some of that lost wonder of our childhood. Emerson then connects this reawakened mind to a “most poetical sense” of how we see things. To see things poetically is to see them as they are and not in an analytical or purely functional way; the poet sees nature in its entirety and not by its material divisions. He offers the example of the woodcutter— who sees a tree only for its potential materials— and the poet, who sees the tree for what it is: as a whole tree with all the beauty one might associate with a treeas well as a “natural object” that shares a “kindred impression” with the stars that invokes a sense of awe, reverence and wonder. He further explains this poetical perception by describing a walk through a variety of farms and woods, in which he sees all these parcels of individually owned land as one landscape and not a landscape divided by ownership. The poetically-awakened mind realizes one can possess a deed to some land, but one can never own the landscape, the view, the experience (and the awe and the wonder it can invoke if one’s mind is open to the influence).