The specific internal arrangement of elements in an essay creates rhetorical form, which can also be called genre, mode, or organization.

• Some argue that preconceived arrangement or formal structure is artificial and that all organization should grow naturally out of a writer’s purpose.

• Others think that readily identifiable organization and form are the first step toward successful communication.

Remember the relationship between form and content: the writer’s purpose, the needs of the audience, and the subject should dictate arrangement—not vice versa.

Three-Part Arrangement

“A whole,” says Aristotle, “is that which has a beginning, a middle, and an end.” Aristotle’s observation is the starting place for the most widely accepted method of rhetorical arrangement, the three-part arrangement.

The introduction: In the three-part essay, the introduction has two main tasks.

·        First, it must catch and hold the reader’s attention with an opening “hook”—an introductory section that does not announce the thesis of the essay but instead begins to relate the as-yet-unannounced thesis in some brief, attention-catching way.

·        The introduction can begin with an anecdote, an aphorism, an argumentative observation, a quotation. Donald Hall calls this kind of opening strategy a “quiet zinger.”

·        • Second, the introduction must quickly focus the attention of the reader on the thesis or claim.

·        The thesis is the central informing principle of the essay and is determined by the writer’s purpose, subject, and audience. It is often also called a claim.

·        The thesis is usually found in the form of a single-sentence declarative statement near the end of the introduction.

·        The thesis statement represents the essay-length equivalent of the topic sentence of a paragraph; it is general enough to announce what the following essay plans to do yet specific enough to suggest what the essay will not do.

The body of the essay: Aristotle says the body of the essay is a middle, which follows something just as some other things follow it.

·        The body of a three-part essay can take many shapes.

·        Writers can develop an essay according to the physical aspects, the chronology,

or the logic of the subject matter, by illustrating points, defining terms, dividing and classifying, comparing and contrasting, analyzing causes and effects, or considering problems and solutions.

·        Whatever organizational plan the writer chooses, make sure that the main points of the body relate not only to the thesis but to one another.

·        In the body of the three-part essay, the writer will need to give support or evidence for the thesis.

·        The main kinds of support or evidence include:

·        facts (a statement accepted as true)

·        statistics (come from reliable sources and are presented fairly and accurately)

·        authorities (quoting, paraphrasing, or referring to experts on the subject)

·        anecdotes (brief stories, most effective if they strike readers as true to life)

·        scenarios (narratives describing something that might happen)

·        cases (summarize observations of people, are meant to be typical or generalized)

·        textual evidence (integrate bits of text you are evaluating into your own text)

The conclusion: A conclusion should indicate that a full discussion has taken place.

·        Often, a conclusion will begin with a restatement of the thesis and end with more general statements that grow out of it, reversing the common general-to-specific pattern of the introduction.

·        This restatement is usually somewhat more complex than the original thesis statement, since now the writer assumes that the reader can marshal all of the facts of the situation as they have been presented in the body of the essay.

·        In addition to reiterating the consequence and import of the thesis, the conclusion should include a graceful or memorable rhetorical note.

·        Writers can draw on a number of techniques: a provocative question, a quotation, a vivid image, a call for action, or a warning.

·        Sheridan Baker says that the successful conclusion satisfies the reader because it “conveys a sense of assurance and repose, or business completed” (12).

·        William Zinsser says: “The perfect ending should take the reader slightly by surprise and yet seem exactly right to him. He didn’t expect the [piece] to end so soon, or so abruptly, or to say what it said. But he knows it when he sees it. (78-79)

Four-Part Arrangement

Aristotle said that as speakers actually practice rhetoric, a discourse generally has four parts: the proem or introduction, the statement of fact, the confirmation or argument, and the dialogue or conclusion.

Note: This is specifically an argumentative form and doesn’t adapt well to narrative or description.

The introduction: Aristotle called it the proem (from the Greek word proemium, meaning “before the song”); the Romans called it the exordium (from the Latin weaving term for “beginning a web”). It is said to have two functions, one major and one minor.

·        Major task is to inform the audience of the purpose or object of the essay.

·        Minor task is to create a rapport, or relationship of trust, with the audience.

Richard Whately suggests different kinds of introductions to arouse reader’s interest.

Examples of Whately’s introductions:

·        Inquisitive shows that the subject is “important, curious, or otherwise interesting.”

·        Paradoxical dwells on characteristics that seem improbable but are real. [This form of introduction looks for strange and curious perspectives on a subject.]

·        Corrective shows the subject has been “neglected, misunderstood, misrepresented by others.”

·        Narrative leads to the subject by narrating a story or anecdote.

·        Preparatory explains peculiarities in the way the subject will be handled, warns against misconceptions about the subject, or apologizes for some deficiency in the presentation.

Edward P.J. Corbett argues that in order to consider their audience, writers must also be aware of the rhetorical situation in which they find themselves. To properly consider the rhetorical situation, writers should ask themselves five questions:

·        What do I have to say?

·        To or before whom is it being said?

·        Under what circumstances?

·        What are the predispositions of the audience?

·        How much time or space do I have?

Note: The introduction is the best place to establish “bridges” between writer and reader by pointing to shared beliefs and attitudes, creating what Kenneth Burke refers to as identification of the writer with the audience and the audience with the writer.

The statement of facts: This is a nonargumentative, expository presentation of the objective facts concerning the situation or problem under discussion.

            • It may contain circumstances, details, summaries, narrative.

            • It sets forth the background of the problems and often explains central point.

            • Quintilian recommended that the statement of fact be lucid, brief, and plausible.

• Writers can order the statement of facts in different ways: in chronological order, from general situation to specific details, from specific to general, or according to topics.

The argument: This is used to prove the writer’s case. Aristotle says that argumentative discourse deals with two different kinds of questions: deliberative, or political, oratory is always concerned with the future; forensic, or judicial, oratory is always concerned with the past.

·        If the question is about events in the past, the confirmation will try to prove:

·        Whether an act was committed

·        Whether the act committed did harm

·        Whether the harm of the act is less or more than alleged

·        Whether the harmful act was justified.

• If the question is about a course for the future, the confirmation will try to prove that:

·        A certain thing can or cannot be done.

·        It is just or unjust

·        It will do harm or good

·        It does not have the importance the opposition attaches to it.

After the writer has decided on a position, she can move into the argument, choosing from definitions, demonstrations of cause or effect, analogies, authoritative testimony, axioms, or personal experience in order to prove her point.

NOTE: Writers can build arguments in different ways, but generally if three specific lines of argument are available to the writer—one strong, one moderately convincing, and one weak, they should be grouped as follows: the moderately convincing argument first, the weak argument second, the strong argument last. This arrangement begins and ends the confirmation on notes of relative strength.

The conclusion: This has four possible tasks in the four-part arrangement, according to Aristotle:

·        It renders the audience once again well-disposed to the writer and ill-disposed toward the writer’s opponent.

·        It magnifies the writer’s points and minimizes those of the opposition

·        It puts the audience in the proper mood

·        It refreshes the memory of the audience by summarizing the main points of the argument

Richard Larson’s Problem-Solving Form

“Problem-solving,” says Richard Larson, is “the process by which one moves from identifying the need to accomplish a particular task (and discovering that the task is difficult) to finding a satisfactory means for accomplishing that task.” Larson’s action-based task definition makes problem solving both exploratory and argumentative. His method is new and valuable because it uses the very process of arriving at an arguable position as the pattern of arrangement for the essay. His eight steps include:

·        Definition of the problem. After a short introduction, this section provides “a clear statement of exactly what is to be decided.”

·        Determination of why the problem is indeed a problem or a source of difficulty. If a course of action is clear, there can be no problem. This section clarifies the need for a decision on policy or an explanation of what is undesirable about the current situation.

·        Enumeration of the goals that must be served by whatever action is taken. Sometimes the determination of the goals to be strived for is in itself a problem-solving situation, but most of the possible subjects for students’ essays take the form of “goods” as goals—world peace, equitable distribution of wealth, the best education, etc.

·        Determination of the goals that have the highest priority for the decision maker. This step can be difficult. Sometimes there are several goals in a solution, and if they are mutually exclusive, such as “free trade” and “fair trade,” then a decision must be made about what has priority.

·        “Invention” of procedures that might be implemented to attain the stated goals. If the question involves choosing among several possible courses of action, no invention is necessary unless some sort of compromise is proposed. However, if the problem solver must discover how to improve an undesirable situation, invention of possible methods will be necessary.

·        Prediction of the results of each possible action. This is the most difficult step, requiring careful study of evidence—conditions, precedents, laws of nature, history, past cause-and-effect sequences, etc. Each possible action must be weighted against the good it would accomplish, its costs, and the unavoidable negative consequences.

·        Weighing of the predictions. This part of the essay compares the possible actions and their projected outcomes, trying to gauge which action will be most likely to attain the chosen goals with the fewest unwanted side effects.

·        Final evaluation of the choice that seems superior. The essay closes with a determination of whether the chosen alternative does indeed solve the problem.