Old, then New writing
Explain Old, then New with overhead text:
Paragraph structure often is built with old information first, with a piece of new information added. That new information becomes “old” for the reader, and another new piece is added. This old + new, old + new structure is psychologically satisfying to the reader.
DO NOT: old + old + old
DO NOT: old + irrelevant new + irrelevant new (work on coherency and unity)
DO NOT: “and then, and then, and then” (this is chronological, not “old, then new”
NOTE: This is used in paragraphs, then for papers-as-a-whole as well.
Tomasky, Michael. “The Specter Haunting the Senate.” New York Review of Books, 30
September 2010: 7-11. Print.
The Senate’s version of the financial reform bill squeaked by in May with the backing of four Republicans from blue states. Though it contained some strong provisions, the Senate bill was not nearly as forceful as liberals had hoped on matters like requiring banks to spin off their proprietary trading operations. In late July, Democrats acknowledged officially what had been clear for several months—that no major energy bill would make it through the Senate this year, leaving the House of Representatives’ bill, passed the previous June, to expire, with no prospect that the matter will be taken up in the near future.
Many will say at this point that it was always this way. No, it was not. While it’s true that the Senate has been more conservative and even reactionary than now throughout its history, notably with regard to the way it blocked civil rights legislation for many years, the fact is that obstructionism is empirically worse today than ever, or at least since 1917, when the current “cloture” system was first adopted. The idea that the Senate is supposed to behave as it is behaving today is one of several myths (or outright lies) surrounding the “world’s greatest deliberative body.”
Old then New
Paragraph structure often is built with old information first, with a piece of new information added. That new information becomes “old” for the reader, and another new piece is added. This old + new, old + new structure is psychologically satisfying to the reader.
DO NOT: old + old + old
DO NOT: old + irrelevant new + irrelevant new (work on coherency and unity)
DO NOT: “and then, and then, and then” (this is chronological, not “old, then new”
NOTE: This is used in paragraphs, then for papers-as-a-whole as well.
Example
Tomasky, Michael. “The Specter Haunting the Senate.” New York Review of Books, 30
September 2010: 7-11. Print.
The Senate’s version of the financial reform bill squeaked by in May with the backing of four Republicans from blue states. Though it contained some strong provisions, the Senate bill was not nearly as forceful as liberals had hoped on matters like requiring banks to spin off their proprietary trading operations. In late July, Democrats acknowledged officially what had been clear for several months—that no major energy bill would make it through the Senate this year, leaving the House of Representatives’ bill, passed the previous June, to expire, with no prospect that the matter will be taken up in the near future.
[Ask yourself -- what is the main idea/ topic of this paragraph? How is old information used to build to new information?]
Many will say at this point that it was always this way. No, it was not. While it’s true that the Senate has been more conservative and even reactionary than now throughout its history, notably with regard to the way it blocked civil rights legislation for many years, the fact is that obstructionism is empirically worse today than ever, or at least since 1917, when the current “cloture” system was first adopted. The idea that the Senate is supposed to behave as it is behaving today is one of several myths (or outright lies) surrounding the “world’s greatest deliberative body.”
[Ask yourself -- what is the main idea/ topic of this paragraph? How is old information used to build to new information?]
