Ugues Comparative Essay

Throughout your academic career, you'll be asked to write papers in which you compare and contrast two things: two texts, two theories, two historical figures, two scientific processes, and so on. "Classic" compare-and-contrast papers, in which you weight A and B equally, may be about two similar things that have crucial differences (two pesticides with different effects on the environment) or two similar things that have crucial differences, yet turn out to have surprising commonalities (two politicians with vastly different world views who voice unexpectedly similar perspectives on sexual harassment).

In the "lens" (or "keyhole") comparison, in which you weight A less heavily than B, you use A as a lens through which to view B. Just as looking through a pair of glasses changes the way you see an object, using A as a framework for understanding B changes the way you see B. Lens comparisons are useful for illuminating, critiquing, or challenging the stability of a thing that, before the analysis, seemed perfectly understood. Often, lens comparisons take time into account: earlier texts, events, or historical figures may illuminate later ones, and vice versa.

Faced with a daunting list of seemingly unrelated similarities and differences, you may feel confused about how to construct a paper that isn't just a mechanical exercise in which you first state all the features that A and B have in common, and then state all the ways in which A and B are different. Predictably, the thesis of such a paper is usually an assertion that A and B are very similar yet not so similar after all. To write a good compare-and-contrast paper, you must take your raw data—the similarities and differences you've observed—and make them cohere into a meaningful argument. Here are the five elements required.

Frame of Reference. This is the context within which you place the two things you plan to compare and contrast; it is the umbrella under which you have grouped them. The frame of reference may consist of an idea, theme, question, problem, or theory; a group of similar things from which you extract two for special attention; biographical or historical information. The best frames of reference are constructed from specific sources rather than your own thoughts or observations. Thus, in a paper comparing how two writers redefine social norms of masculinity, you would be better off quoting a sociologist on the topic of masculinity than spinning out potentially banal-sounding theories of your own. Most assignments tell you exactly what the frame of reference should be, and most courses supply sources for constructing it. If you encounter an assignment that fails to provide a frame of reference, you must come up with one on your own. A paper without such a context would have no angle on the material, no focus or frame for the writer to propose a meaningful argument.

Grounds for Comparison. Let's say you're writing a paper on global food distribution, and you've chosen to compare apples and oranges. Why these particular fruits? Why not pears and bananas? The rationale behind your choice, the grounds for comparison, lets your reader know why your choice is deliberate and meaningful, not random. For instance, in a paper asking how the "discourse of domesticity" has been used in the abortion debate, the grounds for comparison are obvious; the issue has two conflicting sides, pro-choice and pro-life. In a paper comparing the effects of acid rain on two forest sites, your choice of sites is less obvious. A paper focusing on similarly aged forest stands in Maine and the Catskills will be set up differently from one comparing a new forest stand in the White Mountains with an old forest in the same region. You need to indicate the reasoning behind your choice.

Thesis. The grounds for comparison anticipates the comparative nature of your thesis. As in any argumentative paper, your thesis statement will convey the gist of your argument, which necessarily follows from your frame of reference. But in a compare-and-contrast, the thesis depends on how the two things you've chosen to compare actually relate to one another. Do they extend, corroborate, complicate, contradict, correct, or debate one another? In the most common compare-and-contrast paper—one focusing on differences—you can indicate the precise relationship between A and B by using the word "whereas" in your thesis:

Whereas Camus perceives ideology as secondary to the need to address a specific historical moment of colonialism, Fanon perceives a revolutionary ideology as the impetus to reshape Algeria's history in a direction toward independence.

Whether your paper focuses primarily on difference or similarity, you need to make the relationship between A and B clear in your thesis. This relationship is at the heart of any compare-and-contrast paper.

Organizational Scheme. Your introduction will include your frame of reference, grounds for comparison, and thesis. There are two basic ways to organize the body of your paper.

  • In text-by-text, you discuss all of A, then all of B.
  • In point-by-point, you alternate points about A with comparable points about B.

If you think that B extends A, you'll probably use a text-by-text scheme; if you see A and B engaged in debate, a point-by-point scheme will draw attention to the conflict. Be aware, however, that the point-by- point scheme can come off as a ping-pong game. You can avoid this effect by grouping more than one point together, thereby cutting down on the number of times you alternate from A to B. But no matter which organizational scheme you choose, you need not give equal time to similarities and differences. In fact, your paper will be more interesting if you get to the heart of your argument as quickly as possible. Thus, a paper on two evolutionary theorists' different interpretations of specific archaeological findings might have as few as two or three sentences in the introduction on similarities and at most a paragraph or two to set up the contrast between the theorists' positions. The rest of the paper, whether organized text- by-text or point-by-point, will treat the two theorists' differences.

You can organize a classic compare-and-contrast paper either text-by-text or point-by-point. But in a "lens" comparison, in which you spend significantly less time on A (the lens) than on B (the focal text), you almost always organize text-by-text. That's because A and B are not strictly comparable: A is merely a tool for helping you discover whether or not B's nature is actually what expectations have led you to believe it is.

Linking of A and B. All argumentative papers require you to link each point in the argument back to the thesis. Without such links, your reader will be unable to see how new sections logically and systematically advance your argument. In a compare-and contrast, you also need to make links between A and B in the body of your essay if you want your paper to hold together. To make these links, use transitional expressions of comparison and contrast (similarly, moreover, likewise, on the contrary, conversely, on the other hand) and contrastive vocabulary (in the example below, Southerner/Northerner).

As a girl raised in the faded glory of the Old South, amid mystical tales of magnolias and moonlight, the mother remains part of a dying generation. Surrounded by hard times, racial conflict, and limited opportunities, Julian, on the other hand, feels repelled by the provincial nature of home, and represents a new Southerner, one who sees his native land through a condescending Northerner's eyes.

Copyright 1998, Kerry Walk, for the Writing Center at Harvard University

Edited by Anthea Roberts, Associate Professor, RegNet School of Regulation and Global Governance, Australian National University., Edited by Paul B. Stephan, John C. Jeffries, Jr., Distinguished Professor of Law, and John V. Ray Research Professor, University of Virginia School of Law, Edited by Pierre-Hugues Verdier, Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law, and Edited by Mila Versteeg, Professor of Law, and Director, Human Rights Program, University of Virginia School of Law

Anthea Roberts is Associate Professor at the RegNet School of Regulation and Global Governance, Australian National University, College of Asia and the Pacific. She won ASIL's Frances Déak Prize in 2002 and 2011, and currently serves as a Reporter for the American Law Institute's—Restatement (Fourth) of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States (for jurisdiction). She authored Is International Law International? (Oxford 2017).

Paul B. Stephan is John C. Jeffries, Jr., Distinguished Professor of Law, and John V. Ray Research Professor at the University of Virginia School of Law. He specializes in international business, international dispute resolution, and comparative law, with special focus on Soviet and post-Soviet legal systems. He is presently a coordinating reporter for the American Law Institute's—Restatement (Fourth) of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States.

Pierre-Hugues Verdier is Professor of Law at the University of Virginia School of Law. He specializes in the areas of public international law, banking and financial regulation, and international economic relations. He is currently working on a book-length project focusing on U.S. and foreign prosecutions targeting global banks.

Mila Versteeg is Class of 1941 Research Professor of Law and Director of the Human Rights Program at the University of Virginia School of Law. She specializes in comparative constitutional law, public international law, and empirical legal studies. She also focuses on the origins, evolution, and effectiveness of provisions in the world's constitutions. Her writings have been published in the California Law Review, the New York University Law Review, the University of Chicago Law Review, the American Political Science Review, the American Journal of Political Science, the Journal of Legal Studies, the American Journal of International Law, and the Journal of Law, Economics and Organizations.

Daniel Abebe is Deputy Dean and Harold J. and Marion F. Green Professor of Law at The University of Chicago.

Tomer Broude is Associate Professor, Faculty of Law and Department of International Relations and Sylvan M. Cohen Chair in Law at Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

Congyan Cai is Professor of International Law at Xiamen University (China).

Mathilde Cohen is Professor of Law at the University of Connecticut and Research Fellow at the CNRS.

Kevin L. Cope is a Research Assistant Professor in the School of Law and a faculty affiliate with the Department of Politics at the University of Virginia. He is also a Ph.D. Candidate in Political Science at the University of Michigan.

Ashley S. Deeks is Associate Professor of Law at the University of Virginia.

Shai Dothan is Associate Professor of International and Public Law, University of Copenhagen Faculty of Law; affiliated with iCourts, the Danish National Research Foundation's Centre of Excellence for International Courts.

Mathias Forteau is Professor at the University of Paris Ouest (Nanterre-La Défense) and a former Member of the International Law Commission.

Tom Ginsburg is Leo Spitz Professor of International Law, Ludwig and Hilde Wolf Research Scholar, and Professor of Political Science at The University of Chicago.

Jill I. Goldenziel is Associate Professor of International Law and International Relations at Marine Corps University - Command and Staff College.

Yoram Z. Haftel is Associate Professor of International Relations and the Giancarlo Elia Valori Chair in the Study of Peace & Regional Cooperation at Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

Neha Jain is Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota.

Alec Knight is Development Associate, International Center for Transitional Justice.

Nico Krisch is Professor of International Law, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva; Research Program Coordinator, Institut Barcelona d'Estudis Internacionals, Barcelona.

Katerina Linos is Professor of Law at the University of California, Berkeley.

Lauri Mälksoo is Professor of International Law at the University of Tartu (Estonia).

Makane Moïse Mbengue is Associate Professor of International Law, University of Geneva, Faculty of Law Affiliated Professor, Sciences Po Paris (School of Law).

Christopher McCrudden FBA is Professor of Human Rights and Equality Law, Queen's University Belfast, and William W. Cook Global Professor of Law at the University of Michigan.

Hooman Movassagh is Principal Education Specialist and Visiting Lecturer in International Human Rights Law, University at Albany, SUNY; formerly, Lecturer, Shahid Beheshti University School of Law.

Emilia Justyna Powell is an Associate Professor of Political Science and concurrent Associate Professor of Law at the University of Notre Dame.

Anthea Roberts is Associate Professor at Australian National University.

Alejandro Rodiles is Associate Professor of International Law, ITAM, Mexico City.

Stefanie Schacherer is a Ph.D. Candidate and a Teaching and Research Assistant, University of Geneva, Faculty of Law.

Paul Stephan is John C. Jeffries, Jr., Distinguished Professor of Law and John V. Ray Research Professor of Law at the University of Virginia.

Alexander Thompson is Associate Professor of Political Science at Ohio State University.

Bakhtiyar Tuzmukhamedov is Professor of International Law and a retired Appeals Judge at the United Nations International Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda and for the former Yugoslavia.

Pierre-Hugues Verdier is E. James Kelly, Jr. - Class of 1965 Research Professor of Law at the University of Virginia.

Mila Versteeg is Professor of Law at the University of Virginia.

Masaharu Yanagihara is Professor of International Law at the Open University of Japan.

0 thoughts on “Ugues Comparative Essay

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *