As according to my current deadline I began writing my first section of the dissertation for reasons as stated in the last deadline post. I am currently 991 words in and am unhappy with the result, this is because I feel there is a distinct lack of a clear line of argument - to me it reads more like a biography than any real argument. I have therefore decided to take, the admittedly difficult decision, in rewriting - and therefore to an extent replanning - this section on Alexander's military success. My very vague argument is that Alexander was never defeated and I have many other mini - not linked - points such as tactics however they are dealt with more chronologically and I believe a more thematic approach in paragraphs may help solve this issue.
I have therefore decided to take the time and really nail down my argument elements for this paragraph before going back and editing it.
1. Alexander was never defeated by the enemy
2. The counter argument will be Philip's influence and the nature of the enemy he faced
Now around these points I have decided to fit the examples - rather than dealing with them chronologically.
Although it is annoying I am glad that this error has been realised by me now as I have only planned two sections in detail so this error is easy to rectify now rather than if it had occurred while I was writing all of the dissertation with a fast approaching deadline! As I have also written a good chunk already a lot of it will just be condensing and rearranging which means it won't be a complete rewrite.
I am now better informed for my future planning and writing - I must remember to think of a clear line of argument and apply it throughout my work.
This is my new outline plan which I'll combine with my original detailed plan and shape my new section using these:
I have therefore decided to take the time and really nail down my argument elements for this paragraph before going back and editing it.
1. Alexander was never defeated by the enemy
- A subtopic in this would be how he always led at the front and his psychological prowess/tactical warfare
2. The counter argument will be Philip's influence and the nature of the enemy he faced
Now around these points I have decided to fit the examples - rather than dealing with them chronologically.
Although it is annoying I am glad that this error has been realised by me now as I have only planned two sections in detail so this error is easy to rectify now rather than if it had occurred while I was writing all of the dissertation with a fast approaching deadline! As I have also written a good chunk already a lot of it will just be condensing and rearranging which means it won't be a complete rewrite.
I am now better informed for my future planning and writing - I must remember to think of a clear line of argument and apply it throughout my work.
This is my new outline plan which I'll combine with my original detailed plan and shape my new section using these: