The CRUX of the Matter
"Crux" comes from the Latin word for "cross." When used about a text or discourse, it refers to a
point where things come together, an intellectual knot. Analytical writing deals
with cruxes. It seeks to untangle them and explain their strands to the reader. It seeks to re-knot
the strands in such a way that the relationships become clearer to the reader.
You may be familiar with the term "thesis." A crux is a strong thesis. A thesis may be wan or
descriptive and lead to a paper with weak argumentation. To write a good argument, the kind
sought in your courses at Davidson, you need a strong thesis or crux. A crux is a genuine
problem, question, or issue that cannot be resolved simply; it generates an argument, requiring
evidence and analysis.
Here is an example of a weak thesis reformulated into a strong thesis or crux:
Weak
thesis
Strong
thesis
(crux)
“Loy uses diction, tone, and visual effects to mock conventional marital relations.”
(Leads to lists of examples. No one would disagree.)
“Loy implies that conventional marriage ideals are mad, yet her writing, which
disregards the norms of syntax, grammar, and punctuation, seems to be infected
with a madness of its own.”
(Identifies an apparent contradiction that requires explanation,
analysis, and resolution.)
Social scientific w riting differs from much of the writing we do in the Humanities
because it involves the collection of original empirical data (a.k.a., facts) as well as analysis. This
empirical data comes from a huge range of sources, including historical documents, public
opinion surveys, interviews, and experiments. Good researchers pay close attention to the
methods they use to collect and analyze their data. Their goal is to find meaningful patterns in
their data.
Like other types of analytical writing, social scientific writing needs a crux. A descriptive thesis
is weak; a social science crux involves a puzzle or mystery in the data.
Weak
Thesis
Strong
Thesis
(crux)
Strong
Thesis
(crux)
“In this paper I will show that Napoleon’s victories were mostly against weaker
armies.”
“The continental armies were, in most battles, smaller and less well-equipped than
their British and Loyalist opponents, yet they won many of these engagements.
Were their victories the result of superior strategy, a stronger will to fight, better
intelligence or some combination of these factors?”
“The odds of dying in plane crash are miniscule compared to the odds of dying in a
car accident. Yet far more people fear flying than driving. Why does the level of
anxiety not reflect the actual risks of these activities?”
Good cruxes usually come from one of two sources: 1) previous research that raises, but does
not answer, a new question; 2) disagreement with an earlier argument. For example, many
scholars, both Japanese and non-Japanese, have argued that Japanese culture discourages the
use of litigation to settle disputes, and that is why Japan has fewer lawsuits than other
industrialized democracies. In Mirror of Modernity, however, Frank Upham refutes this
argument and provides data to show that it is Japan’s legal institutions, and not its ancient
culture, that makes lawsuits unlikely.
H ow can you tell if you have a crux?
If a question calls for a list, it's probably not a crux (e.g., how does Thoreau think we should
simplify our lives?) You probably don't have a crux if your paragraphs begin with phrases like:
"Thoreau describes…" "He uses two examples…" "He presents…" "Another example is…"
A crux requires you to go back to text, read it carefully, propose an answer, and provide
evidence for the interpretation. Your syntax suggests you have a crux when it makes logical
connections, raises questions, and shows causes, such as:
•
•
•
•
If A is true, then why does Thoreau say B?
If A is the case, then B follows.
A is the case, but is complicated by B.
Thoreau leads us to believe A is true, when in fact B exposes A to be false
A crux should be stated in terms specific to the text, not abstract general terms.
General
Specific
General
Specific
Why does Thoreau denigrate philanthropy?
How can Thoreau reject philanthropy, yet claim that his philosophy is not selfish?
In Summer, Wharton uses natural imagery to portray Charity Royall’s maturation.
Edith Wharton’s Summer frustrates romantic expectations by dooming Charity
Royall’s love affair with a young architect and condemning her to marriage with
an older man who has served as her guardian and father-figure. Yet Wharton’s use
of natural imagery implies that this seemingly perverse mismatch is as natural and
inevitable as the change of seasons.
First Paragraph
Your first paragraph is the occasion for introducing your crux and explaining why it is worthy
of discussion. You should formulate the crux in a succinct sentence (or two). You should also
show what makes it problematic and why its resolution is essential to achieving an
understanding of the work.
• Assume that your reader has read the relevant texts.
• Get straight to the point.
• Do not summarize the work or list all the points of your argument.
• Do not provide encyclopedic background on your topic.
• Do not waste your reader’s time with chatty anecdotes or ponderous generalities
involving terms like “throughout history,” “humankind,” “society,” and “scholars,”
or euphemisms like “unique,” “meaningful,” and “effective.”
• Let the substance of your ideas attract your reader’s interest.