Authoring a PhD

particularly addresses. Later elements (again sentences or para-
graphs) can come down to earth somewhat, feeding into the
framing text (see below) which is specific in indicating what the
chapter is about. However, the requirements to be interesting
and to write with special care pull in different directions here.
Most PhD students write their theses too defensively, and hence
end up with 
safe
but very low-impact starts. Three of the most
popular false starts are:
9 2
◆
A U T H O R I N G A P H D
I
‘In the previous chapter, I argued that 
X
and
Y
and
Z
. [Author may
enlarge on this for several sentences, even a whole paragraph.] But
there are also other issues of 
A
or
B
which will be tackled here …’
II
‘In this chapter, I will discuss [repeat the chapter title at more
length], in particular the issues of 
A
and
B
.’
III
‘The concept of 
A
[a word mentioned in the chapter title] has been
defined by Jones (1989) as “xxx” and by Smith (1998) as “yyy” …’

---

In all these cases the capital letters in italics such as 
A
or
X
stand
for specific concepts or arguments in the thesis. False start I 
is deeply problematic because it makes readers focus not on 
the new chapter, but on its predecessor. This mis-signalling is
almost bound to make them feel that the current chapter 
only repeats or extends in some small way what has gone
before, a very demotivating beginning indeed. In a new chap-
ter, always begin afresh. Never, ever, begin a chapter by looking
back, by trying to make retrospective linkages between chap-
ters. These links must instead always be made prospectively, at
the very end of the conclusions of the previous chapter (see
below). False start II does not actively mis-signal what the 
new chapter is about. But by only elaborating and repeating 
the chapter title it will look boring and low energy for readers.
If key chapter title words are incanted exactly, often many
times in the first few sentences, this start will also seem badly
written. False start III is again very low energy, ploughing off
immediately into definitions, normally quite boring for pro-
fessional readers who will have seen this concept many times
before. By linking these definitions to other authors, of course,
this start also makes your work look derivative and unoriginal
from the outset.
The key ways of getting to a better and genuinely high
impact start vary a lot, depending on your discipline and 
type of thesis. Three common choices are: including quota-
tions; introducing a strong example or other striking piece of
empirical information; and setting out a paradox or intellectual 
puzzle.
Strong, memorable 
quotations
can often be helpful in getting
you over the hurdle of beginning from a blank sheet. In Johanne
Goethe’s words: ‘It is just when ideas are lacking that a phrase is
most welcome’.
7
You can integrate the quote into the opening
sentence of your chapter. Or a whole-sentence quote can be
printed as an epigraph, as at the beginning of chapters and sec-
tions in this book. (An epigraph is like a motto or subtitle,
placed immediately after the title and above the main text.) If
the quote is in the first line or first sentence of your main text
then you will have to immediately discuss the theme or issue it
raises. But if the quote is an epigraph then it implicitly charac-
terizes the whole chapter (or section) and does not have to be
discussed straightaway.
O R G A N I Z I N G A C H A P T E R O R PA P E R
◆
9 3

---

Do not select boring, mundane or anodyne quotes as
epigraphs or opening sentence material, especially from con-
temporary authors working in the same field as you. Useful
starting quotes really need to be something like epigrams (witty
or striking thoughts cogently expressed in a short space), or par-
ticularly thought-provoking or fundamental reflections for your
themes (if you pick a longer quotation). A beginning quote from
a contemporary professional author working in exactly your
field can make your work look derivative. So try not to cite such
people. Instead pick much more general quotes. Classical or
canonical or long-dead authors in your field (who may safely 
be quoted without looking derivative) are a good option. Con-
temporary non-professional authors (novelists, playwrights,
journalists) make a good impression, and in some disciplines
other modern sources (magazines, newspapers, music CDs or TV
programmes like