A Good Paper Starts With A Good Thesis
click
here for a printed copy

A good thesis is:

Generalizations:

"Since the beginning of time, man has wrestled with the great questions of the universe. Humans have always sought to understand their place in creation. There is no society on earth that has not attempted to reckon with the human condition."

Generalizations like this are sure to sink your writing.

For starters, how do you know what has happened since the beginning of time?  Do you know what the great questions of the universe have been since the beginning of time?  Do you know how all humans, since the beginning of time, have tried to understand their place in creation?  Do you know about all societies on earth to make the claim that they all have tried to reckon with the human condition?  And just what is the human condition?

Good Theses:

Showing that a book claims to do one thing while actually doing another -- that's English-paper gold, because such theses are almost always specific and controversial. For example:

Note that I said the speaker, not the poet: avoid making claims about real-life authors, whose opinions you may or may not be able to guess from their work. Never assume any writing is autobiographical.
 

Another thing that makes English professors jump for joy: close attention to language. Do not be content with plot summary, especially since I have already read the literature you are writing about and do not need to have the plot summarized for me.  Look instead at the exact words the author uses, and try to base your argument on them. Some good models:

Try to pay attention to things like verb tense (past, present) and voice (active, passive), diction (the choice of words), words that are repeated or pointedly avoided, word order, etc.

Bad Theses:

"Fate versus free will in Macbeth."

This one isn't even a thesis -- it's still a topic. Remember, a thesis should say something specific, and it should be a full sentence (with a verb) not a sentence fragment.

"Money is important in Moll Flanders's life."

This one fails for two reasons. First, although it is a sentence and has a verb, it does not say much -- just some vague indication that a topic (money) is worth attention.  This thesis is also weak because it is not controversial -- who in his or her right mind would argue with it? Moll is obsessed with money, and it is obvious to anyone who opens the book. You have to say something that is not obvious.

"In Oliver Twist, Charles Dickens presents a realistic picture of social interaction in Victorian London."

How do you know? -- what makes you think Victorian London was really like what Dickens describes? Be careful of circular reasoning: it appears in a book, so it must have been part of real life; therefore I can discuss how the book is like real life. Unless you have done research on actual social conditions in the nineteenth century, do not presume to talk about the world outside the book. All your attention should be on interpreting the text itself, without regard to things you do not (and sometimes cannot) know.

"Hamlet is an enduring testimony to the genius of William Shakespeare."

Good English papers are analytical, not evaluative -- your thesis should never be that a work is good or bad. (Again, that is the business of book reviewers.) Take it for granted that Hamlet deserves two thumbs up: there is no need for you to say it, and certainly no reason to make it the center of your argument.

"In its departure from the familiar metrical forms of its day, Whitman's Leaves of Grass is ahead of its time."

A good thesis should at least nod in the direction of historicism. Evaluating old works by modern standards does them no justice.

Work Toward Turning Bad Theses into Good Ones:

Here is a way to turn some bad theses into good ones, albeit, they are still far from perfect.

"Fate versus free will in Macbeth."

There is not much we can do with this, since there is no argument of any sort. To make it worthwhile, we need to say something specific. Here is a possibility: "Lady Macbeth works to manipulate her husband into believing in the possibility of free will, but Shakespeare puts them in a world controlled by fate."  A better thesis might be produced by trying to answer the question, "Why does Lady Macbeth want her husband to believe in the possibility of free will?  What does he believe in now?  Will believing in free will threaten his present worldview?"

"Money is important in Moll Flanders's life."

Like the previous example, this one does not say anything specific. But try this: "As her use of language shows, Moll Flanders imagines every aspect of life, including love and family life, in economic terms."  A bit better, but still boring.  It leaves me asking, "So what?  Who cares if Moll Flanders imagines everything in economic terms?"  The thesis is better than the first example, but try making it better by asking yourself the "so what?" question.

"In Oliver Twist, Charles Dickens presents a realistic picture of social interaction in Victorian London."

Unless you are prepared to do research to back it up, steer clear of things that depend on facts outside the books you are reading. But you can discuss the ways the author describes his world. Something like this might work: "Dickens's attention to circumstantial detail makes the squalor of Oliver Twist seem much more convincing."  Still, this thesis does not make for a very exciting paper.  Why should we care if the squalor depicted is more convincing? More convincing than what? Who cares?  So what?  This idea needs a little more work to make a stronger argument or claim.

"Hamlet is an enduring testimony to the genius of William Shakespeare."

Nothing you can do with this, because it is not the sort of thing a college English paper should do. Toss it out and start over.

"In its departure from the familiar metrical forms of its day, Whitman's Leaves of Grass is ahead of its time."

The problem is "ahead of its time," which evaluates Whitman by standards that came after him. You can, however, evaluate him by standards that came before him: "Whitman's content appears more experimental, even radical, because his form is also revolutionary; the form and content work together to challenge conventional wisdom."  This revision is the best example of working toward making a strong thesis.  The way to make it even stronger would be to carry out the final idea a bit more.  "......to challenge conventional wisdom, which stated that......."  What was the conventional wisdom that Whitman's work challenged?

Other websites to help you formulate your thesis: