Connect the Dots

   by: Professor Sharon Delmendo       Close Window    Print Page

A common problem in student writing is insufficiently "connecting the dots." That is, you may make a statement about A and a statement about C, but you need to connect the two with a sentence B to explicitly show the relationship between A & C. Also, you need to connect these series of statements with your thesis or larger argument. Often students will say, "but if I said it that clearly, I would be treating you [i.e., the reader] like an idiot." I understand that concern, but don't confuse clarity with condescension. Often the problem underlying a "connect the dots" problem is that you understand what you mean to say, but unless you tell me, don't assume I'll figure it out on my own. You know what you mean because you're inside your own head, but it's your job as writer to make your argument clear to your reader. If you force your reader to guess what you mean, you run a 50% chance that your reader will guess wrong.

Examples of Failure to Connect-the-Dots:

  1. These problems only deal with the implementation of the Racial Licensing Preference Act (RPLA), not the plan itself. When I say this, I mean that there needs to be a political and economic plan to implement the Act. The other side of the argument is that this Act is even right morally. In Bell's book, it is written that it is impossible to enforce laws policing morals.


  2. [Martin Luther] King [Jr.] was known as the great integrationist; this would not have been a good integrationist movement. For the reason that of employed blacks, 75% held menial jobs.


  3. Throughout Malcolm [X]'s autobiography he displays his anger towards the white man. It's obvious that Malcolm would be against the RPLA. Unlike Martin Luther King, Jr., Malcolm was for segregation.


  4. Another reason I think Malcolm X would favor the Act is due to him being a Black nationalist with a very strong bond to the principals it is made up of. "Black nationalism thrives among poor blacks who have lost all hope in white society and its claims about freedom and justice for all" (Cone 54); therefore it's apparent X would be the first in line to activate the RPLA nationwide.


  5. Some people thought that the government determined how white people thought and acted towards black people. There are many advantages of the RPLA. On of the reasons for the RPLA was to stop racial discrimination.


  6. In regards to the RPLA as described by Bell, I am in objection. If such an act existed in today's society there would be no telling where friends would be living. I wouldn't have had to deal with discrimination in the work force, because fellow employees would have had the choice to work in a segregated restaurant.


  7. The Racial Preference License would be very expensive, and the license would have to pay an annual duty of 3% of their gross income. This I do not understand as well. The economic factors make an idea like the RPLA inconceivable. The basic fundamental of economics of making money provides fortuitous disagreement with the Act. Minister Malcolm X agreed with this point.


  8. The fact is, is that we make these laws and we do not enforce them. We allow these unjust acts to take place and we allow innocent human beings to be treated like animals. The RPLA will be enforced. The RPLA uses devices such as "testers" to check and make sure that no person is illegally discriminating.


  9. In the movie, Derek believes illegal immigrants are the reason why "hardworking Americans are falling through the cracks and getting the shaft because the government cares more about the constitutional rights of a bunch of people who aren't even citizens in this country." He is angry that the U.S. government does not care about the lives of white Americans. He says, "We're losing our right to pursue our destiny and freedom so a bunch of foreigners can come and exploit our country." In Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria, Beverly Tatum writes, "Certainly some people are more prejudiced than others, actively embracing and perpetuating negative and hateful images of those who are different from themselves"(6). I believe this quote applies to the scene where Derek and his group assault the Korean store owners. His frustration leads him to take violent action against a minority group. He is out on a mission, and no one can stop him. Derek comments, "This isn't our neighborhood. It's a battlefield. We're on a battlefield tonight. Derek and all of the kids charge into the store and completely tear the place apart. They attack the store employees and record their crime on videotape. I think this is a key scene in American History X because Derek's white rage is the dominating force behind his actions. By attacking the store, Derek expresses his prejudice against non-whites. He blames these people for ruining and destroying the lives of white Americans. Through violence, this is the only way Derek can teach them a lesson and get his point across.
    In the car thief scene, Derek expresses his rage through violence.... His rage is so great that not even his brother can stop him. This gives me the impression that Derek is proud of what he did, and he is not afraid of any consequences that come his way. This scene along shows how much anger and hate Derek has inside him. However, in this case, Derek's extreme rage against blacks cannot be controlled. As a result, he ends up committing murder and spending three years in prison.


  10. [T]he movie Thunderheart focused on the FBI's involvement with the murder of a Sioux Indian. Frank Cottrell mentions "illusions of the past" that the Sioux had to come to terms with. The "illusions of the past" that they had to come ot terms with are the homicide of one of their own, the Battle of Wounded Knee, and the early Indian Wars that had occurred. Cottrell says that the "feels of the Indians because they are a proud people, but a conquered people."


  11. The quote in the beginning of the film "In Whose Honor" states, "It has ever been the way of the white man in his relation to the Indian, first, to sentimentalize him as a monster until he has been killed off and second, to sentimentalize him in retrospect as the noble savage." This quote from the movie describes the writing of Mather all to[o] well when he states,
    that the heathen people amongst whom we live, and whose Land the Lord God of our Fathers hath given to us for a rightfull Possession, have at sundry times been plotting mischievous devices against that part of the English Israel which is seated in these goings down of the Sun, no man that is an Inhabitant of any considerable standing, can be ignorant(Mather 51).

    In this passage Mather is saying that the English were given the possession of the Native American's land by God. Mather looks upon the Native Americans as being barbaric heathens and ignorant. These stereotypes are still given to the Native Americans today.

Examples of Effectively Connecting the Dots:

In passage #1 the student effectively connects the dots as follows:

  1. The Neo-Nazis and Cameron's perception of the larger social problem is that the government is spending way too much money taking care of illegal immigrants and not enough on the hungry, poor Americans (American History X). The scene where this is most evident is in the grocery store scene. They pick this grocery store because it's an example of what they believe is the larger social problem. The Korean man fired all of the American workers and hired immigrants who would work for much cheaper wages. Derek says, "we're losing our right to pursue our destiny and our right to freedom" (American History X). The group as a whole feels that they are beginning to become second behind illegal immigrants in their own country. They feel that something must be done to gain the upper hand again. Of course, they use violence in order to try to get back at the Korean man who took over the store. Derek says, "we're in a battlefield tonight" (American History X). What Derek means is that the men should do whatever they feel is necessary to get their point across. The men ransack the store and beat up all of the employees, in hopes of solving the problems of economical injustice directed towards them. [Note: Passive Voice?]


  2. Society teaches blacks what Martin Seligman calls "learned helplessness." Learned helplessness is defined as the passive behavior produced by exposure to unavoidable aversive events (Themes & Variations, 529). Blacks know that as much as they can fight societal ways, that they will never be able to change any of them. An example of learned helplessness was used in the essay Killing Rage. In the essay [a] young black woman on a plane had the same ticket as an older white male. He makes a fuss about her being in her seat. She has learned that no matter what she says she will not be able to change anything; that is why she gives up her seat to him. Her learned helplessness was a defense mechanism that she was most likely taught at a young age. She gave up her seat easily because unconsciously she was protecting herself from emotions like anxiety. She was using the defense mechanism to suppress the feelings of anger also. The woman suppressing her anger also kept her from acting out in aggressive ways. Society certainly does not condone blacks to act out on their rage; that's why the young woman had to revert to her learned helplessness. [Note: Passive Voice & Title Format]


  3. The Nazi's make many efforts to try to purify their community. One example being [is] when Derek gives the speech to a group of people that he is about to lead on a rampage through a Korean-owned grocery store. He tells the group that the Koreans should not be in their town making profit from them. He says that they are all just illegal immigrants who should go back to where they came from. This leads to the store being turned upside down and many of the workers being abused. This is one of the stereotypes that are put on people. Just because there might be some illegal immigrants from a particular race, it does not mean that everyone from that race is too. This leads to the question: does this sort of thing make a difference? If one non-white store is broken into, will all of them close? I think that it does not make a difference. There are more than a million non-white owned stores in this country, and just because one store is broken into, every store is not going to close. Even the store that was broken into will probably reopen when it gets cleaned up. That is why I do not believe scapegoating works. Unless Derek and his group go to every single store in the country and ruin them, then they are not solving any problem at all. Instead they are just adding more violence to their community. [Note: Apostrophe & Passive Voice]

Examples of Adding Analysis:

  1. The scapegoating phenomenon is not the best way to solve the bigger problem. It actually tends to make it worse. In the examples from American History X we can see by putting the blame on others, there is an increase in overall violence. It just keeps going around in circles. As seen in the movie[,] the killing and hate ended up ruining Derek's family. His father's death was a result of a violent society, but Danny's death was a direct result of his own hate. The only way to end the killing is to stop the hate and begin to get along.


  2. [Derek and the other whites] were aware of the White privilege they should be receiving. The privilege was evident when Derrick went to jail. The Black man he worked with was doing more time for a robbery/assault than he was doing for the murder of three men. That is not right.


  3. "I had been raised to turn the other cheek" (Hooks 15). Blacks are taught that the White man runs America and they need to keep their fears and anger inside, while Whites are taught that it is okay to express how they feel. For example, Daniel expressed his feelings in his report about Hitler and his book Mein Kampfe. He felt he was merely expressing the way he felt. He did not feel he had to keep his feelings inside.

Top of Page