This class aims to help you become a better writer of academic essays. An “academic essay,” which remains the chief mode by which ideas are exchanged in the university and in academia at large, may not be something you have written or even encountered (for one thing, it differs from a General Paper, though we will have to figure out how), and there are also variations within the genre. Our focus is on the argumentative essay that puts forth evidence-based claims. Though it will of course be the purpose of the module to help you understand the following definition, we can for now say that an argumentative essay justifies the need for, and then advances, an original thesis, doing so via the primary analysis of evidence. Put another way, an argumentative essay first convinces its readers (whether rhetorically, or more empirically through a literature review) that there is an interesting problem to be solved, and then goes on to solve it by examining relevant evidence.

The above definition has many implications. For a start, it suggests that the chief purpose of an argumentative essay is not to summarize or paraphrase other people’s ideas (its thesis is “original”). Nor is an argumentative essay that requires “primary analysis of evidence” going to make its claims by only or even mainly using other people’s views as “supporting evidence” (i.e., “I think X because persons A and B have said X”). This, however, does not mean that we can ignore what other scholars have argued. Quite the opposite: after all, you will only have something original to say about a topic if you spend some time reading and thinking about what other writers, with whom you are essentially entering into a dialogue, have already said. Indeed, the writing of a good essay must be prefaced by critically reading texts on the subject; this helps us figure out what are the intriguing and remaining problems in the field, before we try to solve them.

Furthermore, this class does not consider writing as merely a way to represent or communicate the ideas that you formulate in your head. Writing is instead what enables you to come up with (as well as sharpen, refine, modify, etc.) those solutions and arguments. As the overarching module title suggests, we will treat writing as a mode of thinking. In addition, this module will help you acquire some “technical” skills: not so much grammar, but the protocols of academic writing (e.g., citations, formatting, working with sources), as well as methods of conducting research. These are all important skills that should come in useful for the rest of your time at NUS, and ideally beyond.

Writing and thinking is most effective when it is specific. Accordingly, we will read, think, and write about a specific topic: tourism. Even this is a huge subject; to make things manageable, we will further limit our focus. This module will therefore be concerned with the relationship between tourism and notions of authenticity. When tourists visit sites and attractions, or buy souvenirs, they frequently seem perturbed by how “real” these sites and mementos are. This kind of worry also operates at a broader level: tourists may wonder about whether the food they are eating (whether during their travels, or more generally) are “truly representative” of a culture, or whether the culture and heritage they experience are in pure, untainted forms. Even the act of defining “tourism” is often riddled with such anxieties. Why does tourism bring out such anxieties about authenticity? Indeed, why are we generally so concerned with the real and the authentic—not just in tourism, but as an ideal for the self? What, in fact, is the nature of the “authentic”?