•To find simple answers. Research in the basic reference sources answers questions such as these: “What did this word mean in X’s time?” “Who was X?” “Is X real or imaginary?” “When did X write and publish the novel?” Usually this kind of research remains invisible in an essay. Unless the answer becomes a subject for your written analysis, you wouldn’t footnote such research. This is because you use this kind of research to “catch up” with the “common knowledge” of experts.
•To explore ideas (that might lead to a subject for your essay, and ultimately, to an argument.) This is the hardest kind of research to describe. It involves following hunches, poking around, and (intermittently) asking yourself, “does this subject interest me?” General resources such as encyclopedias help here, as do websites. Sometimes good ideas come from using your knowledge in another discipline. Last year, for instance, I received a good essay that applied Freudian ideas about the interpretation of dreams to a novel. The writer was not an expert on Freud ahead of time. She was interested in dreams. Though I will hestitate to “give” you a topic, I can certainly help you find your way as you explore potential ideas. Your working bibliography will include the works you consult in this process, though the “Works Cited” list will be edited to prune out those sources that fall into the background as you fine-tune your topic.
•To find out what other critics write (about your topic). It’s best to use this phase of research once at the very beginning, to see if your topic is so common that you will struggle to find an original way to treat it. Then, if the way seems clear enough, you will seek those most useful critics, incorporate and respond to their thinking, and cite their books and articles.
The best ways to use other critics:
1) As authorities. Authorities provide information (to be delivered in your essay in a brief quotation or paraphrase, with citation) that you couldn’t possible research yourself. The trick here is to find a “good” authority. My student who was interested in dreams needed to read Freud, not a New-Age website. Use these authorities sparingly, so the impression of your original thinking dominates.
2) As pioneers. It’s perfectly o.k. to use an authority to “point the way.” An appropriate use of an authority as pioneer would be to take an argument applied by a critic to one book, and test it out on another. If you end up saying the same thing exactly, discard this approach. Usually you will make your own orginal discoveries. Don’t cover your trail: acknowledge and cite the pioneering critic, and make it clear how your conclusions and interpretations differ. If you must repeat a pioneer’s point, write: “As Gillian Beer argues, . . .” Be sure to identify the critic in your prose, not just buried in a note.
3) As targets. This may be the most fun. If you can find an interpretation with which you vehemently disagree, and can use your essay to demolish this errant critic’s argument, you have a recipe for a very lively essay. Particularly if the critic is not a crackpot, and if you can show by your own research that he or she missed some key information, you can use disagreements with the critic as a jumping-off point for your own interpretation. No cheap shots, though!
4) As participants in an on-going conversation. Professionals want to know what interests other experts, and we want to converse with them through our essays and books. This does not preclude the prior three approaches: it includes them. The very best use of this strategy places your interpretation in a rich context of other crtitics’ voices, with whom you agree and disagree. It is vital not to let these “others” ventriloquize your points and take over your essay. Don’t use other critics to say what you want to write. Differentiate your views from theirs.