Originally posted by: rh71
I personally wrote as much in the present tense as possible.
I don't think it matters much as long as you stay consistent throughout the paper.
<-- B.A. COM (but that really doesn't mean anything
)
I agree with this. There are very few instances where you'll be penalized for using present over past or vice versa. As a general rule, though, if you're writing about a book or something, then use past tense ("Tom Sawyer
was a boy...). If you're responding to a non-fictional opinion piece or something ("...the author
believes that..."), use present tense, if it's appropriate. Obviously, if the author is dead, use past tense.
(Heh, I just scrolled down and saw your post. I have to admit I didn't read it the first time, sorry.)
In your case, I think present tense is definitely in order. If you're arguing a case, it's much more effective, and I personally think it's more correct. I'm sorry I'm not more articulate in explaining things.
But either way, keep it in one tense. Switching around when and where it's not warranted can be really, really grating. But that doesn't mean that you can never change tense... Wow, this is harder to spell out than I expected. Just use your common sense and you should do fine. If things make sense when you read them, then chances are you're doing it right.
Some examples:
"The author, a great lover of animals, believed that dogs are smarter than cats. My own dogs, however, attempt to disprove him on a regular basis."
"This is a view commonly held within the educated circles of existentialism. For example, Claire Gutsburn, former dean of the Caramel University psychology department, writes:"
"In the time following the incident, I staunchly maintained that my hand was forced. I somehow knew, felt within the very threads of my being, that my patient, Mr. Cox, was stealing gum from my receptionist's desk."
Facebook
Twitter