Selecting Relevant and Sufficient Evidence: Study Guide (English Literature 7.8)

Evidence is chosen, not found

Every story offers more details than an essay can use. Choosing is part of the argument: the quotations and details you select tell the reader what you think matters, and the ones you leave out may be the ones that would complicate your case. The course says writers use evidence strategically and purposefully to illustrate, clarify, exemplify, associate, amplify or qualify a point, and that evidence is effective when commentary explains its relationship to the claim, and sufficient when its quantity and quality provide apt support for the line of reasoning.

Topic 6.7 introduced those jobs. This topic concentrates on selection: how to decide which details to use, and how to know when you have used enough.

The evidence audit

An audit is a short table you fill in before writing. For each candidate detail ask five questions.

Question	What to ask	Why it matters
1. Relevant?	Does it bear directly on the claim, or only on the topic?	Interesting but irrelevant evidence distracts
2. What job does it do?	Illustrate, clarify, exemplify, associate, amplify or qualify?	A piece with no job is decoration
3. Where is it?	Beginning, turning point, ending?	Evidence from several points shows a pattern
4. Does it complicate?	Does it conflict with the claim in any way?	Honest handling of counter-evidence makes the argument stronger
5. Does the set cover the claim?	Is every part of the claim supported?	Sufficiency depends on coverage, not count

Quality as well as quantity

Sufficient evidence is a matter of quality and quantity.

• Quality: specific words and details that carry the meaning, not plot summary; short, embedded quotations; details that can bear a close reading.
• Quantity: enough pieces to support the claim, which for a claim about a pattern means evidence from more than one place in the text.
• Balance: one broad claim supported by a single detail is thin; many details supporting a narrow claim are repetitive.

The recursive loop

Developing an interpretation is recursive. You may start with a claim and look for evidence, or start with evidence and form a claim. In both cases, you go back and forth: if the evidence does not support the claim, revise the claim; if the claim opens new questions, look for new evidence.

Public-domain example: Poe’s Montresor

The Cask of Amontillado (Edgar Allan Poe, 1846). The narrator, Montresor, tells how he took revenge on Fortunato. Here are details that a writer arguing about his reliability could consider:

• “The thousand injuries of Fortunato I had borne as I best could; but when he ventured upon insult, I vowed revenge.”
• “It must be understood, that neither by word nor deed had I given Fortunato cause to doubt my good will.”
• “I continued, as was my wont, to smile in his face, and he did not perceive that my smile now was at the thought of his immolation.”
• “My heart grew sick—on account of the dampness of the catacombs.”

Worked example 1: auditing evidence for a claim

Claim. “Montresor presents his revenge as justified, but the omissions in his account and the pleasure he takes in the deed undermine his reliability.”

This claim has three parts: (1) he presents revenge as justified, (2) his account omits key information, (3) his own language reveals pleasure that conflicts with the justification.

Candidate evidence and audit.

Detail	Relevant?	Job	Position	Complicates?
(a) “The thousand injuries of Fortunato I had borne …”	Yes: part 1 and part 2	Illustrates the claim of justification; exemplifies the omission, since the injuries are never named	Opening	No
(b) “neither by word nor deed had I given Fortunato cause to doubt my good will”	Partly	Associates deception with his self-image; shows he deceived Fortunato on purpose	Early	May suggest he is honest about being deceptive, which complicates “unreliable”
(c) “I continued, as was my wont, to smile in his face … at the thought of his immolation.”	Yes: part 3	Amplifies: pleasure and cruelty in the act	Middle	No
(d) Fortunato’s jester costume	Weakly	Illustrates irony, but not reliability	Middle	No
(e) “My heart grew sick—on account of the dampness of the catacombs”	Yes: part 3	Qualifies: he excuses a feeling that might be conscience	Ending	Slightly: it shows some feeling

Coverage. (a) covers parts 1 and 2 at the beginning; (c) covers part 3 in the middle; (e) covers part 3 again at the ending and shows a pattern across the story. (d) is relevant to another argument but not to this claim, so leave it out. (b) can be used to qualify: Montresor admits to deceit, so he is candid about the mechanism of his revenge, but this makes his silence about the injuries more striking.

Sufficiency. A response that used only (a) would support part 1 and part 2 but not part 3, and so would be insufficient. Using (a), (c) and (e) covers all three parts, from three positions in the story.

A model body sentence. “Montresor’s refusal to name Fortunato’s ‘thousand injuries’ leaves his justification unsupported, and the gap between his claim of punishment and his smile ‘at the thought of his immolation’ suggests that what he calls justice is pleasure.”

Worked example 2: revising a claim when the evidence pushes back

Original passage written by Marlbridge for practice.

Mr Pike’s scales were known in three parishes. Widow Lamb, who bought a quarter of tea each Saturday and paid in coppers, always found the pan tipped a little in her favour, and Pike would wave away her thanks as if the tea had weighed itself. On the first Monday of each month Sir Anthony’s steward came, and bought forty pounds of sugar for the Hall, and on those mornings Pike’s thumb, which was a broad one, rested on the sugar-pan a moment longer than a thumb needs to.

First claim. “Mr Pike is an honest trader.”

Evidence collected.

1. The pan is “tipped a little in her favour” for Widow Lamb.
2. Pike “would wave away her thanks”.
3. His thumb “rested on the sugar-pan a moment longer than a thumb needs to” for the steward.

Audit. Items 1 and 2 might seem to support “honest”. But a pan “tipped in her favour” is generous, not exact: it is a departure from accurate weight, so it does not show honesty. Item 3 contradicts the claim. A thumb resting on the sugar-pan makes the sugar appear heavier, so the buyer pays for more than he receives.

Revision. The claim cannot survive the evidence. A better claim: “Pike’s scales serve not honesty but loyalty: he gives to the poor what he takes from the powerful, and the narrator’s mild tone invites the reader to be amused by a trader whose fairness is selective and, in its way, moral.”

Why this is better. It accounts for every piece of evidence (generosity to the widow, the thumb on the steward’s sugar, the waved-away thanks) and it makes a more interesting claim about the narrator’s attitude.

Lesson. Interpretation is recursive. The evidence did not simply support the first claim; it changed it. A writer who ignored the thumb would have kept the simple claim but lost the argument.

A model body sentence. “By letting the pan tip for the widow and the thumb press for the steward, the narrator presents Pike’s fairness as selective: a private justice that redistributes rather than weighs.”

Stems for introducing evidence

How you lead into a quotation shows what you want it to do. Compare these stems.

Job	Stem	Example
Illustrate	“The narrator shows … when …”	The narrator shows his composure when he “said that it was very healthy”.
Exemplify	“One example is …”	One example is her repeated deflection, “a dull note from the agent”.
Amplify	“This is intensified when …”	This is intensified when she holds the letter to the lamp.
Qualify	“Yet …” or “Although …”	Yet the “low voice” suggests that the cheer is partly private encouragement.

Choosing the stem is a small way of making sure that you know what each piece of evidence is doing.

Common misconceptions

• “More quotations means better evidence.” What matters is relevance, fit and explanation.
• “If evidence disagrees with my claim, I should skip it.” Counter-evidence is an opportunity to refine the claim or to show nuance.
• “One strong quotation is enough for any claim.” A claim about a pattern needs evidence from more than one place.
• “Plot summary counts as evidence.” Summary supplies context. Analysis needs specific words and details.
• “Evidence does the job by itself.” Commentary must explain how it supports the claim.

Where this leads

This topic completes Unit 7. Check the whole unit with the Unit 7 diagnostic and then the Unit 7 review. Test this topic with the Topic 7.8 practice questions, review with the revision notes and track your progress with the checklist.