---
name: jaar-structure-and-exposition
description: Use when organizing a Journal of the American Academy of Religion (JAAR) article so a method-conscious argument unfolds clearly within the ~8,000-12,000-word range (including references and footnotes). Builds the essay's architecture; it does not generate content.
---

# Structure & Exposition (jaar-structure-and-exposition)

A JAAR article is a humanities essay, not an IMRaD report: it has no fixed Methods/Results sections.
Its architecture must carry a thesis-driven argument and make the broad significance visible, all
inside roughly **8,000–12,000 words including references and footnotes**. This skill designs that build.

## When to trigger

- Outlining the article or restructuring a sprawling draft
- The argument is sound but readers get lost in the sections
- Over the length budget and needing to cut without losing the argument
- The introduction or conclusion isn't doing its job

## A structure that works at JAAR

1. **Introduction that frames the field-level problem.** Open with the broad question (the reframing
   from `jaar-topic-selection`), state the thesis early, and signal the method. By the end of the intro a
   non-specialist knows the stakes and the claim.
2. **Situate, then argue.** Position the intervention (briefly — not a survey), then move into the
   analysis. Avoid a long detached "literature review" section; weave scholarship into the argument.
3. **Analytical sections that advance the thesis.** Each section does work; use signposting so the
   reader tracks how evidence and method build toward the claim. Keep the throughline visible.
4. **Conclusion that delivers the payoff.** Return to the field-level stakes: what the argument
   establishes for the study of religion, and what it opens up — not a summary.
5. **Budget the length.** ~8,000–12,000 words counts references and footnotes; reserve footnotes for
   substantive points (citations go in-text — see `jaar-citation-and-style`), and prune block quotations.

## Exposition for two audiences

- Define specialist terms and transliterations on first use so generalists can follow.
- Give just enough context on the tradition/sources for a non-specialist, without lecturing specialists.
- Keep the argument, not the material, in the driver's seat.

## Anti-patterns

- An IMRaD skeleton imposed on a humanities essay
- A detached literature-review section that stalls the argument
- Sections that describe without advancing the thesis
- A conclusion that merely recaps ("In this article I discussed…")
- Footnote sprawl or block-quote bloat that busts the word budget

## Output format

```
【Intro】field-level problem + thesis + method signaled early? [Y/N]
【Positioning】woven in, not a detached survey? [Y/N]
【Sections】each advances the thesis; signposted?
【Conclusion】delivers field-level payoff (not a recap)? [Y/N]
【Length】within ~8,000-12,000 words incl. refs + footnotes?
【Next】jaar-writing-style
```

## Section-by-section job sheet

A JAAR essay has no IMRaD scaffold, so each section earns its place by the work it does for the
argument. The shape below is common at the AAR/Oxford University Press flagship — adapt it; do not
impose it mechanically.

| Section | Its one job | Failure mode |
|---------|-------------|--------------|
| Introduction | Pose the field-level problem; state the thesis; signal method | Case minutiae before any stake |
| Positioning | Locate the intervention briefly | A detached survey |
| Analytical core (2–4 sections) | Each advances the thesis with evidence + method | A section that only describes |
| Methodological reflection | Make the method visible where it produces the reading | Method invisible after the intro |
| Conclusion | Deliver the payoff for the study of religion | "In this article I discussed…" |

## Worked vignette: rescuing a sprawling draft

A 14,000-word draft on "Sacred Geography in Two Andean Pilgrimages" buries its thesis on page nine
behind a standalone literature review. Restructuring against JAAR's norms:

- **Hoist the thesis.** The field-level claim — that the cases pressure the category "sacred space" —
  moves to the first two pages, so a non-specialist meets the stakes immediately.
- **Dissolve the survey.** The detached review is cut to a tight positioning passage; the rest is
  woven into the analytical sections at the point of use.
- **Make each section work.** Two sections that merely narrated the routes are merged and rewritten so
  each advances the recategorization claim, signposted.
- **Hit the budget.** Trimming the survey, pruning block quotations, and converting citation-only
  notes (via `jaar-citation-and-style`) brings the essay under the ceiling — references and footnotes
  count toward the word total.

## Length and shape pushback → the fix

- "I lost the thread by §3" → add section-opening claims that name the move.
- "Over length, notes bloated" → prune notes and block quotes; weave positioning in.

Hedged calibration: the ~8,000–12,000-word range (including references and footnotes) and the absence
of a fixed section template reflect the journal's humanities-essay norm; treat the word ceiling and any
abstract or heading requirements as volatile and confirm them against the journal's current submission
guidelines.

## Supplementary resources

- [`../../resources/official-source-map.md`](../../resources/official-source-map.md) — article length range and structure expectations