talk to your professor. if you meet with them most will practically write your paper for you.

>>7812399
Got about 3 days to write it
Of course I've left it to the last minute.

I've got most of it planned it's just how to structure it, first time writing an essay of this size.
And you're right, they more or less do

discuss it in relation to carl schmitt's theory of the exception

>>7812410

they already know you write the papers the night before, it's not a big deal

>>7812411
>>7812410
more seriously since you're actually down to the wire

depending on the context of the class the professor may expect you to be familiar more with modern conceptual and philosophical issues surrounding the idea of revolution

there are a lot of those, and especially if he's bringing in arendt, i am assuming it's not a straight history class about 18th century america

i would use whatever resources you have (class notes, textbook, arendt footnotes/intro) to try to find an overview of the scholarly discussion with which the professor is likely hoping you're acquainted. too literal an interpretation of the prompt might get an automatic B. especially if it's a case of skipping the two hour lecture where he rambled nonstop about three authors on what constitutes a revolution, how that relates to post-1789/1776 history, what its ethical and political implications are, etc.

if you didn't have three days to write 20 pages i'd tell you to take a look at benedict anderson's imagined communities talking about the south american revolutions for extra points but it's probably too minor to waste your remaining time on

hopefully i'm way off base but just throwing some potential warnings out there

>>7812378
http://www.thegreatcourses.com/courses/american-revolution.html

Pirate this course. Also there is plenty of Gordon Wood in Libgen

>>7812428
Fuck I mean this one

http://www.thegreatcourses.com/courses/americas-in-the-revolutionary-era.html

He sets the American Revolution as the impetus for the overthrow of the spanish colonial empire.

>>7812422
also if the professor has like postcolonial leanings or black skin and you skipped the relevant lecture(s), you might want to be on the lookout for "NO IT WASN'T A REVOLUTION BECAUSE WOMEN AND NIGGERS WERE STILL DISENFRANCHISED!!"

>>7812418
My uni is shit with office hours and his are all booked up.
I was just so confident I did all my planning and reading with the question in my head (how revolutionary was the American Revolution?) that when I looked at the question again, I realised I've been going at this essay with probably the wrong approach
.>>7812434
I actually went to the lecture on the essay, and he explicitly argued how it isn't a revolution, for yep exactly those reasons. This is a Politics course, and his is a module on state theory and revolutions
>>7812433
Cheers lad

>>7812422
Yeah I really do think this is more about the concepts of revolution, I don't know if you're familiar with Neil Davidson but he was the other scholar mentioned in the question.
Thanks for your advice though, I guess the question isn't much different to how I imagined initially, so I'm gonna talk about the social and political impacts of the revolution, maybe compare with the Russian, or probably more relevant the French, if I have time.

>>7812447
if your university has access to oxford bibliographies online, i fucking guarantee there will be one on the american rev, and of course on 18th century america (or something similar), and maybe on revolutions in general

they will a) have an intro blurb summarising the background of scholarly discourse, and b) recommend other survey texts that will have similar things

it might be worth blazing through that shit for like half an hour just so you can namedrop a few authors and major arguments or schools of thought

if it's an ":/ wow women couldnt even vote lol all MEN created equal" meme academic you may want to toe even closer to the party line for the A+

good grades in classes and on papers like these are hugely dependent on familiarity with the relevant literature. you get enormous points for having a capacious view of the subject under discussion, even if your central thesis is meh or just reformulates something. one shitty book whose intro fortuitously summarises the whole topic you're talking about and gives background on all its major intellectual developments can take you from a B to an A+ by making you look like you did waaay deeper reading than you did

also worth skim
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/scientific-revolutions/#ProRevInnCha

>>7812466
You've gone above and beyond anon. Thank you. By Oxford bibliographies what are you referring to exactly? Just books published by Oxford in general?

I do have a bit more faith in the professor though, and will argue as I see fit, perhaps I am being a bit naive

>>7812493
oxford bibliographies is this thing where they ask established scholars in a field or on a topic to write a bibliography for that topic, and it has an online version. it's incredibly handy for research essays.

http://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/
and pic related is an example of some entries, though far more helpful is usually the article or section header descriptions, for giving you detailed overviews of the topic and its subdivisions.

but you need to pay for access. your university might have access - mine does but it's a pretty big uni. here's how i access mine:
http://search.library.utoronto.ca/details?8997182

you can see that it's a web resource, so i have to connect with my student ID. but it is listed in the catalog and on the university's list of subscribed databases.

people on /lit/ periodically dump copypasted versions of various listings. i can't do it from this computer though.

o

>>7812652
Does someone have a login for unfettered access to Oxford Bibliographies that they should share with us.