artbull-structure-and-exposition

Structure & Exposition (artbull-structure-and-exposition)

A long art-historical article (up to 16,000 words including endnotes) succeeds or fails on architecture: the order in which the thesis, the looking, and the evidence reach the reader, and where each figure appears. This skill organizes the piece; the sentence-level craft and citation live in artbull-writing-style-and-citation.

When to trigger

• Outlining the article or reordering a draft that "wanders"
• Deciding where each figure is introduced and discussed
• Cutting to fit ~16,000 words including endnotes
• A reviewer found the structure "hard to follow" or "front-loaded with description"

Structuring the article

1. Open with the problem and thesis. Within the first pages the reader should know the work(s), the question, the stakes, and your claim — not a slow throat-clearing tour.
2. Lead with the argument, not a catalogue. Description serves the thesis; do not stack pages of formal description before the reader knows why it matters.
3. Integrate figures where they are discussed. Introduce each figure at the moment the prose needs it ("Figure 4"); the reader should never hunt for the image a sentence depends on.
4. Sequence the evidence. Build from the strongest looking and documents toward the interpretation; place comparanda where the comparison does its work.
5. Manage the endnotes. Endnotes carry the apparatus and count toward the 16,000-word cap — keep them substantive but disciplined; do not offload the argument into the notes.
6. Close on the stakes. End by showing what the argument changes for the field, not by summarizing what was just said.

Length discipline

• Endnotes count toward the cap — bloated notes are a common overage.
• Each figure must earn its place; if a figure is never discussed, cut it (and its permission cost).
• Move genuinely peripheral material out rather than padding the main text.

Anti-patterns

• A long descriptive overture before any argument
• Figures referenced far from where they are discussed, or never discussed at all
• Burying the contribution in the final paragraph
• The argument hidden in the endnotes
• Going over length because the notes ballooned

Architecture diagnostic for a long art-historical article

A submission to the College Art Association's quarterly is a long-form essay whose figures are woven into the argument.

Structural unit	Working well	Failing	Repair
Opening	Work, question, stakes, and thesis land in the first pages	Slow descriptive tour before any claim	Lead with the problem and the contestable thesis
Figure placement	Each figure introduced exactly where discussed	Figures referenced far from their discussion, or never	Move the reference beside the prose that depends on it
Endnotes	Substantive apparatus, disciplined length	Argument offloaded into notes that balloon over cap	Keep the argument in the text; trim the apparatus

Worked vignette: rescuing a draft that "wanders"

Suppose a draft on a sculpted tomb opens with eight pages describing every figure before the reader learns why it matters, and the central comparison securing the workshop attribution appears only in an endnote. The spine is rebuilt: the opening names the tomb, the question, the stakes, and the thesis within the first pages. The description is redistributed to where it carries the argument; the buried comparison is promoted into the text as a numbered figure beside the attribution discussion, and a digressive excursus on a restoration moves to a compact endnote, so the recast article fits the cap and closes on stakes.

Exposition pushback patterns and the venue-specific fix

• "It is front-loaded with description." Lead with the argument and let description serve it at the moment of need, the way close looking earns its place here.
• "A figure is never discussed." Cut it — an unexamined plate wastes a limited illustration slot and its permission cost.

Calibration anchor (hedge where uncertain)

• The article runs long by humanities standards (commonly up to roughly 16,000 words including endnotes — confirm the cap against the journal's current submission guidelines), so endnote bloat is the usual source of an overage; the figure program is structural, not ornamental.

Output format

【Spine】problem → thesis → looking → evidence → interpretation → stakes
【Figure placement】each figure introduced where discussed? [Y/N]
【Length】est. words incl. endnotes vs ~16,000 cap
【Notes discipline】apparatus in notes, argument in text? [Y/N]
【Cuts】what moves out / is dropped to fit
【Next】artbull-writing-style-and-citation

Supplementary resources

• ../../resources/external_tools.md — manuscript and reference tooling
• ../../resources/official-source-map.md — article length (incl. endnotes) and figure conventions