Conclusions

The purpose of conclusions is neatly to present the ideas of the paper as a whole in a form that readers can use. Very often, this means moving from the very specific analysis of the body of the paragraph to a more general discussion which will remind readers of the larger issues at stake. Summary may be one tool for doing this, but it is not necessary and not always appropriate.

The first priority in a good conclusion is to pull the various strands of argument together. If the whole paper has been one chain of reasoning, this won't take much. However, if the work has had a number of sections, the start of a conclusion will remind readers of how the two sections fit together. This may involve repeating the central point of each section, but the primary purpose of a conclusion is not repetition -- it can be downright insulting to have a conclusion of a short five-page paper repeat points that were just made -- but to package the idea of the paper in the best possible way.

The second priority in a good conclusion is to put the paper's ideas in a larger context. This will encourage readers to use the ideas in their own work; it is also a reminder of what makes the paper interesting by providing motivation for the study. Consider these two conclusions to an imaginary paper comparing the portrayal of Guinevere in Chretien and Malory:

(A) Thus Malory and Chretien imagine Guinevere very differently. In Chretien's Lancelot, the queen's role is primarily as lover. Aside from the very beginning when she is at seen court, she has little public role beyond being gazed upon. Most of her conversations are private, and most of her decisions have to do with love. In Malory, however, she has a much more public role. She often acts as a judge in disputes over chivalry, and she has ties to many knights beside Launcelot. She is no longer the perfect lover, since she can jealous and angry, but she is shown as a woman who wields real political power.
(B) Queens in the middle ages were caught between two very different hierarchies. In terms of gender, they were inferior; in terms of social rank, they were highly superior. They thus had to balance the demands between being a good leader (active and assertive) and being a good woman (more passive and deferential). Chretien's Guinevere, although unquestionable in control of Launcelot, plays more the role of a woman, whose power comes through love rather than social rank. She is the passive subject of kidnap and rescue, and the public world is the world of men. Malory's Guinevere is more of a leader, even though her reputation as a lover suffers when she is less meek than readers expect her to be.

Conclusion A brings together the arguments of the paper, but it doesn't look beyond those issues to the larger discussions going on in the field. Conclusion B also brings together the issues of the paper, but it also shows how those issues connect to larger questions of queenship, social class, gender, and power. It has far more impact -- and since this is the last thing readers read, impact is important.