In narration the natural order is chronological. To arouse immediate
interest, however, a writer may at times deviate from this order by
beginning with a striking incident and then going back to relate the
events that led up to it. This method of beginning _in medias res_ is a
device well recognized in fiction. In exposition the normal order is to
proceed from the known to the unknown, to dovetail the new facts into
those already familiar to the reader.

When a writer desires by his article to create certain convictions in
the minds of his readers, he should consider the arrangement best
calculated to lead them to form such conclusions. The most telling
effects are produced, not by stating his own conclusions as strongly as
possible, but rather by skillfully inducing his readers to reach those
conclusions by what they regard as their own mental processes. That is,
if readers think that the convictions which they have reached are their
own, and were not forced upon them, their interest in these ideas is
likely to be much deeper and more lasting. It is best, therefore, to
understate conclusions or to omit them entirely. In all such cases the
writer's aim in arranging his material should be to direct his readers'
train of thought so that, after they have finished the last sentence,
they will inevitably form the desired conclusion.

With the main topics arranged in the best possible order, the writer
selects from his available material such details as he needs to amplify
each point. Examples, incidents, statistics, and other particulars he
jots down under each of the chief heads. The arrangement of these
details, in relation both to the central purpose and to each other,
requires some consideration, for each detail must have its logical place
in the series. Having thus ordered his material according to a
systematic plan, he has before him a good working outline to guide him