As a medium, academic books read rather similarly: a problem-description, puzzle, or observation, some historical background, some theory, a few empirical chapters, and a conclusion. Weapons of the Weak is no different. I would say that he back-loads high theory at the end - which was slightly different. The layout provides a backbone a basic rhetorical argument. It progresses from topic to evidence into theory. It’s an interesting rhetorical device, but Scott bookends his work with theory. The opening chapter throws some theory at you just to position it in its place, but the last chapter is 50 pages on Gramsci and hegemony. I actually appreciate the structure; it’s textbook inductive reasoning. He starts with the necessary theory required to understand his exact case, then he outlines his empirics, then he goes into the theoretical implications and its wider application to existing theories.
