Examples of Book Reviews With Plot Details Throughout Background About the Author and Themes

What this handout is about

This handout will help yous write a book review, a written report or essay that offers a disquisitional perspective on a text. Information technology offers a process and suggests some strategies for writing volume reviews.

What is a review?

A review is a disquisitional evaluation of a text, event, object, or phenomenon. Reviews can consider books, articles, unabridged genres or fields of literature, compages, fine art, way, restaurants, policies, exhibitions, performances, and many other forms. This handout volition focus on book reviews. For a similar consignment, meet our handout on literature reviews.

Above all, a review makes an statement. The most important element of a review is that information technology is a commentary, not merely a summary. It allows yous to enter into dialogue and give-and-take with the piece of work'due south creator and with other audiences. You can offer agreement or disagreement and identify where you observe the work exemplary or deficient in its noesis, judgments, or system. You should clearly state your stance of the work in question, and that statement will probably resemble other types of academic writing, with a thesis argument, supporting body paragraphs, and a conclusion.

Typically, reviews are brief. In newspapers and academic journals, they rarely exceed m words, although you may encounter lengthier assignments and extended commentaries. In either case, reviews demand to be succinct. While they vary in tone, field of study, and style, they share some common features:

• First, a review gives the reader a concise summary of the content. This includes a relevant clarification of the topic also as its overall perspective, argument, or purpose.
• Second, and more chiefly, a review offers a critical assessment of the content. This involves your reactions to the work nether review: what strikes yous every bit noteworthy, whether or not information technology was effective or persuasive, and how it enhanced your agreement of the issues at hand.
• Finally, in addition to analyzing the piece of work, a review ofttimes suggests whether or non the audience would appreciate it.

Becoming an expert reviewer: three short examples

Reviewing tin can exist a daunting task. Someone has asked for your stance about something that yous may experience unqualified to evaluate. Who are you lot to criticize Toni Morrison's new book if yous've never written a novel yourself, much less won a Nobel Prize? The indicate is that someone—a professor, a journal editor, peers in a written report group—wants to know what you think about a particular work. You may not be (or experience like) an expert, simply you need to pretend to be one for your item audience. Nobody expects you to be the intellectual equal of the piece of work's creator, but your conscientious observations tin can provide you with the raw material to make reasoned judgments. Tactfully voicing agreement and disagreement, praise and criticism, is a valuable, challenging skill, and like many forms of writing, reviews require y'all to provide physical evidence for your assertions.

Consider the following brief book review written for a history course on medieval Europe by a student who is fascinated with beer:

Judith Bennett's Ale, Beer, and Brewsters in England: Women's Work in a Changing World, 1300-1600, investigates how women used to brew and sell the bulk of ale boozer in England. Historically, ale and beer (non milk, wine, or water) were important elements of the English nutrition. Ale brewing was low-skill and depression status labor that was gratis to women'south domestic responsibilities. In the early fifteenth century, brewers began to make ale with hops, and they called this new drink "beer." This technique allowed brewers to produce their beverages at a lower cost and to sell it more easily, although women more often than not stopped brewing in one case the business organization became more profitable.

The student describes the subject field of the book and provides an accurate summary of its contents. But the reader does not larn some primal information expected from a review: the author's argument, the student'due south appraisal of the volume and its argument, and whether or not the student would recommend the book. As a critical assessment, a volume review should focus on opinions, not facts and details. Summary should be kept to a minimum, and specific details should serve to illustrate arguments.

Now consider a review of the aforementioned volume written by a slightly more opinionated student:

Judith Bennett'due south Ale, Beer, and Brewsters in England: Women's Work in a Changing Earth, 1300-1600 was a colossal disappointment. I wanted to know almost the rituals surrounding drinking in medieval England: the songs, the games, the parties. Bennett provided none of that data. I liked how the book showed ale and beer brewing as an economic action, simply the reader gets lost in the details of prices and wages. I was more interested in the private lives of the women brewsters. The book was divided into viii long chapters, and I can't imagine why anyone would e'er desire to read information technology.

There'due south no shortage of judgments in this review! Only the educatee does not display a working cognition of the book's argument. The reader has a sense of what the student expected of the book, just no sense of what the writer herself ready out to prove. Although the student gives several reasons for the negative review, those examples do not clearly chronicle to each other as part of an overall evaluation—in other words, in support of a specific thesis. This review is indeed an assessment, but not a critical one.

Here is one concluding review of the same book:

One of feminism's paradoxes—one that challenges many of its optimistic histories—is how patriarchy remains persistent over time. While Judith Bennett's Ale, Beer, and Brewsters in England: Women's Work in a Changing World, 1300-1600 recognizes medieval women every bit historical actors through their ale brewing, it also shows that female agency had its limits with the advent of beer. I had assumed that those limits were religious and political, simply Bennett shows how a "patriarchal equilibrium" shut women out of economic life likewise. Her analysis of women's wages in ale and beer product proves that a change in women'south work does non equate to a modify in working women's status. Gimmicky feminists and historians akin should read Bennett'due south volume and think twice when they fissure open their next brewsky.

This student's review avoids the bug of the previous two examples. It combines balanced stance and concrete example, a critical assessment based on an explicitly stated rationale, and a recommendation to a potential audience. The reader gets a sense of what the book's author intended to demonstrate. Moreover, the student refers to an statement about feminist history in full general that places the book in a specific genre and that reaches out to a full general audience. The example of analyzing wages illustrates an argument, the assay engages significant intellectual debates, and the reasons for the overall positive review are plain visible. The review offers criteria, opinions, and back up with which the reader tin concur or disagree.

Developing an cess: before you lot write

There is no definitive method to writing a review, although some critical thinking nigh the piece of work at hand is necessary earlier you lot actually begin writing. Thus, writing a review is a two-step process: developing an argument about the piece of work under consideration, and making that statement every bit you write an organized and well-supported draft. Run into our handout on argument.

What follows is a series of questions to focus your thinking as you dig into the work at mitt. While the questions specifically consider book reviews, you tin can easily transpose them to an assay of performances, exhibitions, and other review subjects. Don't experience obligated to address each of the questions; some volition be more than relevant than others to the book in question.

• What is the thesis—or main argument—of the book? If the author wanted yous to get one idea from the book, what would it be? How does it compare or contrast to the world you know? What has the book accomplished?
• What exactly is the subject or topic of the volume? Does the author comprehend the subject adequately? Does the author cover all aspects of the subject in a balanced manner? What is the approach to the field of study (topical, analytical, chronological, descriptive)?
• How does the writer support her statement? What bear witness does she use to prove her point? Do you find that bear witness convincing? Why or why non? Does any of the writer's information (or conclusions) conflict with other books you've read, courses you've taken or just previous assumptions you had of the field of study?
• How does the writer construction her argument? What are the parts that make up the whole? Does the argument make sense? Does information technology persuade you? Why or why not?
• How has this book helped you understand the bailiwick? Would y'all recommend the volume to your reader?

Beyond the internal workings of the volume, you may also consider some information virtually the writer and the circumstances of the text'southward production:

• Who is the author? Nationality, political persuasion, training, intellectual interests, personal history, and historical context may provide crucial details nearly how a piece of work takes shape. Does it matter, for instance, that the biographer was the subject's best friend? What difference would it make if the author participated in the events she writes near?
• What is the volume's genre? Out of what field does it sally? Does it suit to or depart from the conventions of its genre? These questions can provide a historical or literary standard on which to base of operations your evaluations. If you are reviewing the first volume always written on the subject, information technology will be important for your readers to know. Keep in mind, though, that naming "firsts"—alongside naming "bests" and "onlys"—can be a risky business organization unless you're absolutely certain.

Writing the review

Once you lot have made your observations and assessments of the work nether review, carefully survey your notes and try to unify your impressions into a statement that will draw the purpose or thesis of your review. Cheque out our handout on thesis statements. And so, outline the arguments that support your thesis.

Your arguments should develop the thesis in a logical manner. That logic, unlike more standard academic writing, may initially emphasize the author's statement while you develop your own in the course of the review. The relative emphasis depends on the nature of the review: if readers may be more interested in the work itself, you may want to make the work and the author more prominent; if yous want the review to be almost your perspective and opinions, then yous may structure the review to privilege your observations over (but never separate from) those of the work under review. What follows is just i of many ways to organize a review.

Introduction

Since most reviews are brief, many writers brainstorm with a catchy quip or anecdote that succinctly delivers their argument. Merely yous can innovate your review differently depending on the argument and audition. The Writing Center'southward handout on introductions tin can help y'all notice an arroyo that works. In general, you should include:

• The proper noun of the author and the book championship and the main theme.
• Relevant details nigh who the author is and where he/she stands in the genre or field of inquiry. You could also link the title to the bailiwick to show how the title explains the subject matter.
• The context of the book and/or your review. Placing your review in a framework that makes sense to your audition alerts readers to your "take" on the book. Perhaps you want to situate a volume most the Cuban revolution in the context of Common cold War rivalries between the United States and the Soviet Union. Another reviewer might want to consider the book in the framework of Latin American social movements. Your option of context informs your argument.
• The thesis of the volume. If you are reviewing fiction, this may be difficult since novels, plays, and brusk stories rarely have explicit arguments. But identifying the volume'southward detail novelty, bending, or originality allows you to bear witness what specific contribution the piece is trying to make.
• Your thesis about the volume.

Summary of content

This should exist brief, every bit analysis takes priority. In the course of making your assessment, yous'll hopefully be backing up your assertions with concrete prove from the volume, so some summary will exist dispersed throughout other parts of the review.

The necessary amount of summary also depends on your audience. Graduate students, beware! If you are writing book reviews for colleagues—to set up for comprehensive exams, for instance—y'all may want to devote more attention to summarizing the book'due south contents. If, on the other hand, your audience has already read the volume—such every bit a class assignment on the aforementioned work—you may accept more than liberty to explore more subtle points and to emphasize your own argument. Encounter our handout on summary for more tips.

Analysis and evaluation of the book

Your analysis and evaluation should be organized into paragraphs that deal with single aspects of your argument. This system can exist challenging when your purpose is to consider the book as a whole, but it tin can assistance you differentiate elements of your criticism and pair assertions with bear witness more than clearly. Yous practice not necessarily need to work chronologically through the book equally y'all discuss it. Given the statement you want to make, yous can organize your paragraphs more usefully by themes, methods, or other elements of the book. If you lot find it useful to include comparisons to other books, go along them brief so that the book nether review remains in the spotlight. Avoid excessive quotation and give a specific page reference in parentheses when you lot practise quote. Remember that you can state many of the writer'southward points in your own words.

Determination

Sum up or restate your thesis or make the final judgment regarding the book. You should not introduce new prove for your argument in the conclusion. You tin can, withal, introduce new ideas that go beyond the book if they extend the logic of your own thesis. This paragraph needs to residual the volume's strengths and weaknesses in order to unify your evaluation. Did the body of your review have three negative paragraphs and one favorable i? What do they all add together upwards to? The Writing Eye's handout on conclusions can help you make a final assessment.

In review

Finally, a few full general considerations:

• Review the book in front end of y'all, not the volume you wish the author had written. You can and should point out shortcomings or failures, but don't criticize the book for not being something it was never intended to be.
• With any luck, the writer of the volume worked hard to notice the right words to express her ideas. You lot should attempt to practice the same. Precise language allows you to control the tone of your review.
• Never hesitate to claiming an supposition, approach, or argument. Exist sure, withal, to cite specific examples to back up your assertions carefully.
• Effort to present a balanced argument about the value of the volume for its audience. You're entitled—and sometimes obligated—to voice potent agreement or disagreement. But keep in mind that a bad book takes as long to write as a skilful one, and every author deserves fair handling. Harsh judgments are hard to prove and can give readers the sense that you were unfair in your assessment.
• A great identify to learn nearly volume reviews is to expect at examples. The New York Times Dominicus Book Review and The New York Review of Books tin can show you how professional writers review books.

Works consulted

Nosotros consulted these works while writing this handout. This is not a comprehensive listing of resource on the handout's topic, and we encourage you to do your ain research to find additional publications. Delight practice not use this listing as a model for the format of your ain reference list, every bit it may not match the commendation mode you are using. For guidance on formatting citations, delight meet the UNC Libraries citation tutorial. We revise these tips periodically and welcome feedback.

Drewry, John. 1974. Writing Book Reviews. Boston: Greenwood Printing.

Hoge, James. 1987. Literary Reviewing. Charlottesville: Academy Virginia of Printing.

Sova, Dawn, and Harry Teitelbaum. 2002. How to Write Book Reports, quaternary ed. Lawrenceville, NY: Thomson/Arco.

Walford, A.J. 1986. Reviews and Reviewing: A Guide. Phoenix: Oryx Printing.

---

This piece of work is licensed nether a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License.
You may reproduce it for non-commercial use if y'all utilise the entire handout and aspect the source: The Writing Center, Academy of Northward Carolina at Chapel Hill

Brand a Souvenir

wallacewhinted.blogspot.com

Source: https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/book-reviews/

Share this post