CUNY Lehman College Cultural Politics of Race Book Review

General introduction to a book review:

A good academic book review summarizes a monograph’s thesis and evaluates its place in the historical literature for scholars who have not yet read the work.  As you craft your book review, imagine that you are writing it for someone who is interested in the field of Puerto Rican or American Studies, but who has not read the book that you are evaluating. What would that person want to know about the book that you have read?   

As you write a book review, identify the author’s thesis and then note the way in which the author supports his or her argument. What is the structure of the book?  Is it a chronological narrative or a thematic treatment? What type of sources does the author use? Do the arguments seem persuasive? Tell your readers what the book does and does not do, and evaluate its effectiveness in meeting its stated goals. Summarize the narrative themes of the book, but do not lose sight of your main argument. A strongly focused book review that makes a coherent argument will probably be a much better essay than one that does not have a central theme. Good organization of your points and a strong writing style are important.

To get a better sense of how to write an academic book review, look at some of the reviews in any issue of the American Journal of Sociology, CENTRO: Journal of the Center for Puerto Rican Studies, or Reviews in American History.  (You can access these journals through the JSTOR database, Academic Search Premier or on the university library’s website). Note the way in which academic book reviews quickly summarize the main themes of a monograph while also giving readers a sense of a work’s contributions to the field. Also note the way in which each academic book review is structured around a strong central thesis.

If you are reviewing a primary, rather than a secondary, source, you should evaluate the way in which that source reflects the views of a particular group during a specific time period. How would you situate that work in its historical context? How might historians use it as a primary source in their research?  What are its arguments? What aspects of the past might this work help us to understand?

The ability to evaluate scholarly works and secondary sources in a tightly focused, insightful essay is an important skill that will serve you well in your study of history, because it will help you develop your analytical and reading skills and improve your understanding of the books in this field. 

Remember: 

Above all, a review makes an argument. The most important element of a review is that it is a commentary, not merely a summary. It allows you to enter into dialogue and discussion with the work’s creator and with other audiences. You can offer agreement or disagreement and identify where you find the work exemplary or deficient in its knowledge, judgments, or organization. You should clearly state your opinion of the work in question, and that statement will probably resemble other types of academic writing, with a thesis statement, supporting body paragraphs, and a conclusion.

While reviews vary in tone, subject, and style, they share some common features:

A review gives the reader a summary of the content. This includes a relevant description of the topic as well as its overall perspective, argument, or purpose.

A review offers a critical assessment of the content. This involves your reactions to the work under review: what strikes you as noteworthy, whether or not it was effective or persuasive, and how it enhanced your understanding of the issues at hand.

In addition to analyzing the work, a review often suggests whether or not the audience would appreciate it.

Developing an assessment—Before you write:

There is no definitive method to writing a review, although some critical thinking about the work at hand is necessary before you actually begin writing. Thus, writing a review is a two-step process: developing an argument about the work under consideration, and making that argument as you write an organized and well-supported draft.

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

What is the thesis—or main argument—of the book?

If the author wanted you 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 book?
• Does the author cover the subject adequately?
• Does the author cover all aspects of the subject in a balanced fashion?

What is the approach to the subject (topical, analytical, chronological, descriptive)?

How does the author support her argument?

What evidence does she use to prove her point?

Do you find that evidence convincing? Why or why not?

Does any of the author’s information (or conclusions) conflict with other books you’ve read, courses you’ve taken or just previous assumptions you had of the subject?

1. How does the author structure her argument?

What are the parts that make up the whole?

Does the argument make sense?

• Does it persuade you?
• Why or why not?

How does the author’s arguments relate to other reading that you have done?

1. To your previous knowledge of the subject?

How has this book helped you understand the subject?

Would you recommend the book to your reader?

• Beyond the internal workings of the book, you may also consider some information about the author and the circumstances of the text’s production:
• Who is the author? Nationality, political persuasion, training, intellectual interests, personal history, and historical context may provide crucial details about how a work takes shape. Does it matter, for example, that the biographer was the subject’s best friend? What difference would it make if the author participated in the events she writes about?
• What is the book’s genre? Out of what field does it emerge? Does it conform to or depart from the conventions of its genre? These questions can provide a historical or literary standard on which to base your evaluations. If you are reviewing the first book ever written on the subject, it 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 unless you’re absolutely certain.

Writing the review:

1. Once you have made your observations and assessments of the work under review, carefully survey your notes and attempt to unify your impressions into a statement that will describe the purpose or thesis of your review. Then, 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 argument 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 you want the review to be about your perspective and opinions, then you may structure the review to privilege your observations over (but never separate from) those of the work under review. What follows is just one of many ways to organize a review.

Introduction.

• Since most reviews are brief, many writers begin with a catchy quip or anecdote that succinctly delivers their argument. But you can introduce your review differently depending on the argument and audience. In general, you should include:
• The name of the author and the book title and the main theme.
  • Relevant details about who the author is and where he/she stands in the genre or field of inquiry. You could also link the title to the subject 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 audience alerts readers to your “take” on the book. Perhaps you want to situate a book about the Cuban revolution in the context of 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 choice of context informs your argument.
• The thesis of the book. Identifying the book’s particular novelty, angle, or originality allows you to show what specific contribution the piece is trying to make.
• Your thesis about the book.

1. Summary of Content.

     You must summarize each of the book’s chapters. In the course of making your assessment, you’ll hopefully be backing up your assertions with concrete evidence from the book, so some summary will be dispersed throughout other parts of the review.

1. Analysis and Evaluation of the Book.

    Your analysis and evaluation should be organized into paragraphs that deal with single aspects of your argument. This arrangement can be challenging when your purpose is to consider the book as a whole, but it can help you differentiate elements of your criticism and pair assertions with evidence more clearly.

    You do not necessarily need to work chronologically through the book as you discuss it. Given the argument you want to make, you can organize your paragraphs more usefully by themes, methods, or other elements of the book.

•     It is important that you include comparisons to other books [However, keep them brief so that the book under review remains in the spotlight.]
•      Avoid excessive quotation and give a specific page reference in parentheses when you do quote. Remember that you can state many of the author’s points in your own words. 
• Conclusion.
•     Sum up or restate your thesis or make the final judgment regarding the book. You should not introduce new evidence for your argument in the conclusion. You can, however, introduce new ideas that go beyond the book if they extend the logic of your own thesis.

    This paragraph needs to balance the book’s strengths and weaknesses in order to unify your evaluation. Did the body of your review have three negative paragraphs and one favorable one? What do they all add up to?