Directions for Writing a Book Review
A book review should be more than a
summary. A book review explains what the book has to say and
analyzes it. A good review allows someone who has not read
the book to obtain an overview of the book’s contents, its importance,
and its strengths and weaknesses.
Begin the review with a full bibliographic citation. The author, title,
place of publication, publisher, and date of publication should be
written in this manner:
After the introductory paragraph, your review should summarize
faithfully and objectively the argument presented in the book. You
will condense perhaps a four-hundred page book into a few carefully
constructed paragraphs. Here is an example of a summary:
According to Gibson, Southern businessmen were envious of
the diversified and expanding economy of the North. These
businessmen knew it would take years to duplicate Northern
economic success, and that to pull it off, they would need to
attract substantial capital to the South. They proposed to
attract this capital through tourism.
Unfortunately, the South was almost totally devoid of
natural tourist enticements. There were a few beaches
in Florida and a notorious annual celebration in New
Orleans. Otherwise, there were just hundreds of small,
sleepy Southern towns that had nothing at all save a
main street replete with a half dozen boarded up
buildings surrounded by acre after acre of boring
farmland.
Given this backdrop, the businessmen’s conspiracy was pure genius; conjure up
a glorious war, put up a few hotels and souvenir stands, and like magic a boring
cornfield becomes a hallowed battleground.
Reams of paper flowed through the mimeograph machines of Southern
Chambers of Commerce, according to Gibson, until every corner of the country
was saturated with stories of glorious battles in backwater Southern towns. The
flood of propaganda drowned out those few voices that questioned the
authenticity of the work. Men who were of an age to have fought in this
courageous conflict were too ashamed to admit that they had not done
so. Instead, by the millions they joined veteran’s groups to exchange fantasized
war stories.
Politicians were quick to sense the potential of this phenomenon. They offered
pensions to all who claimed to have served in the war, and overnight the Grand
Army of the Republic formed ranks. The politicians now had a client
constituency and the American political alignment was set for the next seven
decades.
Meanwhile, people in bermuda shorts and flowered shirts were walking around
in Southern cornfields snapping pictures of fictitious battle sites and merchants
and farmers were lining up at banks with bags of tourist money.
Note: It is important to use your own words in this and anything
else you write. Do not present the words of the author as your own,
either verbatim, or in close similarity. This is plagiarism, a form of
intellectual theft.
After the summary of the book’s content, examine specific points
made by the author. Now, instead of compressing hundreds of
pages into a few paragraphs, you will take a single idea and expand
it into a thoughtful analysis. Here is an example:
Among Gibson’s more interesting points was his report that
Robert E. Lee never commanded any unit larger than the
Lexington Virginia Volunteer Fire Department. He was
merely a photogenic fire chief who looked great in a military
uniform. Moreover, U.S. Grant looks like the town drunk in
his photos, because, says Gibson, he was a town
drunk. Neither Grant nor Lee ever enlisted in an
army. Rather, they were enlisted by shrewd souvenir
salesmen into a scheme that placed their likeness on ashtrays,
plates, cigarette lighters, salt and pepper shakers, and assorted
curios, in exchange for fifteen percent royalties. This
revelation was one of Gibson’s most thought-provoking and
interesting points, shattering the traditional image of these
men.
Professor Gibson also refutes the widely held “myth” that the
Civil War ended slavery. He maintains that slavery never
ended, it merely evolved into the racism of today. The myth of
slavery’s abrupt ending allowed a fictional war to be fondly
remembered as a great national achievement. While his view
runs counter to the prevailing view, the role played in society
by the enslaved and their descendants changed little from
1865—the supposed end of the War—through 1965, giving his
argument credibility.
Next, your review should criticize the author’s style and proof of the
thesis. Criticisms can be positive or negative. Many students assume
that it is their own fault if they cannot understand a book, but
generally this is not so. It is the author’s job to write a book that the
reader can understand. If the reader finds the book difficult to read,
or unconvincing, it is the author’s fault, and the author should be
held to account. In criticizing the book, ask yourself if the author
convinced you of the validity of his or her thesis. If you are not
convinced, describe which arguments were faulty, and what
additional proof is necessary. If the author overproved the thesis,
criticize this as well. If you had to bribe yourself with a cookie to
read each page, note it. Many great researchers are terrible writers;
they are ill-equipped to say the important things they know. Here is
an example of a criticism:
In many ways, Brazos Gibson’s book is quite impressive. He tells a story that
captivates, surprises, and challenges the reader. His phrases are
persuasive. However, it is disappointing that the only source he cites for his
amazing theory is his brother-in-law, an unemployed car salesman who was the
subject of twenty-three interviews conducted at Billy Bob’s Saloon in Fort
Worth. A second collaborating source would have made his case
stronger. Nevertheless, the lack of documentation is somewhat overcome by his
warm and engaging writing style.
Finally, write a conclusion. The conclusion pulls all of the points of
the review together and wraps them in a nice, tight
paragraph. Here’s an example:
Brazos Gibson, in his book, The Southern Business Conspiracy and the Civil War,
sets out to prove that the war never happened. He argues that it was a fraud
concocted by greedy businessmen. His writing style is pleasing and his words
have a ring of truth to them; however, Gibson’s documentation is weak, and in
the end, he fails to convince his reader.
