Book Critiques

        Regardless of whether they call it a critique, a report, or a review, professors tend to want the same kinds of things when they ask for you to write about a book.

        The first and most important rule is: Read the book.  Most professors are skillful at determining whether a student has actually read the book.  The second most important rule is:  Give you own summary and analysis.  If a professor is convinced that a student read the book and is earnestly trying to write his/her own paper about it, the professor will be rooting for the student to do well.  On the other hand, the instant that a professor suspects that a student has not followed those two rules, the professor will be on the lookout for evidence to prove these suspicions.

        When you read a book, take notes about it and formulate your thoughts as you go along.  Before you sit down at your computer to type your paper, review your notes.  You should be able to write most of your critique without looking back at the book.  If you continually are paging through the book, the result is likely to be a string of paraphrases taken from the book rather than your own evaluation.

        Keep in mind that you are writing a BOOK critique.  In other words, if your book is a history of the French Revolution, your paper is not a summary of the French Revolution.  Rather, your paper is a summary and analysis of how this particular book treats the French Revolution.

        A book critique should contain both summary and analysis.  Let's say that you are writing about a biography of  Franklin Delano Roosevelt.  The first page or so of your critique might concentrate on giving the reader some idea of the scope of the book:  What topics does it concentrate on?  Is it a personal biography that focuses mostly on private life? Does it concentrate primarily on his public career?  Or does it do both?  How is the book organized?  Does it give 50 pages to Roosevelt's early life and 500 pages to his presidency? 

        The remainder of your paper should be your analysis of the book.  To be sure, an undergraduate student usually is not an expert on the topic of a book.  Therefore your analysis might not be as authoritative as that of a professional historian who has devoted many years to studying Roosevelt.  But you should be able to address issues like the following:  Does the author offer new information or a new interpretation? (You can be sure that if an author is claiming to say something no previous writer has said, the author will tell you that in the book.)  What kind of research did the author do?  (Interviews, extensive archival research, etc.).  What main points does the author make? (About Roosevelt's personality, about his relationship with his wife, about the New Deal, about WWII, etc.).  Does the author appear to substantiate each point he makes--with sound logic and sufficient evidence?  Does the book include pertinent maps or illustrations?  Does this book agree or disagree with any other things you have read for this course?  What kind of readership is the book aimed at? (General readers, specialists?).  Does the book include sufficient documentation (notes, bibliography)?  Is the book well written and clearly organized? 

         If you quote from the book that you are discussing, put the page number in parentheses at the end of the sentence.  Here is an example:  The author concludes that "Jenkins was indeed the only person who had the evil capacity to commit such a heinous crime" (p. 79).

         Be careful not to criticize an author just because he/she did not write the book that you would have wanted.  You must judge a book according to the author's stated intentions.  It the author states that the book, for example, will concentrate on the financial history of the American Revolution, it is not fair to criticize it because it does not cover all sorts of other topics.

        In general, you should also keep in mind that you are reading a book because you want to learn about the topic.  It should not be surprising, therefore, that the book challenges you.  If you have to look up some words or names in a dictionary or encyclopedia, consider this a learning experience, not something for which you should blame the author.

         Either at the beginning or the end of your paper you should give the full citation for your book.  This includes author's name, title, city, publisher, edition (if it is not the first one), translator (if any), year.