Prof. Andrea Sterk

BOOK REVIEW ASSIGNMENT
(for EUH 4930 – Senior Seminar: “Converting” the Mediterranean World)

        All students are required to review a scholarly book or monograph that has been approved by the instructor by the end of Week 6 of class.  Ideally the book you choose to review will cover some aspect of your final paper topic so that a critical reading of the book will contribute to your research for the paper.  The book review is due in my office by 4:00 pm on Friday, March 1.  Late papers will be penalized a half grade per day.


The Making of a Critical Review
(adapted from J. M. McCrimmon, Writing with a Purpose, Houghton-Mifflin, 1966)


Purpose and Substance
        A critical book review is an evaluation, never simply a book report or digest.  The goal of a good review is the critic’s judgment, and the critic’s success depends primarily upon how convincing the arguments are for his or her judgment and not on the judgment per se.

        The substance of most good reviews includes three categories:  interpretation, technical analysis, and judgment. 
        a) Interpretation deals with the purpose of the book and answers the question, what does the book set out to do?
        b) Technical analysis deals with the techniques by which the author selects, shapes, and presents his materials, i.e., it deals with the author’s methods, and answers the question, how does the author go about doing it?
        c) Judgment is the critic’s appraisal of the interpretation and technical analysis.  It is the main goal of the review and deals with the success and significance of the book.  It answers the questions: how effective is the author’s treatment of the subject, and how significant is the total work in its purpose and achievement?


Preparation
        There is no substitute for careful reading and writing, and the critic who skims a book and/or writes haphazardly is doomed to failure (or at least a “C”).  Indeed, most critics find it indispensable to take notes, giving special attention in the review itself to pages and passages that are central to the author’s purpose or the critic’s evaluation.

        When reading, you should take special note of the Table of Contents, the preface and the opening paragraphs of the book, for in a great majority of cases the purpose and the organization of the book is revealed there.  However, you should be careful that your early impressions or judgments remain tentative and open to modification until the whole book has been carefully read.


Writing
        Organization and presentation are entirely up to the critic.  However, you must keep in mind at all times your obligation to the readers.  Always keep your audience in mind in writing a critical review.  Do not write for your professor but for fellow students who have not yet read the book.  Your review should aim to help them assess whether they want to, should, or could care less to read the book.

        Experience has taught that the opening paragraph is the most difficult to write, for the overwhelming temptation is to plunge right into the final judgment.  While this may be appropriate on certain occasions, it most often yields a dearth of material just when the review should be building to a climax.  However, there are several alternatives to this opening, e.g., an introductory statement on the author, a quotation that summarizes the purpose of the book, a summary of the problems which the author is discussing, etc.


Common Weaknesses
        You should guard against the following pitfalls which often yield a poor review (hence, a lower grade):

        1. Using too much of a review to explain the action or content of the book.  A mere summary of the work is a book report not a critical book review.
        2. Reviewing parts of the book while neglecting the whole.  Parts may be criticized in relation to the whole, but criticism outside the context of the whole book is poor scholarship.  (It is also annoying for most readers who want to get a sense of the whole scope and purpose of the book.)
        3. Digressing upon your own views rather than the merits or demerits of the book.
        4. Failure to provide adequate rationale for judgments made.  (It is not sufficient to say that you liked or didn’t like the book!)
        5. Conveying to the reader a sense of prejudice which makes the reader believe the evaluation to be biased and unfair.


        Finally, learn to read critical book reviews yourself.  Scholarly reviews are published in most history journals.  Journals with reviews that relate to the content of this course include Journal of Roman Studies and Journal of Early Christian Studies, both of which are accessible on-line through J-STOR.  The format or your book review should approximate reviews that you find in these and other academic journals.

    Your review for this assignment should be approximately 1000 words in length (3-4 pages).  This is a typical word allotment for reviews in scholarly journals.