Readers’ Club Department of English Literature

GUIDELINES FOR WRITING A BOOK REVIEW

Government College University Faisalabad Society RCDEL is indebted to University of North

Carolina at Chapel Hill for these guidelines for our reviewers to follow.

1
Readers’ Club Department of English Literature

BOOK REVIEW

What this handout is about

This handout will help you write a book review, a report or essay that offers a critical perspective
on a text. It offers a process and suggests some strategies for writing book reviews.

What is a review?

A review is a critical evaluation of a text, event, object, or phenomenon. Reviews can consider
books, articles, entire genres or fields of literature, architecture, art, fashion, restaurants, policies,
exhibitions, performances, and many other forms. This handout will focus on book reviews.

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.

Typically, reviews are brief. In newspapers and academic journals, they rarely exceed 1000
words, although you may encounter lengthier assignments and extended commentaries. In either
case, reviews need to be succinct. While they vary in tone, subject, and style, they share some
common features:

​ First, a review gives the reader a concise summary of the content. This
includes a relevant description of the topic as well as its overall perspective,
argument, or purpose.
​ Second, and more importantly, 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.
​ Finally, in addition to analyzing the work, a review often suggests whether
or not the audience would appreciate it.

Becoming an expert reviewer: three short examples

Reviewing can be a daunting task. Someone has asked for your opinion about something that you
may feel unqualified to evaluate. Who are you to criticize Toni Morrison’s new book if you’ve
never written a novel yourself, much less won a Nobel Prize? The point is that someone—a
professor, a journal editor, peers in a study group—wants to know what you think about a
particular work. You may not be (or feel like) an expert, but you need to pretend to be one for
your particular audience. Nobody expects you to be the intellectual equal of the work’s creator,
but your careful observations can provide you with the raw material to make reasoned

2
Readers’ Club Department of English Literature

judgments. Tactfully voicing agreement and disagreement, praise and criticism, is a valuable,
challenging skill, and like many forms of writing, reviews require you to provide concrete
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 majority of ale
drunk in England. Historically, ale and beer (not milk, wine, or water) were important
elements of the English diet. Ale brewing was low-skill and low status labor that was
complimentary to women’s 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 generally stopped brewing once the business became more
profitable.

The student describes the subject of the book and provides an accurate summary of its contents.
But the reader does not learn some key information expected from a review: the author’s
argument, the student’s appraisal of the book and its argument, and whether or not the student
would recommend the book. As a critical assessment, a book 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 same book written by a slightly more opinionated student:

Judith Bennett’s Ale, Beer, and Brewsters in England: Women’s Work in a Changing
World, 1300-1600 was a colossal disappointment. I wanted to know about the rituals
surrounding drinking in medieval England: the songs, the games, the parties. Bennett
provided none of that information. I liked how the book showed ale and beer brewing as
an economic activity, but 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
eight long chapters, and I can’t imagine why anyone would ever want to read it.

There’s no shortage of judgments in this review! But the student does not display a working
knowledge of the book’s argument. The reader has a sense of what the student expected of the
book, but no sense of what the author herself set out to prove. Although the student gives several
reasons for the negative review, those examples do not clearly relate 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 final 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 as 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

3
Readers’ Club Department of English Literature

religious and political, but Bennett shows how a “patriarchal equilibrium” shut women
out of economic life as well. Her analysis of women’s wages in ale and beer production
proves that a change in women’s work does not equate to a change in working women’s
status. Contemporary feminists and historians alike should read Bennett’s book and think
twice when they crack open their next brewsky.

This student’s review avoids the problems of the previous two examples. It combines balanced
opinion 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 argument about feminist history in
general that places the book in a specific genre and that reaches out to a general audience. The
example of analyzing wages illustrates an argument, the analysis engages significant intellectual
debates, and the reasons for the overall positive review are plainly visible. The review offers
criteria, opinions, and support with which the reader can agree or disagree.

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 their argument? What evidence do they use to
prove their 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?
​ How does the author structure their argument? What are the parts that make
up the whole? Does the argument make sense? Does it persuade you? Why or
why not?
​ How has this book helped you understand the subject? Would you
recommend the book to your reader?

4
Readers’ Club Department of English Literature

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 they write 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

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 they stand 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.

5
Readers’ Club Department of English Literature

​ The thesis of the book. If you are reviewing fiction, this may be difficult since
novels, plays, and short stories rarely have explicit arguments. But 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.

Summary of content

This should be brief, as analysis takes priority. 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.

The necessary amount of summary also depends on your audience. Graduate students, beware! If
you are writing book reviews for colleagues—to prepare for comprehensive exams, for
example—you may want to devote more attention to summarizing the book’s contents. If, on the
other hand, your audience has already read the book—such as a class assignment on the same
work—you may have more liberty to explore more subtle points and to emphasize your own
argument.

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. If you find it useful to include
comparisons to other books, 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.

Format

Here are the formatting guidelines for your reviews:

1. Font and Size for the Body: The main body text must be in Times New Roman, font size
12.
2. Title Formatting:
○ The title should be center-aligned, written in UPPERCASE, in Italics and
formatted in bold, with a font size of 16.
3. Reviewer Details:
○ Your name and related information should appear below the title, center-aligned,
in the following format and font size 10:
■ Name
■ B.S English Literature
■ 5th Evening

6
Readers’ Club Department of English Literature

■ Roll Number _______

■ Email (written in italics).

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.

In review

Finally, a few general considerations:

​ Review the book in front of you, not the book 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 author of the book worked hard to find the right words to
express her ideas. You should attempt to do the same. Precise language allows
you to control the tone of your review.
​ Never hesitate to challenge an assumption, approach, or argument. Be sure,
however, to cite specific examples to back up your assertions carefully.
​ Try to present a balanced argument about the value of the book for its audience.
You’re entitled—and sometimes obligated—to voice strong agreement or
disagreement. But keep in mind that a bad book takes as long to write as a good
one, and every author deserves fair treatment. Harsh judgments are difficult to
prove and can give readers the sense that you were unfair in your assessment.
​

Works consulted

We consulted these works while writing this handout. This is not a comprehensive list of
resources on the handout’s topic, and we encourage you to do your own research to find
additional publications. Please do not use this list as a model for the format of your own
reference list, as it may not match the citation style you are using.

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

Hoge, James. 1987. Literary Reviewing. Charlottesville: University Virginia of Press.
Sova, Dawn, and Harry Teitelbaum. 2002. How to Write Book Reports, 4th ed.
Lawrenceville, NY: Thomson/Arco.
Walford, A.J. 1986. Reviews and Reviewing: A Guide. Phoenix: Oryx Press.