Preliminary Considerations<\/p>\n
First, one must understand that a critical book review is not a book report (a summary of the
\ncontents of a book). A critical book review is a vehicle for examining and discussing issues the
\nbook itself raises or fails to raise. One writes a critical book review for the benefit of those who
\nmight not presently have time to read the book but who nevertheless need to learn more about
\nits basic approach should they desire to read or study it at a future time. The job of the book
\nreviewer is to inform these readers concerning any merits and\/or shortcomings the book may
\nhave. From information based on a well-written review, the reader may conclude that this book
\nis either indispensable or inconsequential.<\/p>\n
Components of a Critical Book Review<\/p>\n
A. Give complete bibliographical information at the top of the page (title, author, publisher,
\nplace of publication, date of publication, number of pages, and name of reviewer).<\/p>\n
Use the following format:<\/p>\n
Toward Rediscovering the Old Testament, by Walter C. Kaiser, Jr. Grand Rapids: Zondervan,
\nl987. 250 pages. Reviewed by Randy C. Slocum.<\/p>\n
B. Briefly state the reason this book was chosen for review. State the author’s credentials
\n(education, place of employment, previous achievements, etc.) as a preface to giving the book a
\nserious hearing. Biographical information about the author should be included only as it
\ndemonstrates the author\u2019s competency to write the book. Within the context of the paper, do
\nnot use titles (Dr., Rev., etc.). In most brief reviews, you will likely need to limit the
\nintroduction to one or two paragraphs.<\/p>\n
C. Briefly (in one or two well-written sentences) summarize the thesis of the book.
\nThis is a crucial step because the thesis contains the reason why the author produced this
\nparticular book (there may be dozens on the market with similar subject matter).
\nThe thesis will state the author’s basic presuppositions and approach. The critical nature of the
\nbook review will then grow from the reviewer’s conclusion that the book does or does not
\nachieve the author’s stated purpose.<\/p>\n
D. The main body of a critical book review will be concerned with “thesis development.”
\nThat is, did the author achieve the stated purpose? In this section the reviewer will inspect each
\nof the chapters of the book to see how the thesis is (or is not) developed. If the author makes
\nprogress and develops the thesis convincingly, providing adequate information and statistical
\ndata, the reviewer says so, providing concrete examples and citing their page numbers in the
\ntext.<\/p>\n
Given the limited amount of space in a brief book review, footnotes should not be utilized.
\nQuotations or ideas taken directly from the text should be followed parenthetically by the page
\nnumber of the quotation. The abbreviation for page(s) (p.\/pp.) should not be used.<\/p>\n
Example:<\/p>\n
Rainer argues that evangelistic churches should focus on reaching youth (20). Indeed, he
\nwrites, \u201cMany churches fail to recognize that adolescence is a critical time of receptivity to the
\ngospel\u201d (21).<\/p>\n
If the thesis is poorly developed or if the examples are inadequate to support the assertions of
\nthe author, the reviewer will point this out as well. Most critical book reviews will contain both
\npraise and criticism, carefully weighed and balanced against one another.<\/p>\n
Remember the purpose of a critical book review is not to provide a summary of the book. You
\nmay assume that the professor and the grader know the contents of the book.<\/p>\n
Questions the reviewer will seek to answer in this section might include:
\n\u2022 Is there an adequate, consistent development of the author’s stated thesis? Why or why
\nnot?
\n\u2022 What is the author\u2019s purpose, i.e., what does he\/she hope to accomplish through this
\nbook? Does the author accomplish the purpose? If so, how does he\/she do so? If not,
\nwhy not?
\n\u2022 Does the author approach the subject with any biases, i.e., do the author\u2019s
\ntheological, experiential, philosophical, denominational, or cultural perspectives
\ninfluence his\/her conclusions?
\n\u2022 Does the author properly support his\/her thesis? Does the author adequately consider
\nand refute opposing viewpoints? Is the book limited in application to specific types of
\nchurches? Is the book relevant to contemporary culture?
\n\u2022 Does the author have to resort to suppression of contrary evidence in order to make the
\nthesis credible (slanting)? If so, what additional evidence would weaken the case?
\n\u2022 Is the thesis sound but marred by a flawed procedure?
\n\u2022 Is the author’s case proved, or would another thesis have been more appropriately
\nchosen?<\/p>\n
E. Finally, a summary section should be attached. How does this book differ from other
\ntreatments of the same subject matter? What is unique and valuable about this approach as
\nopposed to the others? Would the reviewer recommend this book above others? Why or why
\nnot?<\/p>\n
This final summary should include the major strengths and weaknesses of the book and
\nevaluate its value for readers who may be interested in that particular field of inquiry. Your
\nprimary purpose in this section is to respond both positively and negatively to the book\u2019s
\ncontents and presentation. Needless to say, this response should be more in-depth than, \u201cThis
\nbook is a good book that should be recommended reading for everyone.\u201d On the other hand,
\n\u201cThis book is a lousy book not worth reading\u201d is also inadequate. Central to this is the basic
\nquestion of whether or not the author has achieved the book’s stated purpose.<\/p>\n
Answer questions such as:
\n\u2022 What are the strengths of the book, i.e., what contributions does the book make?
\n\u2022 Why should a person read this book?<\/p>\n
\u2022 What did you learn from this book?
\n\u2022 How might you apply the lessons of this book in your ministry context?
\n\u2022 Would you recommend the book to other ministers? to seminary students? to
\nlaypersons? Why, or why not?<\/p>\n
Do not allow your response to this question to become lengthy (for this paper is not primarily
\nan Assessment of your ministry), but do make some application.<\/p>\n
Throughout your critique, be specific in your Assessments. Do not just tell the reader about the
\nbook; tell and show the reader with concrete examples from the book. As previously
\nsuggested, include page numbers when making specific reference to the book.<\/p>\n
F. The length of the review should be between five and seven pages, double-spaced.<\/p>\n
Style Issues for a Critical Book Review<\/p>\n
Turabian\u2019s A Manual for Writers of Term Papers, Theses, and Dissertations (7
\ned.) is the
\naccepted standard for style issues.<\/p>\n
The following guidelines are included to counter common style errors:<\/p>\n
A. Utilize this suggested outline to guide your book review, but do not include the specific
\nsubheadings (\u201cBibliographical Entry,\u201d \u201cSummary of the Book,\u201d etc.) in the essay. The
\nbrevity of the review demands a smooth flow from one section to another without including
\nthe subheadings.<\/p>\n
B. Use first-person sparingly; however, you may use \u201cI\u201d when referring to your opinion of a
\ntext.<\/p>\n
C. Avoid contractions in formal writing.<\/p>\n
D. Use active voice as much as possible.<\/p>\n
E. Be clear and concise. A brief review allows no room for wandering from your objective.<\/p>\n
F. Use your spell-checker, but do not trust it. A spell-check will not catch the error in such
\nsentences as, \u201cThe whole church voted too pass the amendment.\u201d Use your eyes as well as
\nyour spell-checker.<\/p>\n
G. Proofread your paper. Finish the paper, and proof it. Lay it aside, and proof it again at a
\nlater time. If you do not catch your errors, someone else will.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Preliminary Considerations First, one must understand that a critical book review is not a book report (a summary of the contents of a book). A\u2026<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[7316,7318,7317,7315,7319,7321],"tags":[441,7323,628,7326,7325,7322,7324],"class_list":["post-48897","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-best-dissertation-writers-uk","category-british-dissertation-writers","category-dissertation-help-online","category-dissertation-writing-services-uk","category-help-with-dissertation-writing","category-uk-dissertation-help","tag-cheap-dissertation-writing-services","tag-dissertation-help-london","tag-dissertation-help-online","tag-dissertation-tutor","tag-expert-assignment-help","tag-masters-dissertation-help","tag-university-assignment-help"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.studyproessays.com\/help\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48897","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.studyproessays.com\/help\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.studyproessays.com\/help\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.studyproessays.com\/help\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.studyproessays.com\/help\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=48897"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.studyproessays.com\/help\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48897\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.studyproessays.com\/help\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=48897"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.studyproessays.com\/help\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=48897"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.studyproessays.com\/help\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=48897"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}