Book Review
Length: 1000-1500 words (=4-6 pages, typed, double-spaced, 1-inch margins).
Books: Any book should be approved in advance by me. Suitable books include:
Monographs: scholarly works on a single topic, based on primary sources research.
Biographies: scholarly treatments of the life of a person.
Surveys of a narrow topic: scholarly works bringing together conclusions of other scholars.
The following works are NOT suitable for review: textbooks, broad surveys, popular history, historical
fiction, and collected essays. Any book chosen must be originally written in the last 50 years (ideally
the last 20 years) and include documentation (notes, references) and be relevant to this course.
Format: The first page of your review should include your name and a full citation of the book (author,
title, publisher, year); no separate cover sheet is needed. If you refer to specific parts of the book, cite
page or chapter numbers. Pay attention to grammar, spelling, punctuation, and paragraphing.
While reading the book: Consider these points: What is the author's thesis? What are the sources? Is
the argument logical? For whom is the author writing? Is it well organized and written?
What to say in the review: The purpose of writing a review is to let your reader know what the book is
about and whether it is worth reading. Assume that your reader is interested in historical accuracy and
current research. Note that not all questions are relevant for all books. In general start with the
most important points and mention minor details towards the end of the review (but NOT in the last
paragraph, which should be a strong conclusion).
*BRIEFLY state your overall evaluation of the book (i.e. whether its strengths overcome its
weaknesses or the reverse, with particular reference to the book’s thesis) in the first paragraph.
[about half a page]
*BRIEFLY summarize the main ideas of the book (beginning with its thesis). [about 1 page]
*Decide what the author's purpose is. Is this a book for specialists or one for the general
public? How will this affect its usefulness, accuracy, and thoroughness? Did the author have to make
sacrifices of content or style to suit the intended audience? Does the author serve the audience well?
[include in summary]
*Discuss whether this is a good treatment of the subject. Did the author use the best sources
available (primary and secondary)? Does he or she make a logical argument? Did he or she cover the
topic thoroughly? Give examples of the book's good and bad points. (Your criticism will be more
credible if you can suggest specific improvements or explain why the author may have made the
choices he or she did.) [about 2 or 3 pages]
*IF APPLICABLE, comment on how the author's background affects the book's argument and
credibility. What are the author's qualifications? You can find out about his or her education and other
publications from reference books in the library (ask the Reference Librarian) or from the internet web
site) if this information is not in the book. Does the author's background bias the analysis? Is this a
field the author has studied for a long time? Does the author appear to have the language skills and
other skills necessary to do a credible job? (Bibliographies and notes provide clues to the last.) For
most books, this will not be an issue. [no more than half a page and only if relevant]
*Finally, comment on how clear and readable the book is. Is the author too technical (or too
basic) for the intended audience (note that this should be put in general terms, such as, "college-level
writing," "technical terminology," NOT personal terms such as "I had a hard time understanding it" or
"it interested me")? How much background does the author assume the reader has? Is the writing and
organization clear? Does the author stick to the point? Are there enough aids to the reader (tables,
graphs, maps, etc.) or too many irrelevant ones? [about half a page]
*Be sure, if you have complaints about a book, that you are fair to the author (do not fault
him/her for leaving out things which interest you but are not central to the book), and be sure that the
reader of your review will have enough information to see how you arrived at your position. (If you
discover early on that you are dissatisfied with a book, you might find it more pleasant to switch books,
but that is up to you.)
*Remember: Your task is to write a coherent review, NOT merely to answer a string of
questions. Write a strong introduction and conclusion, with well-rounded supporting paragraphs in the
body of your review.