[meteor_slideshow slideshow=”arp1″]
) A balanced summary of the book?s contents. The ?content? of a scholarly book on a subject in the past (history) has several dimensions. (A) Topic. Imagine that you are reviewing this book for readers who have not read it themselves. Your paper should begin with a concise description of the central topic that is treated in the book. Is the author trying to solve a historical puzzle? What is the puzzle and why is it one? Is the author trying to come up with a new view of an historical period or phenomenon? What period or phenomenon? And, why is the ?old? view such that the author would write a big book to try to correct it? A reader should have a clear indication of what the book is about after reading the first paragraph or two of your review. (B) Author?s approach. Since ?history? is a bundle of raw traces of human doings in the past, any reconstruction of a period, an event, a person, a social trend, and so forth, requires of the author of a history book to say something on her/his perspective on history and history-writing. This includes historiographical suppositions and how they differ from those of other historians who specialize in the same historical period or subject, statements of what counts as evidence, why some evidence is more valuable than other evidence, and how different kinds of evidence may be related. Your review of the book should indicate that you are aware of the author?s interests, aims, and theoretical vantage point. Usually this sort of information is most explicitly indicated in a book?s front-end (preface and introduction) and often reiterated in the book?s concluding pages (conclusion, epilogue). (C) Evidence. What evidence does the author rely on? Where and how is the evidence found? In short, your review should indicate what data forms the basis for the author?s argument. (D) Argument. How does the author evaluate the evidence, or, how does he/she try to persuade the reader that it is reliable? What are the key arguments made on the basis of the evidence? Are the arguments coherent with the evidence and in relation to each other? That is, do his arguments work together to generate the main conclusion(s) of the book?
(2) Critical evaluation of the author?s views, methods and arguments. To be critical does not mean to be sneeringly negative; it means to make judgments about strengths/weaknesses, positives/negatives in the author?s approach, arguments and conclusions. Does the author persuade you? If so, why? If not, why not? You may feel you do not have enough expertise to assess what the author is up to. On the one hand, don?t worry, because you are not expected to assess his work beyond the knowledge and critical judgment that you have. On the other hand, do not simply rely on uninformed opinion for your criticism. On this issue, the essay should go beyond mere review and slide over into the research essay. That is, for this part of the review you should inform yourself. Do some additional reading on the book?s topic.
[meteor_slideshow slideshow=”arp2″]
A-Research-Paper.com is committed to deliver a custom paper/essay which is 100% original and deliver it within the deadline. Place your custom order with us and experience the different; You are guaranteed; value for your money and a premium paper which meets your expectations, 24/7 customer support and communication with your writer. Order Now
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]