Category: Book Review

 
Write a Critical Book Review on,
Jornalero: Being a Day Laborer in the USA
By: Juan Thomas Ordonez

Must only use book as a source and reference

 
Critical review of a primary text -Hobbes’s Leviathan

As a basic outline, these reviews should:
 Identify the text, indicate the key aspects which will be discussed, and state
the purpose of the review.
 Provide a brief summary of the range, contents, and argument of the book.
 Critically discuss two to three key issues raised in the book.
 Set out the author’s argument, then criticise and evaluate it, supporting your
criticisms with evidence drawn from the text itself and/or from other writings.
 For the conclusion, evaluate the overall contribution the book has to the
development of knowledge in this particular area or discipline, setting it in the
context of other writings in the field.
 Provide a correctly formatted bibliography of all sources referred to.

HIST 17– Book Study Prompt(due Monday, 11/30)
This semester, we’ve beenreading and studying two books,The Shoemaker and the Tea Party by Alfred Young, and The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass. For your book study, you will compare and contrastinformation from these books to discusslarger themes we have studied in this course.

Your essay should start with a statement of your main points, and conclude with a summary of those points. The body of your essay should address these questions, citing specific examples from both books:

1) How were the experiences of George Robert Twelves Hewes similar to, or different than, the experiences of Frederick Douglass?
2) Identify factors of change in U.S. history that shaped these similarities and differences.
3) What do each of these books reveal about the challenges and opportunities experienced by ordinary people in U.S. history?

NOTE: This is not a “book report.” Don’t write a plot summary that tells me “what happened.” Your paper should discuss larger processes of change in American history, using information from these two books as your primary examples.

Required format:
Your essay must include at least two direct quotes from each book, cited with in text citations, for example, (Young, 134) or (Douglass, 37).
3-4 pagesminimum (2.5 pages is not 3 pages, it’s only 2.5), double-spaced, 12 pt., typed (word processed), in a plain font on 8.5 x 11 white paper. There is no maximum page length.
60 points are possible for completion of this assignment. Points will be deducted for each day that the assignment is late!

 
Task: Book Review and Analysis
Title of book: Doing Time Together: Love and family in the shadow of the prison
Author: Megan Comfort
Assignment objective/purpose
To gain confidence in ‘voicing’ your opinion about social science in a laconic manner. In addition, to gain experience in ‘critical thinking’ in social science and develop the skill to write a book review.
Task
 You will provide a summary of the above book (available in the bookstore see syllabus) and then submit a completed book review at the end of the semester which will include a section on ‘Analysis’. This section will engage the reader and also demonstrate your ability to present arguments on the value (strengths) and limitations (weaknesses) of the work
 The summary should include important aspects of the reading. This will include two aspects a) an overview of what the work is doing and what the author is saying and b) express your view of the work
 Try to answer these questions:
a. What are some specific statements made by the author?
b. What problem is being addressed?
c. What question(s) is the author asking and or investigating?
d. What are some of the assumptions made by the author?

 
The first half of the book review should contain a description, analysis and evaluation of the main arguments in Kanan Makiya’s book, Cruelty and Silence.
The second half of the book review should then move on to address the following question: Have the events popular referred to as “The Arab Spring” vindicated Makiya’s argument, or shown it to have been mistaken from the outset?

Please use additional sources, particularly sources with viewpoints contrary to those of Makiya.

.

Emanuel Le Roy Ladurie, Montaillou: The Promised Land of Error (New York: George Braziller, 2008). ISBN 978-0-8076-1598-0 (Hybrid Source that Combines Primary and Secondary Material)
Book listed above must be used!

Given that Montaillou is a hybrid work that combines primary and secondary source material, your paper will be a hybrid work as well, divided into two related but distinct parts. Part One, which will be pages 1 – 3, will be a review that directly addresses, in a fluid and coherent narrative, the same questions you address for your oral presentations (to be found in “Week One” under the “Modules” tab). For help with this section, you should have a look at some reviews that were done of the book when it was first published, including:

– Leonard Boyle’s in the Canadian Journal of History, vol. 14 (December 1979), pages 455 – 457
– David Herlihy’s in Social History, vol. 4 (October 1979), pages 517 – 520
– P. S. Lewis’ in The English Historical Review, vol. 92 (April 1977), 371 – 373

There are numerous other reviews available via JSTOR.

Part II of the paper (pages 4 – end) will concentrate on the primary source material. For this section, you will also draw on the Inquisitorial Record of Jacques Fournier, which Le Roy Ladurie used heavily. Thanks to Prof. Nancy Stork, it may be found in English translation at http://www.sjsu.edu/people/nancy.stork/jacquesfournier/. The central question of Part II is, “How does Montaillou and Fournier’s Inquisitorial Record inform your understanding of heresy and dissent in the later Middle Ages?” While formulating your response, consider the social (e.g., personal relationships – including with women and children), economic (e.g., the importance of poverty), and religious (e.g., the enthusiasm of both the orthodox and heretical players) evidence. For every point you make, there should be quoted primary evidence (in italics in Montaillou), to support your argument.

This will be a 10 – 12 page paper, so that Part II will run between 6 and 8 pages. It will be double-spaced, formatted with one-inch margins, typed in 12-point font, and include footnotes and a bibliography done according to the Chicago Manual of Style. It is due both electronically (see the link provided in “Week Fourteen” under the “Assignments” tab) and in hard copy class on Wednesday, December 2. Use the handout, Tips for Better Historical Writing, to guide you. Below I’m providing you the questions that I had mentioned above for (part 1 which will be pages 1-3)
I. How to Read your Book or Article

1. Read introduction and conclusion carefully, taking good notes on both.

2. Look over Table of Contents or subheadings closely, trying to determine the layout of the book or article and the structure of its argument.

3. Read the first and last paragraphs of each chapter (if you’re presenting on a book) or of the article closely, taking good notes.

4. Look at footnotes and endnotes, coming to terms with the primary and secondary sources on which the author(s) has drawn. Again, take good notes here.

5. Finally, go back and read the rest of each chapter (if you’re presenting on a book) or of the article, this time just making note of the minor points and ideas that have struck you.

II. Questions to Ask your Book or Article

(Note that certain questions will be more appropriate for some books than for others. Address the ones that apply and feel free to ask your own.)

1. In one sentence, what is the author’s (or authors’) thesis?

2. Beyond the thesis, what minor points does the author(s) make?

3. Who is the intended audience? What about the book or article suggests that the author(s) had a particular audience in mind?

4. What kinds of sources does the author(s) use to construct his or her argument?

5. Does the author(s) treat the subject in a balanced way? Or is there a noticeable bias in the book or article? Support your opinion with one or two examples.

6. If there are a number of years that separate the publication of the book or article and the period it covers, how might the context in which the author(s) wrote have influenced his/her treatment of the subject?

7. How does the author(s) construct his/her argument? In other words, what does the chapter or article structure reveal about the way the author(s) has approached his/her subject?

8. Does the author(s) apply theory to make sense of his/her evidence? If so, whose theory does s/he apply?

9. Is the author(s) writing against a particular author or school of thought? If so, who is s/he (or what is it) and why does your author(s) feel the need to correct past scholarship?

10. Are you convinced by the thesis? By the minor arguments? Why or why not?

11. Is there a particular anecdote, story, sentence, etc. that you think captures the essence of the book or article? What is it?

12. Does the author(s) raise unanswered questions and suggest a direction for further research?

13. Overall, what did you think of the book or article and why?

WRITER MUST HAVE THE BOOK

“Montaillou Paper”.

Emanuel Le Roy Ladurie, Montaillou: The Promised Land of Error (New York: George Braziller, 2008). ISBN 978-0-8076-1598-0 (Hybrid Source that Combines Primary and Secondary Material)
Book listed above must be used!

Given that Montaillou is a hybrid work that combines primary and secondary source material, your paper will be a hybrid work as well, divided into two related but distinct parts. Part One, which will be pages 1 – 3, will be a review that directly addresses, in a fluid and coherent narrative, the same questions you address for your oral presentations (to be found in “Week One” under the “Modules” tab). For help with this section, you should have a look at some reviews that were done of the book when it was first published, including:

– Leonard Boyle’s in the Canadian Journal of History, vol. 14 (December 1979), pages 455 – 457
– David Herlihy’s in Social History, vol. 4 (October 1979), pages 517 – 520
– P. S. Lewis’ in The English Historical Review, vol. 92 (April 1977), 371 – 373

There are numerous other reviews available via JSTOR.

Part II of the paper (pages 4 – end) will concentrate on the primary source material. For this section, you will also draw on the Inquisitorial Record of Jacques Fournier, which Le Roy Ladurie used heavily. Thanks to Prof. Nancy Stork, it may be found in English translation at http://www.sjsu.edu/people/nancy.stork/jacquesfournier/. The central question of Part II is, “How does Montaillou and Fournier’s Inquisitorial Record inform your understanding of heresy and dissent in the later Middle Ages?” While formulating your response, consider the social (e.g., personal relationships – including with women and children), economic (e.g., the importance of poverty), and religious (e.g., the enthusiasm of both the orthodox and heretical players) evidence. For every point you make, there should be quoted primary evidence (in italics in Montaillou), to support your argument.

This will be a 10 – 12 page paper, so that Part II will run between 6 and 8 pages. It will be double-spaced, formatted with one-inch margins, typed in 12-point font, and include footnotes and a bibliography done according to the Chicago Manual of Style. It is due both electronically (see the link provided in “Week Fourteen” under the “Assignments” tab) and in hard copy class on Wednesday, December 2. Use the handout, Tips for Better Historical Writing, to guide you. Below I’m providing you the questions that I had mentioned above for (part 1 which will be pages 1-3)
I. How to Read your Book or Article

1. Read introduction and conclusion carefully, taking good notes on both.

2. Look over Table of Contents or subheadings closely, trying to determine the layout of the book or article and the structure of its argument.

3. Read the first and last paragraphs of each chapter (if you’re presenting on a book) or of the article closely, taking good notes.

4. Look at footnotes and endnotes, coming to terms with the primary and secondary sources on which the author(s) has drawn. Again, take good notes here.

5. Finally, go back and read the rest of each chapter (if you’re presenting on a book) or of the article, this time just making note of the minor points and ideas that have struck you.

II. Questions to Ask your Book or Article

(Note that certain questions will be more appropriate for some books than for others. Address the ones that apply and feel free to ask your own.)

1. In one sentence, what is the author’s (or authors’) thesis?

2. Beyond the thesis, what minor points does the author(s) make?

3. Who is the intended audience? What about the book or article suggests that the author(s) had a particular audience in mind?

4. What kinds of sources does the author(s) use to construct his or her argument?

5. Does the author(s) treat the subject in a balanced way? Or is there a noticeable bias in the book or article? Support your opinion with one or two examples.

6. If there are a number of years that separate the publication of the book or article and the period it covers, how might the context in which the author(s) wrote have influenced his/her treatment of the subject?

7. How does the author(s) construct his/her argument? In other words, what does the chapter or article structure reveal about the way the author(s) has approached his/her subject?

8. Does the author(s) apply theory to make sense of his/her evidence? If so, whose theory does s/he apply?

9. Is the author(s) writing against a particular author or school of thought? If so, who is s/he (or what is it) and why does your author(s) feel the need to correct past scholarship?

10. Are you convinced by the thesis? By the minor arguments? Why or why not?

11. Is there a particular anecdote, story, sentence, etc. that you think captures the essence of the book or article? What is it?

12. Does the author(s) raise unanswered questions and suggest a direction for further research?

13. Overall, what did you think of the book or article and why?

WRITER MUST HAVE THE BOOK

 
You need to get the book <Beggar Thy Neighbor: A History of Usury and Debt, Charles R. Geisst. University of Pennslyvania Press. Hardcover, ISBN: 978-0-8122-4462-5.> To finish this order. (i dont have the book)
Part one: You are required to find 5 questions from the book and answer it by 250 words minimum each. All 5 questions should be found at chapter 3.1 pg 97-118
Part two: And you are required to find 20 questions from the book chapter 3,2 pg 118-136. You dont have to answer it, just make 20 questions, no words limited . Please write down you works at the files which i uploaded.

1. Background – What is a creative response taskwithin an English course?

The creative response in this Communications course provides an opportunity for students to respond both analytically and creatively, in a creative mediumof their choice, to a specific literary text.
2. The Task

You must produce one creative work and an accompanying rationale that addresses the following headings (see next section) of between 800 and 1000 words.
3. What is the rationale?

The rationale is a written explanation of the creative work as either a short essay or a series of well-crafted, paragraphs. It can take a written or non-written form depending on the choice that you make. It should address the following headings:

Creative/artistic intent
• Explain your own creative/artistic intent. Discuss the messages and ideas that you are hoping to convey through your creative response and how you believe your creative work delivers these messages.

Textual Influences
• Your explanation of textual influences should demonstrate your understanding of the text (the play) and explain how it has been represented through your own creativework. You should quote from the text to identify, analyse and discuss specific aspects of the playby which your work has been influenced.

Additional Influences
• Discuss any additional influences on the themes and ideas expressed within your creative work. For example, were they from reading or watching the text? Were they from class discussions about the text? Were they from relevant news items? Or, a combination of the above? Explain why and how these influences affected your creative work.

Significance of Medium and Materials
• Justify the choice of the particular medium and materials chosen by you. If the work is a narrative, point of view, setting, mood and choice of characters should be explained. If it is a poem, the style, imagery, language and other literary techniques used should be justified. In an artistic work, the language of music or design and visual expression should be used to analyse and justify your work.
You may also choose to offer additional information about your creative work. If you have any questions about this, be sure to discuss them with the teacher.
of between 800 and 1000 words.
4. What sort of creative work should I produce?

The scope for creative worksis enormous. Suggestions include:

• a short story
• a diary entry
• a series of lyric poems (minimum of three), or a sustained narrative poem,
• a recreationof the style or thematic concerns of the author in a piece of your own, such as a short play, a story, or other creative writing piece,
• an artistic work such as a painting, photography, graphic design, sculpture, drawing, textile piece or floral/botanical sculpture,
• a performance piece of your own composition– performed either live or filmed. This might, for example, involve a dance piece or a performance with a musical instrument, or voice, or
• a short digital film or dynamic graphic montage.

Other ideas are also welcome, please see your teacher to discuss your proposal.
5. Suggested responses

These are some ideas that you might like to consider. You are not restricted to choosing one of these proposals:

• Select a theme that is presented in the novel and write a story or one act play that illustrates that theme.
• Continue the story of 1984after the novel ends. What happens to the main character/characters next?
• Choose a key moment in the story. Create a visual representation of the scene created by the author.
• Choose a character from the play and write a poem(s) expressing their response to their situation.
• Write an excerpt from the diary of one of the novel’s main characters.
6. Completing Your Assessment Task
• Refer to the assessment rubric before commencing.
• Write your student ID number on all responses.
• Take time to plan, draft and edit your work.
• Answer all questions using well-structured paragraphsor essay format.
• Use formal language, complete sentences and correct punctuation.
7. Assessment marking criteria and rubric
Students will be assessed on the degree to which they demonstrate:

• The ability to respond critically to text and to identify and analyse the use of literary devices and technique.
• The ability to evaluate and synthesise ideas.
• Imagination and originality.
• Proficiency in use of language.
• Control and mastery of the creative medium.

Please note that the marking rubric is attached to this task outline – you should also consider this and discuss any queries that you have about it with the teacher.
8. General assessment guidelines
Submission of drafts
Drafts for teacher feedback and guidance are most welcome 1 week prior to submission of the Assessment Task.
Applying for an extension
Extensions are not granted automatically. Each application will be judged on its merits.
Fill in the Application for Special Consideration form available from the Office (and eLearn ‘Year 12 Essentials) and give to your teacher. Do this before the due date for an assessment task.
A late penalty will apply unless an extension is granted. The penalty for late submission is 5% (of possible marks) per calendar day late (including weekends and Public holidays) until the notional zero (see below), is reached. Submission on weekends or public holidays is not acceptable.

Notional Zero
The notional zero will be a score, which lies between 0.1 of a standard deviation below the lowest genuine score for that item and zero.
9. Plagiarism
Plagiarism is NOT acceptable. It involves
• presenting another person’s ideas and work as your own; other people’s work includes books, journals, the internet, ABS and the work of other students
• is avoided by referencing your work
BSSS penalties apply for proven cases of plagiarism. For details about penalties, appeals and a detailed description of plagiarism and how to avoid it

 
A book review assignment expects you to offer a critical evaluation of a piece of writing with
respect to both structure and content. A review should contain three main elements. It should provide a
brief summary of the book and the author’s main argument(s). So, the review should answer the basic
question: what is this book about? You do not want to linger here, as the point is not to provide so much
detail that the reader of your review does not need to read the book. You want enough detail to provide
the gist of the book. Like in the perhaps more familiar movie review, you want to tell the reader what the
movie is about without spoiling the experience of seeing it. A book review should also comment on how
well the author made their argument. Was their argument organized in a clear, logical way? Was the
author’s argument easy to follow and reinforced throughout the piece? Was it well written and easy to
understand? You should provide evidence from the book for your answers to these questions; examples of
good or bad writing – depending on your conclusions. Again, a comparison to a movie review is helpful
here (“good plot, but the filming and editing were so poor it made the plot harder to understand. For
example, in the scene where…”). The third element in a book review is your evaluation of the book’s
content and argument. You’ve discussed what the author argued, you discussed how well they made that
argument; now you must engage with the argument itself. In an academic book review, this element is
probably the most important. For our specific purposes, consider what the author’s arguments say about
ideas of the past and how those ideas alter over time. What does the author say about how our relationship
with the past is informed by our present? Finally, this is your review. Say whether you were or were not
convinced by the author’s argument and why. Ultimately: did you like the book? Why or why not?
Although a book review is different from an “essay” in which you do your own research, it should
follow roughly the same pattern. You are making an argument, insofar as you are going to make assertions
about this book one way or the other. Those should be stated, briefly, near the beginning of your review
and elaborated with evidence in the body of the work – just like in an essay. In this way, a book review is
similar to an essay even though you are asked to perform a slightly different task.

 
This assignment is for my International Political Economy
Class, I want from you to write 8-10 pages paper following the professor instructions below:

Students are to complete a typed as well double spaced book appraisal pick one book to write about in your book appraisal and also pick two other books from the list to compare and contrast with the first book you chose to write about in your book appraisal.

***DO NOT SUMMARISE THE BOOK. RATHER, ILLUSTRATE AND ANALYSE FIVE MAIN ARGUMENTS OR POINTS OF SIGNIFIGANCE THE AUTHOR MAKES AND WHY YOU THE READER AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH THEM***

*** You have to compare and contrast at lest 5 significant points the author of you main book made with the other two books authors ***

***Don’t forget to compare and contrast two other books with the first book you chose to write about in your book appraisal from the suggestions books list***

***NOTE THAT ALL DATA SHOULD BE FOOTENOTED ***