Aim for roughly 150 words of summary that restate the reviewer’s overall conclusions, key terms, key examples, and main points. Rather than offering a step-by-step account of what the reviewer says, your summary should help readers see his/her argument about the text and how he/she builds this argument. Your summary should also reflect application of the methods from Writing Analytically and those we’ve practiced in class. Be aware that some reviews read like a simple summary. Try to find the argument “within” the summary. Spend longer (roughly 350 words) reacting to the review. Determine how the review might shape your opinions of the text. If you haven’t read the texts, does this convince you to read it (or the opposite)? If you have read the texts before, what do you think about the information provided by the review? Think of any information that might be missing from the review? Does your reviewer engage in any counter-productive habits (see WA 10-16)? Look at the Handout provided in OAKS about writing a book review. Write an additional (~)100 words in which you address how closely your reviewer follows these recommendations and guidelines. Why do you they do/not do this? What does this tell you about the reviewer, publication site, audience, and potentially the books themselves? Use this link to help you on that: https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/book-reviews/ Link of the book review: https://www.nypl.org/blog/2009/04/06/uglies-review Only use the book review to write this essay, don′t use the actually book for this. Only use the book review link that I have given you. Cite only the link of the article that′s it. Altogether, should be 600 words. First paragraph 150 words, second should be 350, and the last one 100 words. Organize it please in sections
