The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks

    Critical Book Review on Henrietta Lacks The merits of academic work are being evaluated here. Its purpose is not to prove that you read the book —which is understood as a given —but to show that you can think critically about what you’ve read. A book review requires a lot of thought and effort. The process can be broken down into three main stages: reading, writing, and writing. There are many questions and factors to consider with each stage as you work on your review. Many of these issues are interrelated, but they are broken up to make them easier to understand in this guide. Procedure: You should consider the following issues while reading the book to help you better evaluate it. Make notes as you read, so you won’t forget your observations or have to go back and hunt for references. 1.Purpose/Thesis: What was the author’s purpose in writing the book? Did they state their purpose explicitly, or did you have to infer it? The purpose for writing is usually the thesis or argument of the work. (Although academics often write books to refute another scholar’s work or because something is en vogue, the underlying purpose for writing is always to present an argument). Does the book have a clear central thesis/argument? How effectively (i.e., with what kinds of evidence) are these theses developed? Does the author convince you of the validity of her thesis/argument? 2.Sources: What types of sources does the author utilize in presenting the thesis? Are they mainly published documents, or do they include archival records? Does the author draw on other material such as novels, artwork, or interviews? How are the author’s sources incorporated into the narrative? Do you think they tapped all the major sources available, or are there omissions? 3.Contextualization: How well does the author explain the wider context of the events or developments he discusses? Is the book narrowly focused, or does the author try to connect to wider developments?   4.Style: is the book well written? Is it easy to understand? Does it flow well? Is the writing dense and heavy with jargon, making it hard to grasp? Does the author show a flair for effective writing that goes beyond simple communication? Does the writing make the book more interesting?   Author’s background: Look into the author’s qualifications and experience. Use the web and the Library catalogue to explore what other works the author has produced and what topics they have addressed.   STAGE TWO: AS YOU PREPARE TO WRITE   Once you’ve read the book and thought about it, you should start developing the main parts of your review before you start writing.Think about the following elements and how to include them in your essay. Then you should make a plan laying out the main points in the introduction, body, and conclusion of your paper. The following analogy might help you conceptualize your review: think of yourself as the judge in a courtroom. The author is an attorney who has just Presented his/her case=thesis/argument. It’s up to you as a reviewer to assess whether or not the author’s thesis has validity. As in a court of law, the judge rules on the evidence presented by the attorney. This is what you will do.   1.Profile: Articulate the author’s thesis/argument clearly and concisely. This will be roughly one paragraph in length and should not summarize the different sections or chapters. Rather, you should concentrate on the author’s central intention behind the book to find an effective way, to sum up the work for your reader.   2.Major Points: Look back through your notes to pull out your most important observations —this may help you find a central argument or theme for your review. Essentially your points are related to the evidence the author uses to support his thesis. Did a particular chapter or idea, for example, use evidence that supported the thesis? Consider the most effective order to present them as you think about the main points you want to make. If you consider the book successful, for example, you might want to present the parts you considered the most effective. You should also think about supporting your points, as you do in any other essay. Look for specific examples and short, effective quotes that could illustrate your ideas, or think about summarizing sections of the book to support your critique. You need to substantiate and illustrate any claims that you make.   3.Theme: Your review needs a central argument. In this case, it’s whether the author has accomplished their purpose in writing the book. Considering the author’s purpose in writing/thesis/argument, did you find the work generally successful, partially successful, flawed, etc.?   STAGE THREE: AS YOU WRITE Your review is a short critical essay of approximately 1000-1250 words or 4-5 pages. As you write and edit your paper, you should ensure that you include the following:   1.Introduction. This is where you briefly introduce the theme or topic of the work generally and the author’s purpose in writing/thesis/argument. The degree to which the author accomplishes that purpose is the thesis of your review.   2.Briefly say something about the author's qualifications. This should not be a biography of the author but a concise explanation of the author's background and those things qualifying him or her to write this work.   3.The body of your essay should critique the book's major points and how those points support the author's purpose writing/thesis/argument. Your ideas should flow in a logical order and be connected. Don’t just jumble ideas together—look for a way to organize your ideas effectively.   4.A short conclusion is summing up your evaluation of the book. Ideally, it should leave your reader with something to reflect on and a sense of whether or not you consider the book a success.   5.Your review should be grammatical and clear. Read it over carefully before you submit it. You should be careful about spelling, the correct use of quotations and citations, italics, etc.     A concise profile of the book's sources. Consider the types of sources the author utilizes in presenting his purpose in writing/thesis/argument. For example, have they published documents or included archival records; do they rely on primary and secondary sources, and how are the sources incorporated into the narrative? Writing a critical review, not an op-ed. Notice that opinion is not mentioned. Whether you liked the book is inconsequential.