how to write a book review of an academic book

• Link to facebook
• Link to linkedin
• Link to twitter
• Link to youtube
• Writing Tips

How to Write an Academic Book Review

4-minute read

• 13th September 2019

For researchers and postgraduates , writing a book review is a relatively easy way to get published. It’s also a good way to refine your academic writing skills and learn the publishing process. But how do you write a good academic book review? We have a few tips to share.

1. Finding a Book to Review

Before you can write a book review, you need a suitable book to review. Typically, there are two main ways to find one:

• Look to see which books journal publishers are seeking reviews for.
• Find a book that interests you and pitch it to publishers.

The first approach works by finding a journal in your field that is soliciting reviews. This information may be available on the journal’s website (e.g., on a page titled “Books for Review”). However, you can also email the editor to ask if there are book review opportunities available.

Alternatively, you can find a book you want to review and pitch it to journal editors. If you want to take this approach, pick a book that:

• Is about a topic or subject area that you know well.
• Has been published recently, or at least in the last 2–3 years.
• Was published by a reputable publisher (e.g., a university printing press).

You can then pitch the review to a journal that covers your chosen subject.

Some publishers will even give reviewers access to new books. Springer, for example, has a scheme where reviewers can access books online and receive a print copy once a review is published. So this is always worth checking.

2. Follow the Style Guide

Once you know the journal you want to write for, look for the publisher’s style guide. This might be called the “Author Instructions” or “Review Guidelines,” but it should be available somewhere on the publisher’s website. If it is not obviously available, consider checking with the editor.

Find this useful?

Subscribe to our newsletter and get writing tips from our editors straight to your inbox.

When you have found the style guide, follow its instructions carefully. It should provide information on everything from writing style and the word count to submitting your review, making the process much simpler.

3. Don’t Make It About You!

You’d be surprised how often people begin by summarizing the book they’re reviewing, but then abandon it in favor of explaining their own ideas about the subject matter. As such, one important tip when reviewing an academic book is to actually review the book , not just the subject matter.

This isn’t to say that you can’t offer your own thoughts on the issues discussed, especially if they’re relevant to what the author has argued. But remember that people read reviews to find out about the book being reviewed, so this should always be your focus.

4. Questions to Answer in a Book Review

Finally, while the content of a review will depend on the book, there are a few questions every good book review should answer. These include:

• What is the book about? Does it cover the topic adequately? What does the author argue? Ideally, you will summarize the argument early on.
• Who is the author/editor? What is their field of expertise? How does this book relate to their past work? You might also want to mention relevant biographical details about the author, if there are any.
• How does the author support their argument? Do they provide convincing evidence? Do they engage with counterarguments? Try to find at least one strength (i.e., something the book does well) and one weakness (i.e., something that could be stronger) to write about.
• As a whole, has the book helped you understand the subject? Who would you recommend it to? This will be the concluding section of your review.

If you can cover all these points, you should end up with a strong book review. All you need then is to have it proofread by the professionals .

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

Got content that needs a quick turnaround? Let us polish your work. Explore our editorial business services.

The benefits of using an online proofreading service.

Proofreading is important to ensure your writing is clear and concise for your readers. Whether...

2-minute read

6 Online AI Presentation Maker Tools

Creating presentations can be time-consuming and frustrating. Trying to construct a visually appealing and informative...

What Is Market Research?

No matter your industry, conducting market research helps you keep up to date with shifting...

8 Press Release Distribution Services for Your Business

In a world where you need to stand out, press releases are key to being...

3-minute read

How to Get a Patent

In the United States, the US Patent and Trademarks Office issues patents. In the United...

The 5 Best Ecommerce Website Design Tools 

A visually appealing and user-friendly website is essential for success in today’s competitive ecommerce landscape....

Make sure your writing is the best it can be with our expert English proofreading and editing.

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Assignments

• Annotated Bibliography
• Analyzing a Scholarly Journal Article
• Group Presentations
• Dealing with Nervousness
• Using Visual Aids
• Grading Someone Else's Paper
• Types of Structured Group Activities
• Group Project Survival Skills
• Leading a Class Discussion
• Multiple Book Review Essay
• Reviewing Collected Works
• Writing a Case Analysis Paper
• Writing a Case Study
• About Informed Consent
• Writing Field Notes
• Writing a Policy Memo
• Writing a Reflective Paper
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Generative AI and Writing
• Acknowledgments

A book review is a thorough description, critical analysis, and/or evaluation of the quality, meaning, and significance of a book, often written in relation to prior research on the topic. Reviews generally range from 500-2000 words, but may be longer or shorter depends on several factors: the length and complexity of the book being reviewed, the overall purpose of the review, and whether the review examines two or more books that focus on the same topic. Professors assign book reviews as practice in carefully analyzing complex scholarly texts and to assess your ability to effectively synthesize research so that you reach an informed perspective about the topic being covered.

There are two general approaches to reviewing a book:

• Descriptive review: Presents the content and structure of a book as objectively as possible, describing essential information about a book's purpose and authority. This is done by stating the perceived aims and purposes of the study, often incorporating passages quoted from the text that highlight key elements of the work. Additionally, there may be some indication of the reading level and anticipated audience.
• Critical review: Describes and evaluates the book in relation to accepted literary and historical standards and supports this evaluation with evidence from the text and, in most cases, in contrast to and in comparison with the research of others. It should include a statement about what the author has tried to do, evaluates how well you believe the author has succeeded in meeting the objectives of the study, and presents evidence to support this assessment. For most course assignments, your professor will want you to write this type of review.

Book Reviews. Writing Center. University of New Hampshire; Book Reviews: How to Write a Book Review. Writing and Style Guides. Libraries. Dalhousie University; Kindle, Peter A. "Teaching Students to Write Book Reviews." Contemporary Rural Social Work 7 (2015): 135-141; Erwin, R. W. “Reviewing Books for Scholarly Journals.” In Writing and Publishing for Academic Authors . Joseph M. Moxley and Todd Taylor. 2 nd edition. (Lanham, MD: Rowan and Littlefield, 1997), pp. 83-90.

How to Approach Writing Your Review

NOTE:   Since most course assignments require that you write a critical rather than descriptive book review, the following information about preparing to write and developing the structure and style of reviews focuses on this approach.

I.  Common Features

While book reviews vary in tone, subject, and style, they share some common features. These include:

• A review gives the reader a concise summary of the content . This includes a description of the research topic and scope of analysis as well as an overview of the book's overall perspective, argument, and purpose.
• A review offers a critical assessment of the content in relation to other studies on the same topic . This involves documenting your reactions to the work under review--what strikes you as noteworthy or important, whether or not the arguments made by the author(s) were effective or persuasive, and how the work enhanced your understanding of the research problem under investigation.
• In addition to analyzing a book's strengths and weaknesses, a scholarly review often recommends whether or not readers would value the work for its authenticity and overall quality . This measure of quality includes both the author's ideas and arguments and covers practical issues, such as, readability and language, organization and layout, indexing, and, if needed, the use of non-textual elements .

To maintain your focus, always keep in mind that most assignments ask you to discuss a book's treatment of its topic, not the topic itself . Your key sentences should say, "This book shows...,” "The study demonstrates...," or “The author argues...," rather than "This happened...” or “This is the case....”

II.  Developing a Critical Assessment Strategy

There is no definitive methodological approach to writing a book review in the social sciences, although it is necessary that you think critically about the research problem under investigation before you begin to write. Therefore, writing a book review is a three-step process: 1) carefully taking notes as you read the text; 2) developing an argument about the value of the work under consideration; and, 3) clearly articulating that argument as you write an organized and well-supported assessment of the work.

A useful strategy in preparing to write a review is to list a set of questions that should be answered as you read the book [remember to note the page numbers so you can refer back to the text!]. The specific questions to ask yourself will depend upon the type of book you are reviewing. For example, a book that is presenting original research about a topic may require a different set of questions to ask yourself than a work where the author is offering a personal critique of an existing policy or issue.

Here are some sample questions that can help you think critically about the book:

• Thesis or Argument . What is the central thesis—or main argument—of the book? If the author wanted you to get one main idea from the book, what would it be? How does it compare or contrast to the world that you know or have experienced? What has the book accomplished? Is the argument clearly stated and does the research support this?
• Topic . What exactly is the subject or topic of the book? Is it clearly articulated? Does the author cover the subject adequately? Does the author cover all aspects of the subject in a balanced fashion? Can you detect any biases? What type of approach has the author adopted to explore the research problem [e.g., topical, analytical, chronological, descriptive]?
• Evidence . How does the author support their argument? What evidence does the author use to prove their point? Is the evidence based on an appropriate application of the method chosen to gather information? Do you find that evidence convincing? Why or why not? Does any of the author's information [or conclusions] conflict with other books you've read, courses you've taken, or just previous assumptions you had about the research problem?
• Structure . How does the author structure their argument? Does it follow a logical order of analysis? What are the parts that make up the whole? Does the argument make sense to you? Does it persuade you? Why or why not?
• Take-aways . How has this book helped you understand the research problem? Would you recommend the book to others? Why or why not?

Beyond the content of the book, you may also consider some information about the author and the general presentation of information. Question to ask may include:

• The Author: Who is the author? The nationality, political persuasion, education, intellectual interests, personal history, and historical context may provide crucial details about how a work takes shape. Does it matter, for example, that the author is affiliated with a particular organization? What difference would it make if the author participated in the events they wrote about? What other topics has the author written about? Does this work build on prior research or does it represent a new or unique area of research?
• The Presentation: What is the book's genre? Out of what discipline does it emerge? Does it conform to or depart from the conventions of its genre? These questions can provide a historical or other contextual standard upon which to base your evaluations. If you are reviewing the first book ever written on the subject, it will be important for your readers to know this. Keep in mind, though, that declarative statements about being the “first,” the "best," or the "only" book of its kind can be a risky unless you're absolutely certain because your professor [presumably] has a much better understanding of the overall research literature.

NOTE: Most critical book reviews examine a topic in relation to prior research. A good strategy for identifying this prior research is to examine sources the author(s) cited in the chapters introducing the research problem and, of course, any review of the literature. However, you should not assume that the author's references to prior research is authoritative or complete. If any works related to the topic have been excluded, your assessment of the book should note this . Be sure to consult with a librarian to ensure that any additional studies are located beyond what has been cited by the author(s).

Book Reviews. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Book Reviews. The Writing Center. University of North Carolina; Hartley, James. "Reading and Writing Book Reviews Across the Disciplines." Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 57 (July 2006): 1194–1207;   Motta-Roth, D. “Discourse Analysis and Academic Book Reviews: A Study of Text and Disciplinary Cultures.”  In Genre Studies in English for Academic Purposes . Fortanet Gómez, Inmaculada  et  al., editors. (Castellò de la Plana: Publicacions de la Universitat Jaume I, 1998), pp. 29-45. Writing a Book Review. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Writing Book Reviews. Writing Tutorial Services, Center for Innovative Teaching and Learning. Indiana University; Suárez, Lorena and Ana I. Moreno. “The Rhetorical Structure of Academic Journal Book Reviews: A Cross-linguistic and Cross-disciplinary Approach .” In Asociación Europea de Lenguas para Fines Específicos, María del Carmen Pérez Llantada Auría, Ramón Plo Alastrué, and Claus Peter Neumann. Actas del V Congreso Internacional AELFE/Proceedings of the 5th International AELFE Conference . Zaragoza: Universidad de Zaragoza, 2006.

Structure and Writing Style

I.  Bibliographic Information

Bibliographic information refers to the essential elements of a work if you were to cite it in a paper [i.e., author, title, date of publication, etc.]. Provide the essential information about the book using the writing style [e.g., APA, MLA, Chicago] preferred by your professor or used by the discipline of your major . Depending on how your professor wants you to organize your review, the bibliographic information represents the heading of your review. In general, it would look like this:

[Complete title of book. Author or authors. Place of publication. Publisher. Date of publication. Number of pages before first chapter, often in Roman numerals. Total number of pages]. The Whites of Their Eyes: The Tea Party's Revolution and the Battle over American History . By Jill Lepore. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2010. xii, 207 pp.)

Reviewed by [your full name].

II.  Scope/Purpose/Content

Begin your review by telling the reader not only the overarching concern of the book in its entirety [the subject area] but also what the author's particular point of view is on that subject [the thesis statement]. If you cannot find an adequate statement in the author's own words or if you find that the thesis statement is not well-developed, then you will have to compose your own introductory thesis statement that does cover all the material. This statement should be no more than one paragraph and must be succinctly stated, accurate, and unbiased.

If you find it difficult to discern the overall aims and objectives of the book [and, be sure to point this out in your review if you determine that this is a deficiency], you may arrive at an understanding of the book's overall purpose by assessing the following:

• Scan the table of contents because it can help you understand how the book was organized and will aid in determining the author's main ideas and how they were developed [e.g., chronologically, topically, historically, etc.].
• Why did the author write on this subject rather than on some other subject?
• From what point of view is the work written?
• Was the author trying to give information, to explain something technical, or to convince the reader of a belief’s validity by dramatizing it in action?
• What is the general field or genre, and how does the book fit into it? If necessary, review related literature from other books and journal articles to familiarize yourself with the field.
• Who is the intended audience?
• What is the author's style? Is it formal or informal? You can evaluate the quality of the writing style by noting some of the following standards: coherence, clarity, originality, forcefulness, accurate use of technical words, conciseness, fullness of development, and fluidity [i.e., quality of the narrative flow].
• How did the book affect you? Were there any prior assumptions you had about the subject that were changed, abandoned, or reinforced after reading the book? How is the book related to your own personal beliefs or assumptions? What personal experiences have you had related to the subject that affirm or challenge underlying assumptions?
• How well has the book achieved the goal(s) set forth in the preface, introduction, and/or foreword?
• Would you recommend this book to others? Why or why not?

III.  Note the Method

Support your remarks with specific references to text and quotations that help to illustrate the literary method used to state the research problem, describe the research design, and analyze the findings. In general, authors tend to use the following literary methods, exclusively or in combination.

• Description : The author depicts scenes and events by giving specific details that appeal to the five senses, or to the reader’s imagination. The description presents background and setting. Its primary purpose is to help the reader realize, through as many details as possible, the way persons, places, and things are situated within the phenomenon being described.
• Narration : The author tells the story of a series of events, usually thematically or in chronological order. In general, the emphasis in scholarly books is on narration of the events. Narration tells what has happened and, in some cases, using this method to forecast what could happen in the future. Its primary purpose is to draw the reader into a story and create a contextual framework for understanding the research problem.
• Exposition : The author uses explanation and analysis to present a subject or to clarify an idea. Exposition presents the facts about a subject or an issue clearly and as impartially as possible. Its primary purpose is to describe and explain, to document for the historical record an event or phenomenon.
• Argument : The author uses techniques of persuasion to establish understanding of a particular truth, often in the form of addressing a research question, or to convince the reader of its falsity. The overall aim is to persuade the reader to believe something and perhaps to act on that belief. Argument takes sides on an issue and aims to convince the reader that the author's position is valid, logical, and/or reasonable.

IV.  Critically Evaluate the Contents

Critical comments should form the bulk of your book review . State whether or not you feel the author's treatment of the subject matter is appropriate for the intended audience. Ask yourself:

• Has the purpose of the book been achieved?
• What contributions does the book make to the field?
• Is the treatment of the subject matter objective or at least balanced in describing all sides of a debate?
• Are there facts and evidence that have been omitted?
• What kinds of data, if any, are used to support the author's thesis statement?
• Can the same data be interpreted to explain alternate outcomes?
• Is the writing style clear and effective?
• Does the book raise important or provocative issues or topics for discussion?
• Does the book bring attention to the need for further research?
• What has been left out?

Support your evaluation with evidence from the text and, when possible, state the book's quality in relation to other scholarly sources. If relevant, note of the book's format, such as, layout, binding, typography, etc. Are there tables, charts, maps, illustrations, text boxes, photographs, or other non-textual elements? Do they aid in understanding the text? Describing this is particularly important in books that contain a lot of non-textual elements.

NOTE:   It is important to carefully distinguish your views from those of the author so as not to confuse your reader. Be clear when you are describing an author's point of view versus expressing your own.

V.  Examine the Front Matter and Back Matter

Front matter refers to any content before the first chapter of the book. Back matter refers to any information included after the final chapter of the book . Front matter is most often numbered separately from the rest of the text in lower case Roman numerals [i.e. i - xi ]. Critical commentary about front or back matter is generally only necessary if you believe there is something that diminishes the overall quality of the work [e.g., the indexing is poor] or there is something that is particularly helpful in understanding the book's contents [e.g., foreword places the book in an important context].

Front matter that may be considered for evaluation when reviewing its overall quality:

• Table of contents -- is it clear? Is it detailed or general? Does it reflect the true contents of the book? Does it help in understanding a logical sequence of content?
• Author biography -- also found as back matter, the biography of author(s) can be useful in determining the authority of the writer and whether the book builds on prior research or represents new research. In scholarly reviews, noting the author's affiliation and prior publications can be a factor in helping the reader determine the overall validity of the work [i.e., are they associated with a research center devoted to studying the problem under investigation].
• Foreword -- the purpose of a foreword is to introduce the reader to the author and the content of the book, and to help establish credibility for both. A foreword may not contribute any additional information about the book's subject matter, but rather, serves as a means of validating the book's existence. In these cases, the foreword is often written by a leading scholar or expert who endorses the book's contributions to advancing research about the topic. Later editions of a book sometimes have a new foreword prepended [appearing before an older foreword, if there was one], which may be included to explain how the latest edition differs from previous editions. These are most often written by the author.
• Acknowledgements -- scholarly studies in the social sciences often take many years to write, so authors frequently acknowledge the help and support of others in getting their research published. This can be as innocuous as acknowledging the author's family or the publisher. However, an author may acknowledge prominent scholars or subject experts, staff at key research centers, people who curate important archival collections, or organizations that funded the research. In these particular cases, it may be worth noting these sources of support in your review, particularly if the funding organization is biased or its mission is to promote a particular agenda.
• Preface -- generally describes the genesis, purpose, limitations, and scope of the book and may include acknowledgments of indebtedness to people who have helped the author complete the study. Is the preface helpful in understanding the study? Does it provide an effective framework for understanding what's to follow?
• Chronology -- also may be found as back matter, a chronology is generally included to highlight key events related to the subject of the book. Do the entries contribute to the overall work? Is it detailed or very general?
• List of non-textual elements -- a book that contains numerous charts, photographs, maps, tables, etc. will often list these items after the table of contents in the order that they appear in the text. Is this useful?

Back matter that may be considered for evaluation when reviewing its overall quality:

• Afterword -- this is a short, reflective piece written by the author that takes the form of a concluding section, final commentary, or closing statement. It is worth mentioning in a review if it contributes information about the purpose of the book, gives a call to action, summarizes key recommendations or next steps, or asks the reader to consider key points made in the book.
• Appendix -- is the supplementary material in the appendix or appendices well organized? Do they relate to the contents or appear superfluous? Does it contain any essential information that would have been more appropriately integrated into the text?
• Index -- are there separate indexes for names and subjects or one integrated index. Is the indexing thorough and accurate? Are elements used, such as, bold or italic fonts to help identify specific places in the book? Does the index include "see also" references to direct you to related topics?
• Glossary of Terms -- are the definitions clearly written? Is the glossary comprehensive or are there key terms missing? Are any terms or concepts mentioned in the text not included that should have been?
• Endnotes -- examine any endnotes as you read from chapter to chapter. Do they provide important additional information? Do they clarify or extend points made in the body of the text? Should any notes have been better integrated into the text rather than separated? Do the same if the author uses footnotes.
• Bibliography/References/Further Readings -- review any bibliography, list of references to sources, and/or further readings the author may have included. What kinds of sources appear [e.g., primary or secondary, recent or old, scholarly or popular, etc.]? How does the author make use of them? Be sure to note important omissions of sources that you believe should have been utilized, including important digital resources or archival collections.

VI.  Summarize and Comment

State your general conclusions briefly and succinctly. Pay particular attention to the author's concluding chapter and/or afterword. Is the summary convincing? List the principal topics, and briefly summarize the author’s ideas about these topics, main points, and conclusions. If appropriate and to help clarify your overall evaluation, use specific references to text and quotations to support your statements. If your thesis has been well argued, the conclusion should follow naturally. It can include a final assessment or simply restate your thesis. Do not introduce new information in the conclusion. If you've compared the book to any other works or used other sources in writing the review, be sure to cite them at the end of your book review in the same writing style as your bibliographic heading of the book.

Book Reviews. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Book Reviews. The Writing Center. University of North Carolina; Gastel, Barbara. "Special Books Section: A Strategy for Reviewing Books for Journals." BioScience 41 (October 1991): 635-637; Hartley, James. "Reading and Writing Book Reviews Across the Disciplines." Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 57 (July 2006): 1194–1207; Lee, Alexander D., Bart N. Green, Claire D. Johnson, and Julie Nyquist. "How to Write a Scholarly Book Review for Publication in a Peer-reviewed Journal: A Review of the Literature." Journal of Chiropractic Education 24 (2010): 57-69; Nicolaisen, Jeppe. "The Scholarliness of Published Peer Reviews: A Bibliometric Study of Book Reviews in Selected Social Science Fields." Research Evaluation 11 (2002): 129-140;.Procter, Margaret. The Book Review or Article Critique. The Lab Report. University College Writing Centre. University of Toronto; Reading a Book to Review It. The Writer’s Handbook. Writing Center. University of Wisconsin, Madison; Scarnecchia, David L. "Writing Book Reviews for the Journal Of Range Management and Rangelands." Rangeland Ecology and Management 57 (2004): 418-421; Simon, Linda. "The Pleasures of Book Reviewing." Journal of Scholarly Publishing 27 (1996): 240-241; Writing a Book Review. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Writing Book Reviews. Writing Tutorial Services, Center for Innovative Teaching and Learning. Indiana University.

Writing Tip

Always Read the Foreword and/or the Preface

If they are included in the front matter, a good place for understanding a book's overall purpose, organization, contributions to further understanding of the research problem, and relationship to other studies is to read the preface and the foreword. The foreword may be written by someone other than the author or editor and can be a person who is famous or who has name recognition within the discipline. A foreword is often included to add credibility to the work.

The preface is usually an introductory essay written by the author or editor. It is intended to describe the book's overall purpose, arrangement, scope, and overall contributions to the literature. When reviewing the book, it can be useful to critically evaluate whether the goals set forth in the foreword and/or preface were actually achieved. At the very least, they can establish a foundation for understanding a study's scope and purpose as well as its significance in contributing new knowledge.

Distinguishing between a Foreword, a Preface, and an Introduction . Book Creation Learning Center. Greenleaf Book Group, 2019.

Locating Book Reviews

There are several databases the USC Libraries subscribes to that include the full-text or citations to book reviews. Short, descriptive reviews can also be found at book-related online sites such as Amazon , although it's not always obvious who has written them and may actually be created by the publisher. The following databases provide comprehensive access to scholarly, full-text book reviews:

• ProQuest [1983-present]
• Book Review Digest Retrospective [1905-1982]

Some Language for Evaluating Texts

It can be challenging to find the proper vocabulary from which to discuss and evaluate a book. Here is a list of some active verbs for referring to texts and ideas that you might find useful:

• account for
• demonstrate
• distinguish
• investigate

Examples of usage

• "The evidence indicates that..."
• "This work assesses the effect of..."
• "The author identifies three key reasons for..."
• "This book questions the view that..."
• "This work challenges assumptions about...."

Paquot, Magali. Academic Keyword List. Centre for English Corpus Linguistics. Université Catholique de Louvain.

• << Previous: Leading a Class Discussion
• Next: Multiple Book Review Essay >>
• Last Updated: Mar 6, 2024 1:00 PM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/assignments

• My Library Account
• Gateway Seminary
• GS Student Resources

How to Write a Book Review: Introduction

• Introduction

Steps to Write a Book Review

• Other Resources on Writing Reviews

Writing Book Reviews

Academic book reviews are helpful in enabling people to decide if they want to read a given book. A book review is not a book report, which you may hae done in elementary school. A book report describes the basic contents. Book reviews go far deeper than that. This guide will explain what an academic book review is and how to write one well.

Introduction to Writing Book Reviews

• What is a Book Review?
• Benefits of Writing Book Reviews

 What is a Book Review?

• Describes the purpose of the book
• Describes the contents of the book (subject of each chapter)
• Analyzes the approach/argument(s) of the book: Does it seem accurate? Does it make sense? Is the argument strong or weak?
• Assesses whether the book did what the author said it would do
• Suggests potential audiences for the book (pastors, students, professors, lay people) and potential uses, such as a textbook
• Based upon a careful reading of the entire book
• Uses a structured, formal, academic tone
• Most often appears in academic journals, though more informal versions may appear in magazines and blogs
• May include comparisons to other works in the same subject, e.g., if you are reviewing a book on Paul's theology, it would help to compare it briefly to another book on Paul's theology
• In an academic setting, a review assumes an academic audience

A book review requires the reviewer to read the book carefully and reflect on its contents. The review should tell a reader what the book seeks to do and offer an appraisal of how well the author(s) accomplished this goal. That is why this is a "critical" book review. You are analyzing the book, not simply describing it. A review assumes that the readers know the vocabulary of the discipline. For example, a reviewer of a book on the Gospel of Matthew could use "Q" and not need to explain it because it is assumed that the audience knows what Q is in the context of talking about the canonical gospels.

A book review does not

• Seek to be entertaining and/or engaging
• Describe your feelings regarding the book, e.g., “I loved it,” “it was terrible,” or “I disagree completely.”
• Superficial treatment similar to the blurb on the back of the book
• Offers an ad hominem (against the person) attack on the author

Here are two examples of typical academic book reviews:

https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=lsdar&AN=ATLAiFZU171223002713&site=eds-live&authtype=ip,sso&custid=s8984749

https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=lsdar&AN=ATLAi9KZ180630003303&site=eds-live&authtype=ip,sso&custid=s8984749

You may see non-academic book reviews that are more inform al or use humor but that is not appropriate for an academic book review.

Why would you write a book review? There are a few reasons.

• Meet a course requirement
• Understand a book better and grow as a scholar
• Write reviews for publications in the future, such as magazines

1. Your professor assigned it. You are probably reading this page because a professor gave you an assignment to write a review. This is straightforward. Your professor may have a specific set of requirements or directions and you need to follow those, even if they differ from what you read here. In either case, assume that your review is for a large audience. 

2. Writing a review will help you understand a book better. When you are going to write a good book review, you need to read the entire book carefully. By assigning a book review, the professor is seeking to help you understand the book better. A book review is a critical assessment of a book. “Critical” here means analytical. What did the author seek to do and how convincing was it? Your professor wants you to read the book carefully enough to explain both. A critical assessment recognizes that the status of an author/scholar is no guarantee that the book accomplishes its goal. The skill of critical assessment is valuable in all your research work, both now and after graduation.

3. You may have an opportunity in the future to write a book review for a denominational publication, a magazine like Christianity Today , a church newsletter, or in a blog post, which is very common.

So, a book review can fulfill a course requirement, make you better at critical assessment of the views of others, and create opportunities to use that skill for various publications.

Step 1: Read the book carefully.

Step 2: Write the basics.

Step 3: Fill in the details.

These steps are explained in the next tab of this research guide.

This is not for Book Reflections

If you have a (personal) reflection on a book assigned, what this guide says, besides step #1, likely does not apply to your assignment. You need to ask your professor for guidance on writing a reflection. There are two reasons.

1. A book reflection is not a standard, academic type of document. Therefore, general help based upon reading book reviews is not relevant.

2. Book reflections are heavily dependent upon exactly what a professor asks for. These frequently require comparing good and bad points of the book. That is not a feature of book reviews as such and reviews do not include your personal reflections.

Library Links

• Library Catalog
• A to Z Journal Databases & Ebook Collections
• Library Hours
• Library Policies & Procedures
• More Research Guides & Reference Helps

Need help? Ask us!

Ask a Librarian!

Make an Appointment with a Librarian

• Next: Steps to Write a Book Review >>
• Last Updated: Jun 20, 2022 4:36 PM
• URL: https://gs.libguides.com/BookReviews

How to Write Academic Book Review – a Complete Guide

Introduction

Welcome to The Knowledge Nest, your go-to resource for comprehensive guides on various academic subjects. In this guide, we will provide you with all the necessary information and steps to write an outstanding academic book review.

Why Write an Academic Book Review?

Before diving into the details, let's first understand why writing an academic book review is important. A book review allows you to critically analyze and assess the merit of a particular book. It not only helps you sharpen your analytical skills but also provides an opportunity to contribute to the academic community by sharing your insights and recommendations.

Step 1: Choose the Right Book

The first step in writing a high-quality academic book review is to select the right book. Identify a book that aligns with your area of interest or the subject you are studying. Ensure that the book is relevant, reputable, and has a substantial impact on the field you wish to explore.

Step 2: Read the Book Thoroughly

Once you have chosen the book, it's time to engage in a comprehensive reading. Read the book attentively, making notes of key arguments, main themes, and any significant evidence presented by the author. Pay close attention to the author's writing style, methodology, and the overall structure of the book.

Step 3: Analyze and Evaluate

After reading the book, critically analyze and evaluate its strengths and weaknesses. Consider the author's arguments, their supporting evidence, and how effectively they present their ideas. Assess the book's contribution to the field, its relevance, and its potential impact on future scholarship.

Step 4: Organize Your Thoughts

Before starting to write the actual review, it's essential to organize your thoughts and create an outline. Identify the main points and arguments you wish to address in your review. This will help you maintain a logical flow and structure in your writing.

Step 5: Start Writing

Now that you have a clear outline, it's time to put pen to paper and start writing your academic book review. Begin with a concise introduction that provides an overview of the book and its context. Clearly state your thesis or main argument regarding the book's strengths and weaknesses.

Step 6: Support Your Claims

As you progress with your review, make sure to back up your claims and arguments with supporting evidence from the book. Quote relevant passages, cite significant examples, and provide specific details to substantiate your viewpoints. Remember to analyze and critique the book's content objectively and fairly.

Step 7: Summarize and Conclude

In the final section of your review, summarize your main points and offer a concise conclusion. Highlight the book's significance and evaluate its contribution to the field. You can also provide recommendations for further research or suggest potential audiences who would benefit from reading the book.

Step 8: Revise and Refine

After completing your initial draft, take the time to revise and refine your review. Check for grammatical errors, ensure clarity in your arguments, and strengthen the overall structure of your writing. Edit ruthlessly to make your review concise, coherent, and compelling.

Step 9: Finalize and Submit

Once you are satisfied with the quality of your review, make any final adjustments and proofread carefully. Ensure that your content adheres to any specific submission guidelines provided by your academic institution or the platform where you plan to publish your review. Submit your review with confidence!

Writing an academic book review is a challenging task that requires careful analysis, critical thinking, and effective communication skills. By following the steps outlined in this guide, you will be well-equipped to craft a comprehensive and insightful book review that contributes to the scholarly discourse in your field.

About The Knowledge Nest

The Knowledge Nest is a community-driven platform dedicated to providing valuable educational resources and comprehensive guides across various academic disciplines. Our mission is to empower learners by sharing knowledge and enabling them to excel in their educational endeavors.

Tags: Academic Book Review, How to Write Academic Book Review, Writing Book Reviews, Writing Tips, The Knowledge Nest

Ph.D. Dissertation Help on Management

How to Start a Book Report - Studybay

An Overview of the Major Ethical Issues in Information Systems

All About Nike Shoes Manufacturing Process

Architecture Thesis Examples

Tips for Writing a Biography Book Report - Studybay

Economics Research Paper Examples & Study Documents

Dissertation Data Analysis Help - Studybay

Geography Homework Help for Stress-Free Studying - The Knowledge Nest

College Homework Help for Students - Studybay

How to Write an Academic Book Review

Learning objectives.

Upon completion of this comprehensive and engaging course, you will be able to:

• Identify the primary goals of an academic book review
• Describe the 5 key benefits of writing an academic book review
• List the 6 main audiences of an academic book review
• Apply strategies for deciding which academic book to review
• Choose the peer-reviewed journal with the best goodness-of-fit for your academic book review
• Successfully write the 5 main sections of an academic book review
• Differentiate between best practices in writing a review of an authored book versus an edited book
• Avoid the 6 most common mistakes made when preparing an academic book review
• Use an e-mail template to solicit an academic book review opportunity from a peer-reviewed journal’s Editor-in-Chief

Paul M. Sutter, PhD is Research Professor of Astrophysics at Stony Brook University, Guest Researcher at the Flatiron Institute in New York City, and contributing editor to Forbes , Space.com , and LiveScience , where his articles are syndicated to CBS News , Scientific American , and MSN , amongst others. Author of over 60 peer-reviewed articles as well as 2 books (published by Prometheus Books and Pegasus Books), he received his PhD in Physics as Department of Energy Computational Science Graduate Fellow at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign before completing post-doctoral fellowships in France at the Institut d’Astrophysique de Paris and in Italy at the Osservatorio Astronomico di Trieste. Since this time, Dr. Sutter has developed one of the most popular astrophysics podcasts in the world and has delivered over 100 conference presentations, seminars, and colloquia at prestigious institutions across the globe. A go-to expert for journalists and producers, he regularly appears on television, radio, and in print, including on the Discovery Channel, History Channel , Science Channel , and Weather Channel .

• Full Name *
• Contact Reason * -- General Inquiry -- Technical Support
• I consent to my data being stored according to the guidelines set out in the Privacy Policy *
• I consent to receiving e-mails with discounts and offers
• Phone This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

© 2021-2024 Publication Academy, Inc. All Rights Reserved

The Thursday Thinker Terms & Conditions Privacy Policy

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site, you are agreeing to the use of cookies outlined in our Cookie Policy .

• Studying at university
• Being organised
• Searching for information
• Reading and evaluating information
• Referencing
• Laboratory reports and lab books
• Dissertations, projects and theses
• Reflective writing

Book reviews

• Notes and other writing tasks
• Strategies for writing
• Developing as a writer
• Assessment and feedback

People who can help

You might be asked to write a book review as a way to help you read actively and form an opinion on the author's views and the context in which the book was written. Book reviews are common ways for academics to evaluate each others' contributions to the field of research, especially in the arts and social sciences where publishing in books is more usual than publishing in journals.

A good review is more than just a summary of the contents. It should include your view on what the purpose of the book is and who it is intended for, and it should address the context (time and place) in which the book has been written,  an evaluation of the author's arguments for strengths and weaknesses, and your identification of any bias in their perspective on the topic. Your lecturer will probably give you some guidance on what they expect, and it is likely to involve you asking yourself some or all of the following questions:

• Who is the author? What is their disciplinary background? What have they published before? Is this building on their previous research or entering a new field?
• When was the book written? How might that affect the perspective taken? Is there, for example, a political, social or economic context that would impact on the writing?
• What is the book about? What is the main topic area and scope? How does it fit with other books that have been published in this area?
• What is the main argument in the book? Is it well argued? Are the author's assumptions valid? Is there any obvious bias in the source of evidence they use?
• Is the writing style appropriate? Is the book well structured and does it flow comfortably?
• What is your view on the book's strengths and weaknesses? Do you think it's a valuable contribution to the literature in the discipline?

All of this should be supported by reference to particular passages or chapters that provide evidence to support your views.

Further reading

Reading and interpreting sources and data.

• Finding resources

Practical advice on managing writing

• Managing reading and writing a literature review
• Writing critically

more from Academic Support study resources

Talk to someone in your school or a specialist support service

Studying Effectively

Kings Meadow Campus Lenton Lane Nottingham, NG7 2NR

telephone: +44 (0) 115 951 5151 fax: +44 (0) 115 951 3666 Contact us

Legal information

• Terms and conditions
• Posting rules
• Accessibility
• Freedom of information
• Charity gateway
• Cookie policy

Connect with the University of Nottingham through social media and our blogs .

Wendy Laura Belcher

How to write an academic book review.

This article “Writing the Academic Book Review” was originally written by Belcher to aid participants in a workshop sponsored by the UCLA Chicano Studies Research Center in February 2003 and to encourage book review submissions to  Aztlán: A Journal of Chicano Studies . Book reviews in the field of Chicano studies can be sent to  the journal; for information, see the  new submissions page. The article was updated in 2015. Cite as Belcher, Wendy Laura. 2003. “Writing the Academic Book Review.” Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Chicano Studies Research Center. Last Modified 2015. Retrieved from https://www.wendybelcher.com/writing-advice/how-to-write-book-review/ on [month year]. See also the best-selling book of advice on writing, now in its second edition: Writing Your Journal Article in 12 Weeks: A Guide to Academic Publishing Success.

Why Write a Book Review?

Writing book reviews is not only the easiest and quickest route to publication, it is a good way to improve your writing skills, develop your analytical skills, learn how the journal publishing process works, and get to know editors. Since some libraries can’t buy books unless they have been reviewed and many individuals won’t buy books unless they have read a review, reviewing books can definitely advance your field. Indeed, scholars in smaller fields sometimes get together and assign books for review so that every book published in their field is reviewed somewhere. Just remember that book reviews do not “count” as much on a curriculum vitae as an academic essay. If you are doing more than two book reviews a year, you may be spending too much time on book reviews and not enough on your other writing.

Choosing a Book

Think about what kind of book would be most useful to you in writing your dissertation, finalizing a paper for publication, or passing your exams. Since book reviews do take time, like any writing, it is best to chose a book that will work for you twice, as a publication and as research. Alternatively, some recommend that graduate students focus on reviewing textbooks or anthologies, since such reviews take less background knowledge and editors can find it difficult to find people willing to do such reviews. Although the traditional book review is of one book, editors will often welcome book reviews that address two or more related books–called a review essay.

Choose a book that (1) is in your field, (2) is on a topic for which you have sound background knowledge, (3) has been published in the past two or three years, and (4) has been published by a reputable publisher (i.e., any press affiliated with a university or large commercial presses).

Books on hot topics are often of special interest to editors. It can also be rewarding to pick an obscure but useful book in order to bring attention to it. To avoid complications, it is best not to review books written by your advisor, spouse, or ex!

To identify a suitable book in your field:

• Look up the call number of the favorite book in your field and go to the stacks of your university library. Do a shelf search around the call number to see if anything similar or related has been published in the past couple of years.
• Go to any book database—your university library on-line, Worldcat , Amazon.com , the Library of Congress —and search using two or three keywords related to your field (e.g., Chicano fiction, Chicana politics, Latino demographics, Latina high school education) to find books in your area.
• Read magazines that review books before publication—such as Choice , Library Journal, or Kirkus Reviews —to get a sense for interesting books that will be coming out. You can get copies of books for review before they are published. Editors especially like reviews of just published books.
• Read those academic journals that list books recently received for review or recently published in their area. 
• Ask faculty members in your department for recommendations.

Once you have identified several books, locate copies and skim them. Pick the book that seems the strongest. Do not pick a book that has major problems or with which you disagree violently. As a graduate student, you do not have the protection of tenure and may one day be evaluated by the person whose book you put to the ax. If you really feel strongly that you must write a negative review of a certain book, go ahead and write the review. Academia is, after all, quite oedipal and young scholars do sometimes make their reputations by deflating those who came before them. Just realize that going on record in such a public way may have consequences.

Choosing a Journal

Identify several leading journals in your field that publish book reviews. One way to do this is to search an on-line article database or something like Book Review Digest , if your library has access. Using several key words from your field, limit your search to book reviews and note the journals where the results were published.

Before starting to write your review, contact the book review editor of one of the journals. This is important standard practice; in particular because most journals do not accept unsolicited reviews. You do not want to write an entire review of a book and send it to a journal, only to be told that they don’t accept unsolicited reviews or that a review of that very book is to appear in the next issue.

So, send a short e-mail to book review editors at prospective journals (most journals have websites with such information) identifying the book you would like to review and your qualifications for reviewing it. This e-mail need not be longer than two sentences: “I am writing to find out if you would welcome a review from me of [ Book Title ], edited by [editor] and published in 2012 by [pubisher]. I am currently writing my dissertation at Stanford on the history of the field of [name of a field related to book].”

Another reason why you want to contact the book review editor is that they often can get you the book for free. Publishers frequently send books for review straight to journals or, if the book editor directly contacts them, straight to you. Of course, you don’t need to wait for the book to start your review if you have access to a library copy. If you get a free book, make sure to write the review. A book review editor will never send you another book if you don’t deliver on the first.

If the book review editor says yes, they would like a review of the book from you, make sure to ask if the journal has any book review submission guidelines. In particular, you want to make sure you understand how long their book reviews tend to be.

If the book review editor says the book is already under review, move on to your next journal choice or ask the editor if they have any books on the topic that they would like reviewed. You are under no obligation to review a book they suggest, just make sure to get back to them with a decision. It is perfectly acceptable to say “Thanks for the suggestion, I’ve decided to focus on writing my prospectus/dissertation.”

Reading the Book

It is best, when writing a book review, to be an active reader of the book. Sit at a desk with pen and paper in hand. As you read, stop frequently to summarize the argument, to note particularly clear statements of the book’s argument or purpose, and to describe your own responses. If you have read in this active way, putting together the book review should be quick and straightforward. Some people prefer to read at the computer, but if you’re a good typist, you often start typing up long quotes from the book instead of analyzing it. Paper and pen provides a little friction to prevent such drifting.

Take particular note of the title (does the book deliver what the title suggests it is going to deliver?), the table of contents (does the book cover all the ground it says it will?), the preface (often the richest source of information about the book), and the index (is it accurate, broad, deep?).

Some questions to keep in mind as you are reading:

• What is the book’s argument?
• Does the book do what it says it is going to do?
• Is the book a contribution to the field or discipline?
• Does the book relate to a current debate or trend in the field and if so, how?
• What is the theoretical lineage or school of thought out of which the book rises?
• Is the book well-written?
• What are the books terms and are they defined?
• How accurate is the information (e.g., the footnotes, bibliography, dates)?
• Are the illustrations helpful? If there are no illustrations, should there have been?
• Who would benefit from reading this book?
• How does the book compare to other books in the field?
• If it is a textbook, what courses can it be used in and how clear is the book’s structure and examples?

It can be worthwhile to do an on-line search to get a sense for the author’s history, other books, university appointments, graduate advisor, and so on. This can provide you with useful context..

Making a Plan

Book reviews are usually 600 to 2,000 words in length. It is best to aim for about 1,000 words, as you can say a fair amount in 1,000 words without getting bogged down. There’s no point in making a book review into a 20-page masterpiece since the time would have been better spent on an academic essay that would count for more on your c.v.

Some say a review should be written in a month: two weeks reading the book, one week planning your review, and one week writing it.

Although many don’t write an outline for an essay, you should really try to outline your book review before you write it. This will keep you on task and stop you from straying into writing an academic essay.

Classic book review structure is as follows:

• Title including complete bibliographic citation for the work (i.e., title in full, author, place, publisher, date of publication, edition statement, pages, special features [maps, color plates, etc.], price, and ISBN.
• One paragraph identifying the thesis, and whether the author achieves the stated purpose of the book.
• One or two paragraphs summarizing the book.
• One paragraph on the book’s strengths.
• One paragraph on the book’s weaknesses.
• One paragraph on your assessment of the book’s strengths and weaknesses.

Writing the Review

Once you’ve read the book, try to spend no more than one or two weeks writing the review. Allowing a great deal of time to fall between reading the book and writing about it is unfair to you and the author. The point of writing something short like a book review is to do it quickly. Sending a publication to a journal is always scary, sitting on the review won’t make it less so.

Avoiding Five Common Pitfalls

• Evaluate the text, don’t just summarize it. While a succinct restatement of the text’s points is important, part of writing a book review is making a judgment. Is the book a contribution to the field? Does it add to our knowledge? Should this book be read and by whom? One needn’t be negative to evaluate; for instance, explaining how a text relates to current debates in the field is a form of evaluation.
• Do not cover everything in the book. In other words, don’t use the table of contents as a structuring principle for your review. Try to organize your review around the book’s argument or your argument about the book.
• Judge the book by its intentions not yours. Don’t criticize the author for failing to write the book you think that he or she should have written. As John Updike puts it, “Do not imagine yourself the caretaker of any tradition, an enforcer of any party standards, a warrior in any ideological battle, a corrections officer of any kind.”
• Likewise, don’t spend too much time focusing on gaps. Since a book is only 200 to 500 pages, it cannot possibly address the richness of any topic. For this reason, the most common criticism in any review is that the book doesn’t address some part of the topic. If the book purports to be about ethnicity and film and yet lacks a chapter on Latinos, by all means, mention it. Just don’t belabor the point. Another tic of reviewers is to focus too much on books the author did not cite. If you are using their bibliography just to display your own knowledge it will be obvious to the reader. Keep such criticisms brief.
• Don’t use too many quotes from the book. It is best to paraphrase or use short telling quotes within sentences.

For further advice about writing for publication, see Writing Your Journal Article in Twelve Weeks: A Guide to Academic Publishing Success by Wendy Laura Belcher (University of Chicago Press, 2019).

Writing the Academic Book Review

I no longer teach this course , but you might want to think about teaching it, so I provide the information here.

This workshop aids students in actually writing and publishing a book review for a peer-reviewed journal. At the first session, students receive instruction on why graduate students should (or should not) write book reviews, how to choose a book for review, how to chose a journal for submission, how to read a book for review, how to plan and structure a book review, and five common pitfalls of reviewing. Students also form small groups to discuss the book each plans to review.At the second meeting, students bring a draft of their book review for exchange and feedback. At the third meeting, students arrive with a final version of their essay to submit to an editor for publication.

This workshop is sometimes offered by a particular journal with the editors serving on a panel the first night to provide students with specific advice for submitting reviews to their journal. I did such a workshop for Aztlán: A Journal of Chicano Studies , with the editors Chon A. Noriega and Alicia Gaspar de Alba.

Session 1, Week 1

• Introduction to book reviewing
• Selecting an appropriate book to review
• Five essential elements of any book review
• Typical errors graduate student reviewers make

Session 2, Week 10

• Assignment: First draft due
• Discussion of the writing process and challenges
• Exchanging and critiquing first drafts
• Some instructions on revising

Session 3, Week 16

• Assignment: Final draft due
• Working with editors and the publication process
• Refreshments

• About the LSE Impact Blog
• Comments Policy
• Popular Posts
• Recent Posts
• Subscribe to the Impact Blog
• Write for us
• LSE comment

Fleur Johns

May 19th, 2021, why, when and how 10 tips for academic book reviewers.

2 comments | 111 shares

Estimated reading time: 7 minutes

Professor Fleur Johns  offers 10 rules of thumb that have guided her own reviewing efforts and may prove helpful to others working on book reviews, or thinking of doing so, in the course of their academic lives.

A recent experience prompted me to reflect on the role of academic book reviews and about when, why and how to write them. I wrote a  review  several months ago of a book that has received widespread and overwhelmingly laudatory attention. While acknowledging the importance and value of the book’s contribution, I took issue with it in no uncertain terms and questioned its attainment of one of its major goals. Several respondents on social media reacted with verbal frowns. One wondered if I had contacted the author prior to the review’s publication (I had not). Another bristled at what they interpreted as audacity on my part, remarking that it was ‘easier’ to write a book review than ‘a book of significance’ (it is). I worried a bit too. Had I been disrespectful, ungenerous? Should I have cushioned my remarks in a fuller recitation of the book’s strengths?

Reflection on this experience led me to formulate, more explicitly than I had previously, some rules of thumb for my own reviewing efforts. I reproduce these here in case they might be helpful to others working on book reviews, or thinking of doing so, in the course of their academic lives. It goes without saying – but let me say it anyway – that these are conditioned by my own unduly privileged circumstances and that I still have much to learn, as a reviewer and otherwise. I have thought and  written about lists  in the past, and have an affection for them, so I present these as 10 suggestions:

1.  Reviewing books maintains one’s sense of being part of a larger, longer, scholarly conversation. It should be as much of a regular responsibility of academic life as peer reviewing (relative to opportunity). And like peer reviewing, it needs to be approached with greater care than it is sometimes afforded.

2.  Everyone should write book reviews, at all academic career stages. It’s not just a practice recommended for graduate students needing free books. It keeps one in the habit of close, critical, cover-to-cover reading. And what of the probable response: that contemporary academic work is structured in ways that make the continued cultivation of this habit unachievable? That may be so for many of us at many times. If we concede that across the board, however, then we acquiesce to the very transformation of universities that we often lament.

Everyone should write book reviews, at all academic career stages. It’s not just a practice recommended for graduate students needing free books. It keeps one in the habit of close, critical, cover-to-cover reading.

3.  Conflicts of interest, actual or perceived, are best avoided. Book reviewers should disclose anything that could be viewed as such. I have reviewed friends’ books before, to try to lend support to and foster engagement with colleagues’ and collaborators’ work. Upon reflection though, I should not have done so because of the possible perception that I might benefit professionally from advances in my co-authors’ and collaborators’ careers, and that my judgment might be coloured accordingly. I might instead have facilitated reviews of these books by someone at a greater distance from their authors. Of particular importance among conflicts is the following: think very carefully before reviewing a book in which your own work features prominently. If there is any reference to your work in the book you’re reviewing, let it pass. Use of the first-person voice can be refreshing, but a book review ought not to revolve predominantly around the reviewer. Professor  Leslie Green’s 2020 review  of a section of Professor Joanne Conaghan’s 2013 book (to which Conaghan offered a  patient response ) is illustrative of the kinds of perils that can be associated with dwelling, as a reviewer, on the treatment of one’s own work in the book under review.

4.  Attend to power imbalances. If you are an established academic, don’t review a first book or a book of an early career researcher with which you fervently disagree. Ordinarily, disagreement can make for engaging writing and productive argument (more on this below). However, in the context of a power imbalance favouring the reviewer, discord may be misread and could do unintended damage.

5.  Foreground the criticism. Keep summary to a minimum. Be sure to make an argument – about the book, but also by reflecting critically on the intervention that it makes in the field, and what it suggests about the state of that field. Be fair, respectful and try to meet the book on its own terms, but don’t shy away from critical engagement. It is a mark of respect for the seriousness of the author’s endeavour.

6.  Some say one should only review books that one loves. I disagree. My version would be the following: only review books by which you feel provoked, and that seem significant to you. This position counsels against reading books that hold you in their thrall. If you are utterly in awe of a book or its author, that might be a good reason not to review it (gushy reviews can be a tad nauseating). At the same time, it militates against reviewing books that you think are good, but which don’t really excite you either positively or negatively. Critique can carry a degree of risk (recall the  extraordinary tribulations  through which journal editor Professor Joseph Weiler was put by one disgruntled author). Nonetheless, a fence-sitting, anodyne review wastes the writer’s, editor’s and reader’s energies and does the author concerned no service at all. Reviewing books that frustrate you, but that you still regard as important and worthy of attention – this can really help move scholarly argument along.

If you are utterly in awe of a book or its author, that might be a good reason not to review it

7.  Don’t just review ‘up’ or focus on renowned and established authors. Seek out lesser-known works to spotlight. If you are bilingual or multilingual, seek out books in a range of languages to pitch to book review editors to help disturb the  dominance of English  in scholarly publication.

8.  Don’t send the review to the author, at least not prior to publication. Don’t imagine yourself in direct conversation with the author so much as with the book and its other readers. This does not, of course, override the imperative of being fair.

Don’t imagine yourself in direct conversation with the author so much as with the book and its other readers.

9.  Explore the genre, including the (often undervalued) review essay. Read widely in it. Approach the genre on its own terms, inspired by those book reviews that you have found most arresting and illuminating as a reader. The  Los Angeles Review of Books , the  New York Review of Books , the  London Review of Books ,  Biblio , the  Paris Review , the  Singapore Review of Books ,  The New Yorker ,  The Nation   and the  Latin American Research Review  all publish excellent book reviews, as do many other online and print publications.

10.  There are awards for book reviewing: in the US,  the Nona Balakian Citation for Excellence in Reviewing , for example. One might learn from taking a look at the work of those lauded for reviewing and trying to unpick what they do well. Accolades for book reviewing are, however, very few. If you are a member of an editorial board or scholarly association, you might consider introducing such an award. Or maybe that suggestion misses part of the point of book reviewing. The poet Philip Larkin’s letters may have presented him as a ‘ habitual racist and full-time misogynist’ . Yet he was on to something, I think, when he ruefully celebrated the unheralded reading and writing of  ‘book-drunk freak[s]’  for precisely that – its ingloriousness. Perhaps, when one can, there is some small grace in doing difficult work in honour of reading and readers, with little or no expectation of recognition.

This blogpost originally appeared on the LSE Review of Books , where readers can find a wide range of books to review. If you would like to contribute please contact the managing editor of LSE Review of Books, Dr Rosemary Deller, at  [email protected]

Note: This article gives the views of the author, and not the position of the Impact of Social Science blog, nor of the London School of Economics. Please review our  Comments Policy  if you have any concerns on posting a comment below.

Image Credit: Adapted from Cottonbro via Pexels.

About the author

Fleur Johns is a Professor and Australian Research Council Future Fellow in the Faculty of Law and Justice at UNSW Sydney. Her books include Non-Legality in International Law: Unruly Law (Cambridge 2013). Fleur is also an avid reader and a periodic writer of book reviews. Find her on Twitter at @FleurEJ

• Pingback: Top tips for writing academic book reviews (and why you should do them in the first place!) – ECRAG

These are golden rules by Professor Fleur Johns, no doubt! Everyone should read and follow these rules.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Related Posts

How to Write a Book Review of an Edited Collection

June 25th, 2019.

Author Interview: Q and A with Dr Phillipa K. Chong on Inside the Critics’ Circle: Book Reviewing in Uncertain Times

November 29th, 2020.

Bibliodiversity – What it is and why it is essential to creating situated knowledge

December 5th, 2019.

Writing for edited collections represents a model for a creative academic community unfairly rejected by the modern academy

June 12th, 2020.

Visit our sister blog LSE Review of Books

Academic Book Review: Guidelines, Template & Structure

When it comes to writing a book review it is important to be extraordinarily perceptive. Book reviews usually share some important insights that goes into the broad system of academic publishing that benefits the people in the academic profession.  

Hence, writing an academic book review carries a lot more responsibility and weightage that what it actually seems to have.  

What Is A Book Review?

What isn’t an academic book review, how do you structure a book review, phase i – assess, understand and plan before you write, phase ii – prepping to write, phase iii – writing, helpful writing tips for reviewers.

Talking about book review many people think that it is merely offering their opinion on a specific book. However, reviewing a book has a much wider scope than that. An effective book review involves assessing a book and then giving a descriptive criticism based on it.  

In general, book review involves evaluating the content, analyzing the characters, information about the author’s background and summarizing the book in short. While writing you can cover the important ideas and topics given in the book assuming that the readers have not read the book.  

While academic book reviews are written by scholars to be read by their fellow scholars. This is the reason it is also called as scholarly reviews. That being said, book reviews are useful for the researchers and readers to decide if they should go for the book or not.  

So, when outlining the academic book review structure make sure it serves the relevant purposes. This includes making the fellow scholars familiar with the objective, quality and reasoning represented by the book’s content. Also, make sure to explain how the content is suitable and valuable for the present-day literature.  

Writing an academic book review is definitely not a very easy or quick job, but it surely oils the wheels of the historians and professional book reviewers. So, if you are wondering how to write a good academic book review, it’s important to understand the prominent parts of academic book review.  

Sometimes readers confuse it with literature review but there is an evident difference between the two.  

Literature review usually focuses on providing a short summary of fellow scholar’s research, blending the present-day content on a particular current topic, and stating the limitations in their research.  

Whereas, the academic book review template appears like an entry done in the annotated bibliography. It lays the entire focus on the evaluation and summary of the published material.  

Reviewing a book means helping fellow scholars in deciding whether or not to purchase the book. It doesn’t cover any hypothesis as academic book review is not a research paper.  

Furthermore, you can’t compare it with a book report even when there might be a few similarities. A book report presents a larger outline of the book contents. The clear-cut goal of an academic book review is to analyze what the author what wanted to convey, how well have they done that, and what are your original thoughts on it (both positive and negative).  

In order to write a successful review it is important to have an excellent academic book review structure. Generally, there is a fairly easy and simple structure for most book reviews.  

• It starts with a brief introduction to summarizing the individual argument of the author and concluding it with helpful suggestions. Don’t forget to share your fair and impersonal response while writing the review.
• The right way how to write an academic book review, is to first make sure to perform some critical thinking and brief research. It will help you to write a well-structured and well-supported review in a logical manner.   In simple words, you can start with an introduction that explains the prominence of the book in relation to the current developments in the field. Understand why is it important to study about the selected topic. That way, you can quickly explain about the main argument of the author and share your insights about the content’s quality.
• In the middle section you can add summarised paragraphs for different parts of the book. Just like most reviewers you can either do it topic-wise or chapter-wise. While evaluating the author’s individual arguments make sure to analyze them based on your personal thinking and opinion.Just make sure to understand if they appropriately relate to the central ides of the book. Although, most reviewers like to share their opinions in the end of the review. But it is better to introduce your thoughts going with the flow as you analyze each element of the book.
• Lastly, give a helpful conclusion summing up the review by telling how valuable the book is. Here you need to explain the readers why they should buy and read the book and why they should not. While sharing your final evaluation make sure to be considerate and generous about the originality of the book.

Wondering How To Write A Good Academic Review?

Just go through the easy to follow academic book review guidelines discussed below.  

Sometimes reviewers or writers might not find any creative insight or research behind a published book or article . It deprives them of the motivation and they keep on thinking how to write an academic book review. Well! It is best for the scholar reviewers to take their sweet time to think it through before beginning to write.   They should plan and analyze the other theories within the subject area. Based on it, they should provide critical assessment, evaluation of the author’s methodology and relevance to other published literature.   Some points review writer must have at the back of their head includes:   What was the author’s purpose in writing the book? Remember that it is really important to highlight the content that shares the author’s objective in writing the book. That way you can provide your opinions of whether the readers or other scholars should give it a try or not.  

Understand the main argument of the book Be thorough while going through the academic book so you can understand the author’s main argument highlighted in the book.  

What sources does the author use to support her arguments? In order to provide an accurate summation of the book’s content, find out the main sources used by author to support the argument. It will help you in understanding whether or not the author was able to provide relevant and accurate summary of the content.  

Is the book well written? Just read and analyse the book thoroughly to decide if it is well-written and concise. Remember the book should be able to provide significant knowledge to the learners.  

Intended audience While doing your research make sure the book connects well with the intended readers.  

When was the book written? A crucial aspect of writing a book review is to find out the timing when it was written. You should know if it is in accordance with progressive ideas or not.  

Does the argument persuade you? Check whether the book was able to convince you with what it was trying to tell.  

Authors background and book genre Since you need to write limited words while assessing the book make sure to understand the genre and the background of the book.  

The next important phase is to master the skill of writing a successful book review. Before you actually start writing it is very important to do some prepping and thinking fundamental for writing a valuable review. Ponder upon the questions we listed above and then move ahead.  

You might even need to understand the book’s connection with similar literature. It will help you develop a personal logic and argument about the work at hand. This way you can come up with an well-organized and supported academic book review.  

Feel free to check some other relevant reviews in your subject area. After some thorough research you can collectively sum up your thoughts into a statement describing the objective of your review.  

Do you want to know how to write an academic book review? Read on to know the various elements of the book that should be covered.  

A. Introduction Start by choosing a suitable citation style of your field and then mention the book. Also, mention about the current rates of book in the market. Provide a summary of the important arguments made by the author all through their work.  

Read the book thoroughly and give an outline of the content organization in the book. Also, look out for the arguments and mention about them with relevant context.  

You should be able to allure the readers by providing relevant statements about why the book is suitable for their subject area. Here you can state some main points on author’s thesis and importance of studying it. Let’s not forget to mention about the quality of content and share some general evaluation.  

B. Body When it comes to the body of your academic book review template, you can share the main ideas mentioned in the book. Just start by writing a brief summary since there is a set word count for writing book review.  

Based on your convenience you can either write a summary chapter by chapter or topic by topic. After performing a thorough assessment of the book compare it with other literature on the same subject area. Mention how it has contributed to the previous and current literature and research.  

Talking about how to write an academic book review, a reviewer should always provide their opinion about the relevance of the book for target readers. This means you should  mention who should read the book and who should not. For example, mention if it will be useful for the college students, fellow scholars, teachers, or researchers.  

An important part of academic book review guidelines are anaylzing the research methods of the author.  

C. Conclusion While giving your concluding evaluation just try to be thoughtful with the words. Remember writing an academic book review is incomplete without reliable recommendations and criticism.  

Your scholarly views will definitely play a crucial role in helping fellow scholars and readers to decide if they should put their money in getting the book. Make sure to mention suitable reasons about why you recommend the book. This includes covering the benefits and drawbacks of the book.  

For instance, you can mention whether or not the book was interesting, concise and well-written. You should explain why readers should spend their valuable time in reading this book.  

If you are thinking how to write an academic book review effectively, go through some useful tips discussed below.  

Related : How to write a lyric poem?  

Here, take a glance at some important tips for writing a book review that is valuable for the readers.

• Just avoid being pedantic and focus on picking the major details for a successful review. This includes originality of the content, factual mistakes, relevance for the readers, focusing on each chapter and other crucial elements.
• While writing an academic book review, keep the language easy to understand, your thoughts clear, and the writing concise.
• Make sure to be careful with the tone and words that you pick while writing the review. Do not keep your tone peculiarly impersonal.
• Go through the reviews presented on some prominent studies in the chosen subject area for academic review.
• Read the academic content thoroughly to figure out the unpredictability in the writer’s argument.
• Avoid any conflicting ideas and thoughts associated with the writer of the selected academic book.
•  Be sure to provide a clear and concise summary of the book. Feel free to present your argument about the book while being respectful.
• Always dig into the references and quotations of the author to understand if the interpretation is unbiased.

Related : Best Grammar Courses Online , Online Business Writing Courses , How to write a synopsis?  

Q. What academic writing is both an evaluation and descriptions of a book?

A . A book review is a piece of academic writing that is both a concise description and evaluation about the major elements of the book. This mainly involves the critical evaluation of the meaning, importance, quality and authenticity of the book’s content. It should clearly highlight the objective and authority of the book’s matter.  

Q. How do you write a book review for a PhD?

A . Providing a book review is surely a great option to make your way in the academic profession world. While different people share different perspectives when it comes to writing a book review for a PhD.  

You just have to make sure to cover the following points: give a summary of the book’s important aspects written with kindness, provide a detailed summary for each chapter and highlight the important elements you found in the book.  

Also, give complete citation and be honest with your thoughts. Don’t forget to meticulously mention about the strengths and weakness of the book.  

Q. What are the 4 stages in writing a book review?

A . Writing an academic book review involves giving a critical analysis about prominent parts of a book to the readers. This goes for the material, advantages, layout and the importance of the book. Reviewers valuable inputs help readers to understand the benefits and limitations of the book’s matter.  

Just make sure your academic book review structure has these 4 stages: a short introduction, defining its contents, choosing specific themes or chapters and highlighting important parts and finally providing a comprehensive concluding evaluation.  

Q. How long should a book review be?

A . Generally, reviews are written in brief. Whether they are published in academic journals or newspapers, reviews are usually 600 -2000 words long.  

But it is best to summarize your review in about 1000 words. Keeping your academic book reviews concise and short is the key even when you encounter some broadened commentaries and lengthy assignments. It would be pointless to write a lengthy review since it won’t drag any special attention, instead make it troublesome for the readers to read.

Related Posts

Online Content Writing Courses with Certification  – What’s My Pick?

Best Online Poetry Classes & Courses + FAQs & Expert Suggestions

SEO Writing Training: 9 Best SEO Content Writing Courses Online

13 Best Business Writing Courses Online

Leave a comment cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Search Menu
• Advance articles
• Author Guidelines
• Submission Site
• Open Access Options
• About International Journal of Law and Information Technology
• Editorial Board
• Advertising and Corporate Services
• Journals Career Network
• Self-Archiving Policy
• Dispatch Dates
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

Book Review Guidelines

All parties interested in reviewing books for the journal should contact the Book Reviews Editor, Dr. Daithí Mac Síthigh, by email at [email protected]​

Standard Book Reviews should be no longer than 1500 words although depending on the book being reviewed they may be shorter or long. Book reviewers should discuss the length of the review with the Book Reviews Editor before writing. All book reviews should be prepared and submitted following the general  Instructions to Authors of this journal.

The following information should be given about the book being reviewed at the start of each review:

Author / Editor Name, Book Title, Publisher, Year of Publication, ISBN-13: 000-0-00-000000-0, Number of Pages, Price

Book reviews should be timely and objective and should consider the following:

The intended audience for the book and who would find it useful

The main ideas and major objectives of the book and how effectively these are accomplished

The soundness of methods and information sources used

The context or impetus for the book - political controversy, review research or policy, etc.

Constructive comments about the strength and weaknesses of the book

For any queries about Book Reviews please contact the Book Reviews Editor at the address above.

• Recommend to your Library

Affiliations

• Online ISSN 1464-3693
• Print ISSN 0967-0769
• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

• Harvard Library
• Research Guides
• Faculty of Arts & Sciences Libraries

GSAS Writing Toolkit

• Writing and Revision
• Consult Your Library Experts
• Research Handbooks & Guides
• Finding a Researchable Question
• Cross-Disciplinary Databases
• Data: Finding, Interpreting, and Visualizing It
• Tracking Stuff Down: Essential Services
• Methodology Sources

Classic Guides to Writing

Writing in a second language, grant writing, note taking tips, back up your files, harvard sites for writers.

• Style and Citation
• Presenting & Publishing Your Work

The  Fellowships & Writing Center  at Harvard's Graduate School of Arts and Sciences is the best resource for GSAS students interested in producing clear, logical, persuasive, elegant, and engaging scholarly writing. In combination with their assistance and the latest guidance from your chosen manual of style, the old standards are as resonant as ever: 

• The Elements of Style This classic text by William Strunk Jr. and E.B. White presents a concise style manual that provides the basic elementary principles of English usage and composition, with tips on commonly misused words and expressions, style, and spelling.
• On Revision: The Only Writing That Counts Germano explains how to get your writing up to the level where it matters not just to yourself but to others. Revision goes far beyond the usual advice to cut for concision, discussing revision as expansion, structural revision across the larger span of a work, revision as response to one's audience, and revision as rethinking ...   On Revision steps back to take in the big picture, showing authors how to hear their own writing voice and how to reread their work as if they didn't write it.
• Style: Lessons of Clarity and Grace Joseph M. Williams' clear, accessible style models the kind of writing that audiences — both in college and after — will admire. The principles offered in this manual help writers understand what readers expect and encourage writers to revise to meet those expectations more effectively. This book is all many might need to understand the principles of effective writing. Revised by Gregory G. Colomb.
• Writing Your Journal Article in Twelve Weeks: A Guide to Academic Publishing Success   A much-appreciated and great all-around guide for writing, this is the only reference book to combine expert guidance with a step-by-step workbook for writing a journal article.

Conducting doctoral research and writing is even more challenging when writing in a second language. The following resources may ease the process.

• Professional Communication Program for International Students and Scholars Through this program, Harvard University's Derek Book Center for Teaching and Learning supports international PhD students, teachers, and scholars at every stage of their academic careers.
• Reading, Writing, and Discussing at the Graduate Level: A Guidebook for International Students From the publisher: "The purpose of this book is to help international students navigate the academic issues they will encounter while attending graduate school in the United States. This book provides guidelines for conquering the obstacles that international graduate students often face, such as developing independent ideas based on required readings, participating in classroom discussions effectively, organizing academic papers, and effectively managing academic work and social relationships. This book is an invaluable tool for international graduate students and their instructors and mentors."
• Thesis and Dissertation Writing in a Second Language: A Handbook for Students and Their Supervisors This book by Brian Paltridge and Sue Starfield uses accessible language and practical examples to discuss issues that are crucial to successful thesis and dissertation writing. This edition offers insights into the experience of being a doctoral writer, issues of writer identity, and writing with authority; typical language and discourse features of theses and dissertations; advice on the structure and organisation of key sections; suggestions for online resources which support writing; extracts from completed theses and dissertations; guidance on understanding examiner expectations; and advice on publishing.
• Translation: A Guide to Harvard Libraries in Plain English This research guide created by Harvard librarian, Anna Assogba, serves as a helpful tool for students whose first language is not English.

A successful grant proposal draws on specialized writing skills. The following resources may prove useful in your endeavor to secure funding for a scholarly project.

• The Grant Writing Guide: A Road Map for Scholars This book by Betty S. Lai, forthcoming from Princeton University Press in January 2023, promises to be "an essential handbook for writing research grants, providing actionable strategies for professionals in every phase of their careers, from PhD students to seasoned researchers."

Librarians have experience with efficient note-taking tools and practices to help you retain what you learn along your research journey and hold on to your best ideas as you make connections among sources. Below is a selection to get you started.

• Register  with your Harvard email address to access unlimited storage through Zotero.  
• Keep Track , a module from Unabridged On Demand, provides general tips about staying organized and on task, including productivity strategies, workflows, and note-taking formats.  
• Prepare your note-taking plan.

Have a file backup plan, just in case. Having multiple copies, accessible in multiple ways, is essential. An external hard drive, a USB flash drive, stored safely, will help you sleep soundly as deadlines approach:

• Free cloud storage solutions to consider include Google Drive , DropBox , or OneDrive.  

Writing is the lifeblood of scholarship and a point of Crimson pride at Harvard. Keep your pen in hand and your finger on the pulse of what's available to you here.

• Finding Your Voice: Understanding Academic Integrity and Graduate Writing at Harvard Academic writing at the graduate level is different from other writing you may have done in the past. Learn more about what it means to be a successful writer at Harvard and a contributor to the scholarly conversation in your discipline.
• Gen Ed Writes A resource for faculty, teaching fellows and teaching assistants, and undergraduate students in Harvard's General Education courses.
• Harvard Guide to Using Sources Essential guide to using sources in academic writing.
• HarvardWrites A resource for writers and teachers of writing, HarvardWrites is a joint venture of the Harvard College Writing Program, the Derek Bok Center for Teaching and Learning, and the departments and schools represented on our site. The project was made possible through a generous grant from the Harvard Initiative for Learning and Teaching (HILT).
• Harvard Writing Project Writing Guides A wide range of writing guides that encourage better writing through practical advice and useful examples. There are four principal types of writing guides: (1) for disciplines or interdisciplinary programs, (2) for specific courses, (3) for specific genres of writing, and (4) for General Education courses.
• AnthroWrites
• ScienceWrites  (in Beta)
• << Previous: Methodology Sources
• Next: Style and Citation >>

Except where otherwise noted, this work is subject to a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , which allows anyone to share and adapt our material as long as proper attribution is given. For details and exceptions, see the Harvard Library Copyright Policy ©2021 Presidents and Fellows of Harvard College.

Please contact the site administrator

• ADMIN AREA MY BOOKSHELF MY DASHBOARD MY PROFILE SIGN OUT SIGN IN

• Seen & Heard

Actor Miles McKenna To Write a Picture Book

BY Michael Schaub • April 1, 2024

Vlogger and actor Miles McKenna will make his picture book debut later this year.

Little Bee Books and LGBTQ+ nonprofit group GLAAD will publish McKenna’s I Am NOT a Vampire , illustrated by Riley Samels,next year, the press announced in a news release.

McKenna began posting videos on YouTube in 2011 and came out as transgender in 2015. His YouTube channel currently has 1.15M subscribers, and he has 888,000 followers on Instagram .

As an actor, he has appeared in the series Guilty Party and All Night , and he currently stars in the Disney+ and Hulu series Goosebumps , based on R.L. Stine’s book series, as James. He is the author of a previous book, Out!: How To Be Your Authentic Self , published in 2020 by Abrams; a critic for Kirkus praised it as “an updated coming-out guide that’s fun, fresh, and incredibly useful.”

I Am NOT a Vampire , Little Bee says, follows a boy who is raised in a family of vampires, but is not a vampire himself. He longs to transform into one of the creatures, and while he does change, it’s not in the way he had expected.

In a statement, McKenna explained the origins of the book. “I asked to be a vampire in the first grade, but on Halloween night I felt so wrong in my big black wig and gown that was bought for me,” he said. “I didn’t know why those feelings were there. The following year, in second grade, I asked again if I could be a vampire. My mom reminded me that I was a vampire the year prior. I corrected her and said, ‘I want to be a boy vampire!’”

I Am NOT a Vampire is scheduled for publication on May 6, 2025.

Michael Schaub is a contributing writer.

• Awards Claire Jiménez Wins PEN/Faulkner Award

• In the News John Barth Dies at 93

• Seen & Heard Reese’s Book Club Reveals April Pick

• Perspectives Teen Novels in Verse: The ‘Right Number of Words’

Our Take On This Week's Bestsellers

Our Verdict

More Seen & Heard

Featured Interviews

• podcast Episode 366: Best April Books with Julia Alvarez

• podcast Episode 365: Nikki McClure

• podcast Episode 364: Guest Host Téa Obreht

• podcast Episode 363: Vinson Cunningham

• podcast Episode 362: Tricia Romano

The Magazine: Kirkus Reviews

Featuring 420 industry-first reviews of fiction, nonfiction, children’s and YA books; also in this issue: interviews with Percival Everett, Cynthia Carr, Cece Bell, K. Ancrum; and more

The Kirkus Star

One of the most coveted designations in the book industry, the Kirkus Star marks books of exceptional merit.

The Kirkus Prize

The Kirkus Prize is among the richest literary awards in America, awarding $50,000 in three categories annually.

Great Books & News Curated For You

Be the first to read books news and see reviews, news and features in Kirkus Reviews . Get awesome content delivered to your inbox every week.

• Discover Books Fiction Thriller & Suspense Mystery & Detective Romance Science Fiction & Fantasy Nonfiction Biography & Memoir Teens & Young Adult Children's
• News & Features Bestsellers Book Lists Profiles Perspectives Awards Seen & Heard Book to Screen Kirkus TV videos In the News
• Kirkus Prize Winners & Finalists About the Kirkus Prize Kirkus Prize Judges
• Magazine Current Issue All Issues Manage My Subscription Subscribe
• Writers’ Center Hire a Professional Book Editor Get Your Book Reviewed Advertise Your Book Launch a Pro Connect Author Page Learn About The Book Industry
• More Kirkus Diversity Collections Kirkus Pro Connect My Account/Login
• About Kirkus History Our Team Contest FAQ Press Center Info For Publishers
• Privacy Policy
• Terms & Conditions
• Reprints, Permission & Excerpting Policy

© Copyright 2024 Kirkus Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Popular in this Genre

Hey there, book lover.

We’re glad you found a book that interests you!

Please select an existing bookshelf

Create a new bookshelf.

We can’t wait for you to join Kirkus!

Please sign up to continue.

It’s free and takes less than 10 seconds!

Already have an account? Log in.

Trouble signing in? Retrieve credentials.

Almost there!

• Industry Professional

Welcome Back!

Sign in using your Kirkus account

Contact us: 1-800-316-9361 or email [email protected].

Don’t fret. We’ll find you.

Magazine Subscribers ( How to Find Your Reader Number )

If You’ve Purchased Author Services

Don’t have an account yet? Sign Up.

• International edition
• Australia edition
• Europe edition

The Washington Book: How to Read Politics and Politicians review – unpicking the lexicon of America’s leaders

New York Times columnist Carlos Lozada examines the speeches, writing and linguistic tics of presidents and members of Congress to expose ‘inveterate deceivers’

P oliticians mince or mash words for a living, and the virtuosity with which they twist meanings makes them artists of a kind. Their skill at spinning facts counts as a fictional exercise: in political jargon, a “narrative” is a storyline that warps truth for partisan purposes. Carlos Lozada, formerly a reviewer for the Washington Post and now a columnist at the New York Times , specialises in picking apart these professional falsehoods. Analysing windy orations, ghostwritten memoirs and faceless committee reports, the essays in his book expose American presidents, members of Congress and supreme court justices as unreliable narrators, inveterate deceivers who betray themselves in careless verbal slips.

Lozada has a literary critic’s sharp eye, and an alertly cocked ear to go with it. Thus he fixes on a stray remark made by Trump as he rallied the mob that invaded the Capitol in January 2021. Ordering the removal of metal detectors, he said that the guns his supporters toted didn’t bother him, because “they’re not here to hurt me”. Lozada wonders about the emphasis in that phrase: did it neutrally fall on “hurt” or come down hard on “me”? If the latter, it licensed the rampant crowd to hurt Trump’s enemies – for instance by stringing up his disaffected vice-president Mike Pence on a gallows outside the Capitol.

Tiny linguistic tics mark the clash between two versions of America’s fabled past and its prophetic future. Lozada subtly tracks the recurrence of the word “still” in Biden’s speeches – for instance his assertion that the country “still believes in honesty and decency” and is “still a democracy” – and contrasts it with Trump’s reliance on “again”, the capstone of his vow to Make America Great Again. Biden’s “still” defensively fastens on “something good that may be slipping away”, whereas Trump’s “again” blathers about restoring a lost greatness that is never defined. Biden’s evokes “an ideal worth preserving”; Trump’s equivalent summons up an illusion.

At their boldest, Lozada’s politicians trade in inflated tales about origins and predestined outcomes, grandiose narratives that “transcend belief and become a fully formed worldview”. Hence the title of Hillary Clinton’s manifesto It Takes a Village , which borrows an African proverb about child-rearing and uses it to prompt nostalgia for a bygone America. Lozada watches Obama devising and revising a personal myth. Addressed as Barry by his youthful friends, he later insisted on being called Barack and relaunched himself as the embodiment of America’s ethnic inclusivity; his “personalised presidency” treated the office as an extension of “the Obama brand”. In this respect Trump was Obama’s logical successor, extending a personal brand in a bonanza of self-enrichment. The “big lie” about the supposedly stolen 2020 election is another mythological whopper. Trump admitted its falsity on one occasion when he remarked “We lost”, after which he immediately backtracked, adding: “We didn’t lose. We lost in the Democrats’ imagination.”

All this amuses Lozada but also makes him anxious. As an adoptive American – born in Peru, he became a citizen a decade ago – he has a convert’s faith in the country’s ideals, yet he worries about contradictions that the national creed strains to reconcile. A border wall now debars the impoverished masses welcomed by the Statue of Liberty; the sense of community is fractured by “sophisticated engines of division and misinformation”. Surveying dire fictional scenarios about American decline, Lozada notes that the warmongers enjoy “a narrative advantage”: peace is boring, but predictions of a clash with China or an attack by homegrown terrorists excite the electorate by promising shock, awe and an apocalyptic barrage of special effects. Rather than recoiling from Trump, do Americans share his eagerness for desecration and destruction?

Changing only the names of the performers, The Washington Book has a shadowy local replica. Here in Britain, too, ideological posturing has replaced reasoned argument, and buzzwords are squeezed to death by repetition. Whenever Sunak drones on about “delivering for the British people”, I think of him as a Deliveroo gig worker with a cooling takeaway in his backpack, or a weary postman pushing a trolley full of mortgage bills.

Though such verbal vices are international, a difference of scale separates Washington from Westminster. In America, heroic ambition is brought low by errors of judgment or moral flaws that for Lozada recall “the great themes of literature and the great struggles of life”: Kennedy’s risky confrontations with Cuba, Lyndon Johnson mired in Vietnam, Nixon overcome by paranoia. To set against these tragic falls, we have only the comic spectacle of Boris Johnson gurning on a zip wire or Liz Truss vaingloriously granting an interview atop the Empire State Building; neither of them had the good grace to jump off. American politics is dangerously thrilling because it is so consequential for the rest of the world. In Britain we are doomed to sit through a more trivial show, an unfunny farce played out in a theatre that is crumbling around us.

• Politics books
• The Observer
• US politics

Most viewed

The Winds of Winter: Everything We Know About the Next Game of Thrones Book

Winter is (eventually... hopefully) coming..

The Winds of Winter, the long, long-awaited sixth book in George R.R. Martin’s A Song of Ice and Fire series, is among the most-anticipated works of fiction. The next entry in the fantasy saga on which HBO’s Game of Thrones was based has been in the works since Book 5, A Dance with Dragons, which was released back in 2011. In the 13 years since, HBO aired Seasons 2-8 of Game of Thrones and Season 1 ( and soon 2 ) of its first GoT spinoff series, House of the Dragon.

While Martin continues work on the next A Song of Ice and Fire novel, we’ve compiled an overview of everything we know about The Winds of Winter, from Martin’s comments on the book’s length and publishing timeline to the story’s characters and differences from the show.

• When will it come out?
• How long will it be?
• Story details
• Book vs. TV series

Winds of Winter Release Date

There is no release date or window for The Winds of Winter.

Martin and his publishers initially hoped to have the manuscript completed by the end of October 2015 in order to release Winds the following March ahead of Game of Thrones: Season 6, according to Martin . That soft deadline then turned to the end of 2015, which also came and went without a completed manuscript. In January 2017 , he expressed optimism that it’d be out before that year’s end. In 2020, the author aimed to finish the project's initial work by 2021 , though that timeline didn’t pan out. This seems to be the last time Martin made a public estimation for when Winds will be published.

In October 2022, Martin said he was about 75% done with the manuscript. Little progress was seemingly made over the next year, as Martin announced in November 2023 that 1,100 pages had been completed — the same amount he mentioned in a December 2022 appearance on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert . Martin last mentioned Winds in a December 2023 blog post , in which he stated he’d been working on the book in Santa Fe, New Mexico, where he resides.

Do you think George R.R. Martin will finish A Song of Ice and Fire?

Winds of winter length.

The Winds of Winter will be around 1,500 pages. Martin said, as of November 2023, he had written roughly 1,100 pages and had “ hundreds more pages to go ." The author has said the final two A Song of Ice and Fire books will collectively come in at over 3,000 pages.

Should The Winds of Winter come in at 1,500 pages, it’d be the longest A Song of Ice and Fire book so far. The current longest is the fifth book, A Dance with Dragons, which was just over 1,000 pages in its original hardcover release.

Winds of Winter Story

There are no spoilers in this section, save for the names of characters who will appear in The Winds of Winter.

The Winds of Winter will continue the events of the fourth and fifth books: A Feast for Crows and A Dance with Dragons. (Books 4 and 5 followed different characters but narratively ran parallel to each other.) Martin, speaking with Smarter Travel in 2012, said Winds will start with a bang:

“There were a of cliffhangers at the end of A Dance with Dragons. Those will be resolved very early. I’m going to open with the two big battles that I was building up to, the battle in the ice [between the forces of Stannis Baratheon and Roose Bolton in and around Winterfell] and the battle at Meereen — the battle of Slaver’s Bay [between the forces of Daenerys Targaryen and the slavers of Yunkai across the Narrow Sea].”

The 25 Best Game of Thrones Episodes

Daenerys Targaryen’s and Tyrion Lannister’s paths will finally cross “in a way,” Martin told EW in 2014, “but for much of the book they’re still apart. They both have quite large roles to play here. Tyrion has decided that he actually would like to live, for one thing, which he wasn’t entirely sure of during the last book, and he’s now working toward that end — if he can survive the battle that’s breaking out all around him. And Dany has embraced her heritage as a Targaryen and embraced the Targaryen words. So they’re both coming home.”

In that same interview, Martin confirmed the Dothraki will return “in a big way” and, as the end of Book 5 suggests, “a lot of stuff is happening at The Wall.” On a more direct yet less consequential note, Martin has said Winds will introduce his “interesting take on unicorns,” according to Winter Is Coming .

Overall, Martin has said to expect things to “get worse before they get better.” “There are a lot of dark chapters right now in the book that I’m writing,” Martin said at the Guadalajara International Book Fair in 2016 (via EW ). “It is called The Winds of Winter, and I’ve been telling you for 20 years that winter was coming. Winter is the time when things die, and cold and ice and darkness fill the world, so this is not going to be the happy feel-good that people may be hoping for. Some of the characters [are] in very dark places.”

Winds of Winter Characters

As of 2016 , Martin was not planning to include any new point-of-view characters in Winds. Here’s a quick list of all the characters confirmed to have chapters told from their perspective, per Martin’s hitherto released preview chapters, blog posts, and public readings:

• Tyrion Lannister
• Cersei Lannister
• Jaime Lannister and/or Brienne of Tarth
• Sansa Stark
• Theon Greyjoy
• Asha Greyjoy
• Victarion Greyjoy
• Aeron Greyjoy/Damphair
• Barristan Selmy
• Arianne Martell
• Jon Connington

While unconfirmed, it’s all but certain Daenerys Targaryen will again be a point-of-view character. Other potential POV characters include Davos Seaworth, Samwell Tarly, and Melisandre. We also know Robb Stark’s wife Jeyne Westerling (replaced in the TV series by a character named Talisa Maegyr) will appear in the prologue, according to Hypable , though Martin didn’t say the section would be written from her perspective.

House of the Dragon Season 2 First Look Images

Winds of Winter: Book vs. TV Show

Given the larger cast and overall scope of the book series, Winds of Winter will differ from what viewers experienced in Game of Thrones . Martin has said characters who died in the series won’t die in the books, and characters who survived in Game of Thrones won’t survive in the books. New characters will be introduced; characters who never appeared on-screen will have important roles to play in the story to come.

Martin wrote about the topic in length in a 2022 blog post :

What I have noticed more and more of late, however, is my gardening is taking me further and further away from the television series. Yes, some of the things you saw on HBO in Game of Thrones you will also see in The Winds of Winter (though maybe not in quite the same ways)… but much of the rest will be quite different.

And really, when you think about it, this was inevitable. The novels are much bigger and much much more complex than the series. Certain things that happened on HBO will not happen in the books. And vice versa. I have viewpoint characters in the books never seen on the show: Victarion Greyjoy, Arianne Martell, Areo Hotah, Jon Connington, Aeron Damphair. They will all have chapters, and the things they do and say will impact the story and the major characters who were on the show. I have legions of secondary characters, not POVs but nonetheless important to the plot, who also figure in the story: Lady Stoneheart, Young Griff, the Tattered Prince, Penny, Brown Ben Plumm, the Shavepate, Marwyn the Mage, Darkstar, Jeyne Westerling. Some characters you saw in the show are quite different than the versions in the novels. Yarra Greyjoy is not Asha Greyjoy, and HBO’s Euron Greyjoy is way, way, way, way different from mine. Quaithe still has a part to play. So does Rickon Stark. And poor Jeyne Poole. And… well, the list is long. (And all this is part of why Winds is taking so long. This is hard, guys).

Oh, and there will be new characters as well. No new viewpoints, I promise you that, but with all these journeys and battles and scheming to come, inevitably our major players will be encountering new people in lands far and near.

One thing I can say, in general enough terms that I will not be spoiling anything: not all of the characters who survived until the end of Game of Thrones will survive until the end of A Song of Ice & Fire, and not all of the characters who died on Game of Thrones will die in A Song of Ice & Fire. (Some will, sure. Of course. Maybe most. But definitely not all.) ((Of course, I could change my mind again next week, with the next chapter I write. That’s gardening)).

And the ending? You will need to wait until I get there. Some things will be the same. A lot will not.

Martin’s comments should be good news for the many fans who felt the quickened pace of Game of Thrones’ final season diluted the character arcs and overarching narratives that came before it.

One last tease: Martin told IGN in 2016 that The Winds of Winter will feature a major twist that couldn’t be done in the show. “It’s something that involves a couple characters,” said Martin, “one of whom is dead in the show [by the end of Season 5] but not dead in the books.”

A Dream of Spring and Other Future Works

A Dream of Spring is the seventh and final book Martin has planned for A Song of Ice and Fire. It, too, is expected to be 1,500 pages or more, according to Martin. As for the story, Martin offered this during the Guadalajara International Book Fair in 2016: “I’m not going to tell you how I’m going to end my book, but I suspect the overall flavor is going to be as much bittersweet as it is happy.” There is no timetable for its release.

In addition to finishing Winds and preparing for A Dream of Spring, Martin is authoring a second volume of his Targaryen history, potentially titled Blood & Fire, and additional stories in his Tales of Dunk and Egg series of novellas, which serves as the basis for HBO’s upcoming Game of Thrones spinoff, Knight of the Seven Kingdoms . Martin continues to serve as an editor of Wild Cards, a shared-universe sci-fi book series he created in 1987. He’s also a producer for two active TV series: House of the Dragon and AMC’s Dark Winds.

Jordan covers games, shows, and movies as a freelance writer for IGN.

In This Article

IGN Recommends

Advertisement

Supported by

Did We Get the Joke? Thousands of You Had Some Thoughts.

Responding to our list of the funniest books since “Catch-22,” readers offer their own choices.

• Share full article

Nothing is funnier than unhappiness, according to Samuel Beckett, and publishing an excruciatingly short list of books deemed “the funniest” was bound to create a fair amount of it. We asked our staff book critics to choose 22 favorites among the many books that have made them laugh: They had to be novels written in English and published since “Catch-22” (1961), which we felt was a turning point in American literary humor. Then we heard from you on what our critics missed. In article comments and a reader questionnaire , more than 4,000 of you let us have it.

What fired up readers the most was our omission of A CONFEDERACY OF DUNCES (1980), John Kennedy Toole’s novel about a hapless medievalist and sometime hot-dog vendor padding around New Orleans. It was, by a landslide, the most frequently cited title in your responses, and your reactions ranged from gentle prodding to biblical wrath . Many recounted their ecstatic reading experiences: “My wife and I took turns reading chapters aloud in bed, readings that countless times were choked off by paroxysms of laughter and tears,” wrote Fritz and Cindy Tripp Johnson of Dillingham, Alaska.

Other popular picks included THE HITCHHIKER’S GUIDE TO THE GALAXY (1979), by Douglas Adams; WHERE’D YOU GO, BERNADETTE? (2012), by Maria Semple; and LESS (2017), by Andrew Sean Greer. John Irving! many clamored. Gary Shteyngart! Elif Batuman! All great suggestions. For some of you, the time frame was too constraining, as were any conventional understandings of humor: You oddballs went to bat for “Wuthering Heights,” “Moby-Dick,” “The Magic Mountain” and, somewhat distressingly, “The Pentagon Papers.”

“Not since ‘The Bell Jar’ have I laughed at food poisoning,” said Alice McGinnis of Silver Spring, Md., who pulled for Katherine Heiny’s STANDARD DEVIATION (2017).

Here’s what else you told us.

You appreciate certain authors but disagree on which is their funniest book.

Carl hiaasen.

SQUEEZE ME (2020): “Skewers the Former Guy [Donald Trump], Palm Beach, xenophobia and Florida wildlife control, and makes me laugh out loud, even on second reading. What’s not to love?” — Lin Robinson (Albuquerque, N.M.)

DOUBLE WHAMMY (1987): “Playfully violent plot with rotting losers, and strangely kindhearted and sympathetic heroes. I get all smiley just thinking about it.” — Christine Shuler (Sunnyside, N.Y.)

Kurt Vonnegut

BREAKFAST OF CHAMPIONS (1973): “It’s irreverent, hilarious, breaks the fourth wall with madcap energy, has these delightful asides, but also some real wisdom.” — Josh Henderson (Springfield, Va.)

GOD BLESS YOU, MR. ROSEWATER (1965): “When I was a young man, it helped to shape my worldview. Now that I’m an old man, it still occupies a cozy apartment just above the volunteer fire department in my heart.” — Grant Loud (Los Angeles)

Terry Pratchett

SMALL GODS (1992): “A beautiful satire of the ways in which organized religion has lost sight of the importance of personal faith and piety. Loved by atheists and the deeply religious alike.” — Terry Fletcher (Pullman, Wash.)

GOOD OMENS, with Neil Gaiman (1990): “Enduring dark wit, dexterous language, a healthy look at humanity with fabulous allegories that make one sit up and realize that we can and must do better.” — Shaheena Karbanee (Harare, Zimbabwe)

James McBride

THE GOOD LORD BIRD (2013): “One of the funniest books ever written based on real characters and events: John Brown, Frederick Douglass and the raid on Harpers Ferry. The narrator is one of the great characters in American fiction and, like ‘Catch-22,’ the humor is made more poignant by the serious parts.” — Mike Sokoloski (Seattle)

DEACON KING KONG (2020): “Set in a fictional Brooklyn housing project just as heroin is arriving in New York, this is a hilarious yet deep look at race, community and drugs in the United States. It made me laugh aloud and cry.” — Helen Benedict (New York)

You have a taste for academic foibles.

DEAR COMMITTEE MEMBERS , by Julie Schumacher (2014): “Inventively told through a series of recommendation letters, this novel is a hilarious jaunt through both the emptiness of an academic career and the self-excoriating emptiness of a man who has lost his way. It’s a book that made me laugh and cry simultaneously, while nodding in recognition.” — Kyle Rudgers, (Flemington, N.J.)

STRAIGHT MAN , by Richard Russo (1997): “I am a retired professor who until recently was teaching at a regional Rust Belt campus of a state university, exactly the setting for Russo’s novel. One can laugh at the ridiculousness unfolding in the book while acknowledging the grim realities it exposes.” — Ruth Glasser (Watertown, Conn.)

MOO , by Jane Smiley (1995): “I teach women and gender studies in a liberal arts college at a land grant university, and Smiley nails it with wit and insight. From the provost’s assistant who actually runs the university to the ever-fattening pig housed in the agriculture college, the novel reveals the foibles and foolishness afoot in universities. And we see, in the novel as in real life, that during budget cuts, women’s studies is the first to go.” — Susan M. Shaw (Corvallis, Ore.)

“I live just a few miles from the Iowa border. I know these people. And ‘Moo’ stars the best literary pig since Wilbur: Earl Butz, named after the former secretary of agriculture.” — Peggy Derrick (La Crescent, Minn.)

CONJURE WIFE , by Fritz Leiber (1943): “Modern audiences might find the sexism of the male protagonist insufferable, but that is part of what Leiber is satirizing. The idea that the success of male academics in mid-20th-century America was dependent upon their wives’ use of witchcraft was a brilliant sendup. Though gender politics have changed, Leiber’s satire of the cutthroat means needed to survive in academia remains relevant as ever.” — Bert Clere, (Carrboro, N.C.)

KINGS OF INFINITE SPACE, by James Hynes (2004): “A bad breakup, an academic career lost. Could a furloughed professor’s life get worse? Wait, what are those otherworldly moans coming from the HVAC ducts? Why does no one else hear them?” — Jane Niles (Culver City, Calif.)

Some of you made the only case for a given book.

BLOTT ON THE LANDSCAPE , by Tom Sharpe (1975): “Sharpe’s books always take a good poke at the British way of seeing the world. Rollicking good fun.” — Kris Bulcroft (Chieri, Italy)

EPITAPH OF A SMALL WINNER , by Machado de Assis (1881): “This ‘autobiography’ of a dead man is funny and startlingly modern! That is all the more remarkable since it was written in 1881 in imperial Brazil by the Black grandson of enslaved people.” — Samuel Cole, (Richardson, Texas)

I AM A CAT , by Natsume Sōseki (1906): The descriptions of human behavior by the unnamed cat are so realistic and at the same time so absurd. The story is set in early 1900s Japan, but it makes you realize that human behavior always and everywhere is crazy, tragic and hilarious at the same time. — Jeffrey R. Hannig (Fargo, N.D.)

Classic can still be funny.

THE PICKWICK PAPERS , by Charles Dickens (1837): “The bad news: This book is about the size of a brick. But please keep in mind that it’s a picaresque. After being introduced to our cast of morons, we are invited to join them on a series of misadventures, each amazingly visual and filled with puns, malaprops and visual shtick. It’s almost like watching a Charlie Chaplin movie!” — Jeffrey Kahan (Los Angeles)

DON QUIXOTE , by Miguel de Cervantes (1605): “Its humor operates at every level, from the crudest slapstick to the most cerebral, self-reflexive play. Always bittersweet, at once funny and sad, joyful and tragic, a reminder that laughter is always more than fun.” — Paul Cohen (Providence, R.I.)

THE LIFE AND OPINIONS OF TRISTRAM SHANDY, GENTLEMAN , by Laurence Sterne (1759): “In this still unclassifiable novel, the asides, omissions, diatribes and narration make for the most rollickingly hilarious read.” — Jonathan May (Memphis)

Some of you can really sell a book.

PRIESTDADDY , by Patricia Lockwood (2017): “This author sincerely loves her father, who happens to be a priest and rarely wears pants at home.” — Jerah Kirby (Brooklyn, N.Y.)

THE BREAST , by Philip Roth (1972): “Lucky the character is stuck in the pages of time. He’d probably be catatonic once he realizes that, as the breast, he’ll be no more than shriveled hanging fruit.” — Rose R. Jeter (Macon, Ga.)

INFINITE JEST , by David Foster Wallace (1996): “The longest drug joke of all time.” — William Larsen (Plymouth, Mass.)

REDSHIRTS by John Scalzi (2012): “The love child of ‘The Office’ and ‘Galaxy Quest.’ ” — Maggi Schierloh (Chicago)

GALÁPAGOS , by Kurt Vonnegut (1985): “What could possibly be funnier than the extinction of the human race? Heartwarming, too.” — Dan Kravitz (Harpswell, Maine)

Explore More in Books

Want to know about the best books to read and the latest news start here..

James McBride’s novel sold a million copies, and he isn’t sure how he feels about that, as he considers the critical and commercial success  of “The Heaven & Earth Grocery Store.”

How did gender become a scary word? Judith Butler, the theorist who got us talking about the subject , has answers.

You never know what’s going to go wrong in these graphic novels, where Circus tigers, giant spiders, shifting borders and motherhood all threaten to end life as we know it .

When the author Tommy Orange received an impassioned email from a teacher in the Bronx, he dropped everything to visit the students  who inspired it.

Do you want to be a better reader?   Here’s some helpful advice to show you how to get the most out of your literary endeavor .

Each week, top authors and critics join the Book Review’s podcast to talk about the latest news in the literary world. Listen here .

Don Winslow says farewell to fiction writing in high style

With ‘city in ruins,’ winslow wraps up a spectacular crime fiction trilogy, a sweeping story that morphs and expands over time.

And so, we come to the end. The end of an exemplary crime fiction trilogy and the self-chosen end of a popular author’s writing career. But I’ve gotten ahead of myself.

With “ City on Fire ” (2022), “ City of Dreams ” (2023) and now “ City in Ruins ,” Don Winslow has written a near-perfect saga: He’s created great characters who grow and develop while remaining true to their essence, and a sweeping story that morphs and expands over time, with the stakes escalating until they reach nosebleed heights at the end. Winslow says he has given up writing novels to devote his time to political activism: “I wanted in the fight. I didn’t want to be writing a fiction obituary of America losing democracy,” he told the Los Angeles Times . With “City in Ruins,” he is saying farewell in high style.

Winslow modeled this trilogy on Virgil’s Roman tragedy “The Aeneid,” an intention made obvious by the epigrams in all three novels. However, you needn’t be a Roman or Greek scholar to enjoy these books (and though it is best to read them in order, it’s not vital). These novels wear their inspiration lightly. The epic poems do not bleed into Winslow’s story but linger like ghosts in the background.

At the center of the three “City” books is Danny Ryan, a Rhode Island version of “a Springsteen kind of guy,” a onetime Providence waterfront worker from a scrappy Irish American family. Over the course of the series, he has gotten mixed up with the mob, fought epic (yet doomed) battles and resurrected himself in Hollywood. After marrying into the family of the king of the Irish mob in Providence, he ends up their reluctant leader in a fatalistic war with the Italians, runs to the West Coast with his family and crew to lie low when it all blows up, manages to claw back his life, gets involved with a movie that’s being made about the Rhode Island mob, and falls in love with a celebrity superstar.

In the final moments of “City of Dreams,” Ryan is in a bad place: in the desert, facing off against a Mexican gang lord who wants to end him. The woman he loves is dead, and he blames himself. Ryan’s life has turned around in the opening of “City in Ruins.” He now owns a casino on the Las Vegas Strip; he’s being a good dad to his son, Ian, with whom he escaped from Rhode Island six years earlier; and he has a psychotherapist girlfriend who’s very different from his previous love interests — in other words, good for him.

But then Ryan decides to indulge his ambition by building a billion-dollar resort casino complex — Il Sogno, which sounds like Las Vegas’s latest wonder, the Sphere , expanded into a full-blown resort. Winslow shows us step by step what it takes to do something this grandiose in Vegas, where everything is supersize, especially the egos.

The project puts Ryan on a crash course with one of his hitherto friendly rivals. Vegas being Vegas, everyone has some connection to the mob, even if it’s distant, and before long Ryan — who thought he had successfully left his gangster past behind — finds himself up to his eyebrows in trouble as old vendettas are resurrected.

Peter Moretti Jr., son of one of Ryan’s former rivals, returns to the States after serving a tour in Iraq only to find out that his mother and her lover are responsible for his father’s death. In a scene involving the clan godfather, Winslow shows how an innocent like Peter Jr. is manipulated into carrying the water for his late father’s crime gang. The rest of this thread is devoted to the courtroom battle between the good district attorney who wants to see Peter Jr. pay for his crimes and the sharpshooting defense attorney who uses every trick at his disposal to get the young man freed.

There’s also Chris Palumbo, the late Peter Sr.’s second-in-command, who took to the wind after a partnership with a crooked FBI agent went south. We see him holed up in Nebraska with a hippie-ish woman (a la Odysseus and Circe in “The Odyssey”) until he comes to realize that he must return to his wife and children back East. He knows he must face the music for his misdeeds and confront the Providence crime gang that wants him dead.

Winslow immerses readers in the hidden world of organized crime, highlighting its inner workings. Whether it’s jousting between lawyers, etiquette among wiseguys or the history of the mob in Las Vegas, Winslow knows how to make the reader feel like one of the cognoscenti. For instance, he shows how he toed the line through the first two books so that Ryan can be in the casino business in Book 3: “Danny’s lawyers argued his cause. ‘There isn’t a single fact linking Mr. Ryan to organized crime,’ the lead attorney said. ‘Not an arrest, not an indictment, never mind a conviction. All you have are rumors and a few articles in the tabloids.’ … The appeal was an effort to keep Danny out of the [Nevada Gaming Control Board’s] dreaded Black Book, which would have prevented him from even entering a casino.”

You can read “City in Ruins” as a meditation on honor, revenge and justice, but the book also challenges readers to examine beliefs about morality. In “City in Ruins,” whether you’re in the world of gangsters or law enforcement or the casino industry, Winslow shows us that morality rides a sliding scale. Ryan is the closest thing the novel has to a hero, trying to inflict the least amount of pain and suffering while saving his family and friends, and willing to sacrifice his dreams as payment for his past sins. In absolutist terms, however, he’s no hero — yet the reader continues to root for him. Even the villains in “City in Ruins” question whether the gods are protecting Danny Ryan or if he will ever get his comeuppance. For the answer, you’re going to have to read the book.

Alma Katsu is the author of eight books, including the Taker trilogy, “The Hunger,” “The Deep” and “The Fervor.” Her latest is “Red London.”

City in Ruins

By Don Winslow

William Morrow. 400 pp. $32

More from Book World

Love everything about books? Make sure to subscribe to our Book Club newsletter , where Ron Charles guides you through the literary news of the week.

Best books of 2023: See our picks for the 10 best books of 2023 or dive into the staff picks that Book World writers and editors treasured in 2023. Check out the complete lists of 50 notable works for fiction and the top 50 nonfiction books of last year.

Find your favorite genre: Three new memoirs tell stories of struggle and resilience, while five recent historical novels offer a window into other times. Audiobooks more your thing? We’ve got you covered there, too . If you’re looking for what’s new, we have a list of our most anticipated books of 2024 . And here are 10 noteworthy new titles that you might want to consider picking up this April.

Still need more reading inspiration? Super readers share their tips on how to finish more books . Or let poet and essayist Hanif Abdurraqib explain why he stays in Ohio . You can also check out reviews of the latest in fiction and nonfiction .

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.