An Inquiry into Book Review

AN ATTEMPT OF INQUIRY INTO BOOK REVIEW

According to Wikipedia, book review is an attempt to analyze “content, style and merit” of the book. Book review is subset of literary criticism, a practice dating as old as early Greek era. The practice has gained greater prominence in this information age which has seen massive explosion of information in terms of quantity and also, unprecedented access of information to the masses (made possible by internet). These two factors have made practically impossible for a person to be able to read most books on any given subject, given limited life span of human being. It is said that the last person who had known all that was available to be known during his/her age was Aristotle.

This writing doesn’t claim to tell anything new to the readers. For in fact, with a single click through Google, one can easily find superior writings on the subject matter itself. What this writing will claim to do is to be able to coordinate ideas available on the subject matter so as to enable readers to be able to benefit by not having to undertake the labor of Googling, themselves. What will this writing also claim not to do, is to provide Islamic approach towards reviewing books, for the writer doesn’t believe there is an Islamic way of reviewing book anymore than there is a Christian or Judaist way of doing so. However, the writer also believes that “principles” espoused by religions (be it Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism etc) such as justice, empathy etc will not harm shall they be applied hand-pickedly during the course of book review.

In so far, one admits that book review is an undertaking/action in itself, one can approach this in two ways.
1) Principle based approach is an approach which prescribes set of broad based principles or values that are to be upheld while reviewing book
2) Rule or formula based approach prescribes set of steps or rules or formulas that are to be followed in order to review a book.

Both of these approaches are not without advantages and disadvantages. While principles based approach acknowledges there is no one way of doing things right, rule based approach avoid ambiguities by articulating step by step approach. While rule based approach may encourage “ticking the box” attitude (which is bad thing, by the way), the principle based approach may dispense away with consistency. In short, both have merits and demerits. Our approach would be to approach book review in both of these ways.

PRINCIPLE BASED APPROACH

The writer suggests that following principles ought to be followed for an undertaking of effective book review:

a) Objectivity

A good book review ought to be objective. Objectivity (opposed to subjectivity) can be taken to mean neutral, mind-independent or truths that are discovered rather than created (Source: Wikipedia). Being objective means, to be “value” free. However, it will be wise to bear in mind what constitute objective might not be agreeable to all; hence “objectivity” can be subjective too!

b) Professionalism

A professional book reviewer is one who “utilizes his/her independent judgement and professional ethics” in the course of book review. Independent judgement, is different from being objective, as the former calls for a judgement to be made, while the latter simply calls for independence or lack of bias. A ethical book reviewer shall avoid selling his soul for purpose other than discovering of truth during the course of book review.

c) Competency

A minimum level of competency in terms of understanding of the subject matter is a pre-requisite of effective book review. However this should not be confused with mastery or specialization of the subject matter. Understanding can be developed through reading relevant writings on the subject matter.

d) Justice

While absolute justice is the reserve of God and His Judgment’s Day, this shouldn’t stop a good book reviewer from striving towards justice. Justice, here could be taken to mean all three (a to c) things above, and/or any other aspect that reader here can construe. Justice ought to be considered in the context of the actors involved, i.e. author, readers and perhaps the subject matter itself.

The above list of “principles” are not exhaustive, one may add or subtract where applicable.

RULES BASED APPROACH

Rule or formula based approach suggests step by step approach towards book review. The writer here suggests the following “best practices” to be adopted;

a) Forming Expectations

Developing expectations about what the book should be all about, helps to keep big picture in mind while reading the book, hence one’s ability to evaluate or assess the book. How is one to develop expectations? Read the title or preface of the book and then Google up the subject. After reading the book, one can decide whether it lived up to its expectations.

b) Identification of Broad Theme or Objective

Book’s theme may or may not be so apparent, but nevertheless need to be identified. Theme needs to be distinguished from arguments or premises. More of which later.
An example of a theme would be Soro’s idea of the need to fix global capitalism in this book “THE CRISIS OF GLOBAL CAPITALISM: OPEN SOCIETY ENDANGERED”.

c) Identification & Assessment of Arguments

Though not all books are argumentative in nature, most that make lively book review are. Simply put, argument is a statement that makes a claim. However, arguments are more than just a claim. An argument ought to have proper structure for it to be effective. An argument, depending on whom you ask, may consist of premise and conclusion. An example would be “Some Greeks are logicians, therefore some logicians are Greeks”. Here, “Some Greeks are logician” is a premise, whereas “therefore some logicians are Greeks” is conclusion. Arguments can assessed based on their strength. Some arguments are strong, while others are weak. To say that UIA should improve quality of its education so that it could attract rich Arabs to come and study, is weaker argument than to say that it should be done so that society/Ummah/everyone would benefit.

d) Conclusion

In the concluding part, the reviewer may want to provide opinion as to whether the author has achieved the objective he set to achieve. Here, the reviewer may bring his personal opinion of the subject matter and assess the overall book, whether it has done justice to the subject matter by e.g. covering main issues involved etc. Here, the reviewer can also provide reference or comparison to similar books that have been written on the subject matter and give recommendation as to whether the book is worth reading. A good reviewer should be able to convince readers to either pick the book up or drop it!


The writer hopes that the above shall be found useful and it will generate interests and curiosity among the readers to experiment and find out more about subject matter.


TYPES OF ARGUMENTATIVE BOOKS

In order to oppose or evaluate an argumentative book, it will be helpful that books types are identified. Argumentative books come in two types:

Principle books (“what” books)

These books debate the “objective” or “principles”. For example, whether or not right to wear hijab be deemed human right etc. The question here is “what” constitutes human rights?

Mechanism books (“how” books)

These books tend to be about mechanism i.e. how to we best achieve certain objective. For example should we jail or hang murderers. Here the objective is punishment or justice. A reviewer is not expected to question the need of punishment or the need for justice but whether either of the mechanism will best serve justice.

In the case of Soro’s book, the writer would deem it as both Principle and Mechanism book. It is Principle book to the extent that it espouse capitalism as best form of organizing economy, and it is Mechanism book to the extent that it provides mechanism e.g. through creation of World Central Bank to solve global financial instability.