Chapter+5

= "Other Kinds of Writing About Literature" =

Chapter Five describes several “kinds of writing about literature” that the book has not yet covered. The chapter covers three more kinds of literature writing: summary, paraphrase, and review. This chapter begins, again, with a seemingly current-traditionalist presentation of summaries by introducing “[...] a few principles that govern summaries” (Barnet and Cain 70). The use of the word govern here implies an authoritative law that applies to all summary writing situations, which is highly current-traditionalist.

After the discussion of summary, the chapter moves on to quickly discuss paraphrase. This brief description gives a standard definition of a paraphrase: “a sort of translation into the same language” (Barnet and Cain 71). The chapter quickly includes that the context of the reader and writer will determine how the reader will understand a paraphrase and that in a paraphrase some of the initial meaning will surely be lost. This discussion indirectly addresses the social constructivist perception that no writer can divorce his or her social influences and provide objective responses or paraphrases. When discussing comprehension of a native English speaker as opposed to a non-native speaker, the chapter also addresses the different interpretations of a reader or writer depending on the person's situation: “A Native speaker of English will not need a paraphrase of “Thirty days hath September,” though a non-native speaker might be puzzled” (Barnet and Cain 71). Even though a social constructivist pedagogy is not directly present in this chapter's description of a paraphrase, it is implied in some of the rules or guidelines of paraphrase.

The final part of the chapter discusses methods of writing a review. Initially, the chapter establishes the qualities of the reader of a review, one that is unfamiliar with the work being reviewed (Barnet and Cain 73). Therefore, the chapter establishes a standard rhetorical situation of writing a review giving a nod to rhetorical pedagogy. Then, the chapter goes on to give a list of guidelines for writing a review that again feels like current-traditionalism. The chapter ends with an example of a review but includes more than just the final product. The notes of the reviewer included in the example give notice to at least part of the process that the writer used to achieve the final draft, and so the chapter includes some process pedagogy in its description of a review as well.


 * Note:** This wikispace can be used as a guide to decide whether or not the text //A Short Guide to Writing About Literature// will be effective for your classroom probably at the college level. Throughout the review of this book, several composition theorists and their writings are referenced. Familiarity with these articles and theories will be helpful in accessing this guide and deciding whether or not to use this book as a source. For your convenience, on the Annotated Bibliography page of this wiki an annotated bibliography including extensive summaries of each work references can be found.