“The Blue Parakeet”

Read “The Blue Parakeet” and write 3 reviews. Instructions below:

You must compose three substantive reviews, of 250 words each (total of 750 words), relating to specific passages, themes, or chapters in the book. One theme/passage/chapter per post, and please make separate posts for each review. To show that you have truly read the book in question, please choose themes or passages that are in different places in the book, and which cover different aspects of the book’s argument. For example, do not pull a quote from p. 10, write 250 words on it, and then pull another quote from p. 11, write 250 words on it… etc. Show your professor and your group members that you have truly read and understood the entire book in question. Cite quotes and other references from the book by placing page numbers within parentheses as you write. Don’t fill too much of the space for these posts with long block quotes, as the bulk of your writing here should be an analysis of the material at hand, not simply repeating or summarizing it.

HINT: What should you write about for your three responses? Where to start? Here is an idea. For your first post, find something that you really liked in the book, something you agreed with, something that resonated with you deeply, and write about that. For the second, find something that rubbed you the wrong way, something you disagreed with us, and tell us exactly why. Third, find something that confused you, that you don’t understand, about which you’d like to know more, and tell us why it confuses you, and what you’d need to know to understand it. These are just ideas, not requirements. If you want to post three disagreements, for example, that’s fine, etc.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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

“The Blue Parakeet”

Read “The Blue Parakeet” and write 3 reviews. Instructions below:

You must compose three substantive reviews, of 250 words each (total of 750 words), relating to specific passages, themes, or chapters in the book. One theme/passage/chapter per post, and please make separate posts for each review. To show that you have truly read the book in question, please choose themes or passages that are in different places in the book, and which cover different aspects of the book’s argument. For example, do not pull a quote from p. 10, write 250 words on it, and then pull another quote from p. 11, write 250 words on it… etc. Show your professor and your group members that you have truly read and understood the entire book in question. Cite quotes and other references from the book by placing page numbers within parentheses as you write. Don’t fill too much of the space for these posts with long block quotes, as the bulk of your writing here should be an analysis of the material at hand, not simply repeating or summarizing it.

HINT: What should you write about for your three responses? Where to start? Here is an idea. For your first post, find something that you really liked in the book, something you agreed with, something that resonated with you deeply, and write about that. For the second, find something that rubbed you the wrong way, something you disagreed with us, and tell us exactly why. Third, find something that confused you, that you don’t understand, about which you’d like to know more, and tell us why it confuses you, and what you’d need to know to understand it. These are just ideas, not requirements. If you want to post three disagreements, for example, that’s fine, etc.

Leave a Reply

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