Summary and Analysis

The difference of Summary and Analysis is quite simple I believe. Being able to

fully grasp this concept when we are asked to complete an assignment is where

people need to distinguish the difference of the two. People, including myself may

still tend to want to summarize when asked to analyze just due to the fact

summarizing is simpler than an analytic exploration.


We all know that a summary basically sums up in text the sequence of events in

virtually anything. Whether that be from a poem, movie, story, or even a sports

event, this is something that is easily accomplished. A summary is an observation

of what has taken place. We can readily accomplish a summary with asking the five

W’s.


An analysis is breaking down the, shall we say a poem since this is what we shall

be analyzing first, to truly get an understanding of it and questioning the depth

of the real meaning. When analyzing something we want to be able to make an

arguable claim. Also this is when the close reading of something comes into play,

and looking deeper into the subject matter. Being able to make an intellectual

argument is something that needs to be preformed, just because you are asked to

make a argument it should engage the want from another party to debate with your

claim. Anyone can choose to argue about anything, doing it with real significance

or importance is where the talent comes in.


http://www.unc.edu/depts/wcweb/handouts/summary.html

Good Readers, Good Writers

My response to the questions on Nabokov

What does Nabokov think makes a good reader?

Nabokov thinks that a good reader had a imagination, a dictionary, and some type of artistic sense. He believes that a good reader will re-read the book as to take in more and more of the story every time the book is read, opening more elements to the story. Nabokov thinks that the reader and the authors mind should be in a harmonious balance. He believes that with imagination we must be able to see things and hear things, we must be able to see and hear the detail of the story without an actual picture.

Do you agree?

I would have to say that I agree with his perception of a good reader.

What do you believe are the characteristics of a good reader?

Like I said in the question right before this, I agree with Nabokov. I think that the reader should be able to visualize what is going on in the story. I believe that one should be able to re-read the book and take in more each time the story is read, noticing more and more detail and depth of the story. The reader should be able to make sense of the words and grammar used in the story. Also I believe that the reader should be able to identify context in the story, being able to identify tone, and the voice of the author.

Do you consider yourself a good reader?

I would have to say I think I am a decent reader. I will say that when I re-read a book I can take more from it each time. I am not a big reader though so I have not been able to develop all of the characteristics that Nabokov has listed as what he thinks is a good reader.

http://www.kipbot.com/blog/2010/01/28/kindle-fail-bleak-house/

Hello all!