Book Review


Book Review vs. Book Report

Confused by the difference? You aren’t the only one. I was as well. This article will help you understand the difference between the two and also give you ideas to consider while writing an awesome book review.

Whenever I think of a book report, I remember them as writing assignments at the beginning of a school year. They were to make sure the class read the book we were supposed to read during the summer break. And that’s exactly what a book report is. It gives details on the book to make sure the reporter actually read it. Reports provide details such as setting, characters, and plot while dropping a short summary.

On the other side of the fence, a book review dives a little deeper and analyzes the book. Instead of checking that the reader read the book, the objective of a review is to give the reader an opinion with reason. Like a report, it tells a little about the book, yet differs as the reviewer is using book details as ammo to explain an analysis.

Put simply, a book report is an explanation of the author’s background and a summary of the plot. A book review covers the theme, thesis, and plot in a deeper, more critical manner.

The structure of a book review vary. But an awesome review has a basic skeleton format. Keep It Super Simple (KISS) because an unstructured complex review looks like a pile of dog mess. Awesome book reviews start with a quick summary/intro, pros, cons, and conclusion. At the end of an awesome book review, you can give a snippet of the book with a few lines, preferably dialogue to help intrigue the audience. The snippet should promote an exciting moment in the book, yet not give it away. It should compliment the review.

What happens specifically in each of these sections? First, the intro. Write an opening sentence that grips the reader and mention the author and book title. The awesome reviewer uses this intro to feed the review. Explain the overall concept and plot of the book in order to be used as subjects to discuss. You should be discussing this anyway.

Yet as an awesome reviewer, utilize this by connecting it the review as well as giving info about the book in the flow of the intro. For example, instead of saying, “The book has 500 pages,” let it flow, “Only working with 500 pages, the author captures a conflicting story about…” Or, “The author tells a unique tale of a boy and girl who die but their love continues in reality through hidden, unexpected ways. These events make every one of its 500 pages worth turning.”

Next are the pros and cons. You can also switch these by discussing the cons first and the pros afterward. During these sections, internal questions are asked and external answers are given. Some are: Favorite/Least favorite character? Favorite/Least favorite part? What could the author have done better? How did events flow? Are the character’s believable? Basically give your likes and dislikes with reason. What not to do? Something like this: “I liked the male lead. He was cool and got the girl.” Or worst, “I liked the ending because…” Analyze and explain your opinion and for the love of man Do Not Give Spoilers!

The finally part is the conclusion, where you give your final thoughts. By final thoughts I mean a summary of your thoughts, clarity on how it made you feel, and recommendations (don’t be afraid to get specific). It’s important not to bring up any new points!
Here is a sample of an awesome book review I wrote on The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand.


Book Review (Sample)

The Dean: “Do you mean to tell me that you’re thinking seriously of building that way, when and if you are an architect?”
Howard Roark: “Yes”
The Dean: “My dear fellow, who will let you?”
Howard Roark: “That’s not the point. The point is, who will stop me?” (pg. 23)

“But you see,” said Roark quietly, “I have, let’s say, sixty years to live. Most of that time will be spent working. I’ve chosen the work I want to do. If I find no joy in it, then I’m only condemning myself to sixty years of torture. And I can find the joy only if I do my work in the best way possible to me. But the best is a matter of standards – and I set my own standards. I inherit nothing. I stand in the end of no tradition. I may, perhaps, stand at the beginning of one.” (pg. 25)

You will either love Ayn Rand’s The Fountainhead or hate it. It’s founded on a philosophy developed by the Rand herself. Picture the novel as the overall building, with Objectivism as it’s skeleton and an embracive story that shows off the building’s architect. Some view the building as grotesque and others view it as beautiful and elegant. Without diving in too deep in the philosophy, I must explain a little of the book’s overall concept. Objectivism illuminates an idea of selfishness, in which it also grows society while mindless workers destroy it with uncreativity. The philosophy and the novel is summarized in the intro as Rand explains,

“The man-worshipers, in my sense of the term, are those who see man’s highest potential and strive to actualize it. The man-haters are those who regard man as a helpless, deprived, contemptible creature – and struggle to never let him discover otherwise. It is important here to remember that the only direct, introspective knowledge of man anyone possesses is of himself.” (pg. x)

This philosophy is presented throughout and disguised as masked form of a novel. The main character Howard Roark, a skilled and free-thinking architect battles the world of uniformity that praises the past and shuns originality. Man-haters like Ellsworth M. Toohey object to Roark and attempt to stun his creativity by influencing public disapproval through newspapers and other mediums. He simultaneously encourages Roark’s opposite, the unimaginative, people pleasing, Peter Keating and his work in hopes that Roark’s buildings never see the light of day. Other characters are introduced in this philosophical battle such as city powerhouse, Gail Wynand, and everyone’s love interest, Dominique Francon to give the novel life and flare.



The pace flowed seamlessly. I enjoyed how she explained passing time through the character’s individual age. It gave me more of a connection to the characters instead of just saying, “3 years passed.” From the beginning, Rand presented Roark as a 22-year-old and I watched the characters develop as they grew older.

I love how the 700-page novel is formatted with just 4 parts. In these 4 parts, each focuses on a specific character’s background. The parts allowed me to know the character better and the viewpoint they were coming from. By sectioning the novel in this way, I felt immersed in the character’s mind as I strived to understand their motives.
Rand did fantastic work in influencing me to like the main character. Roark is presented as the best (and, at times, appears flawless) architect in the world, yet his genius is misunderstood by almost everyone around him.



The last pro I gave is also a con. By being misunderstood, Roark is often found waiting in his office doing nothing. His ideals make it hard for him to gather clients at the first, so his rent is often late, food doesn’t come easy, and he doesn’t accept help from others. Sometimes this can make him hard to believe and relate with because he does nothing when work doesn’t come to him.

Another area I found unbelievable is that everyone loves the female love interest, Dominique Francon. She is presented as the diamond that the male characters want to possess. Rand forms her as this perfect form of human that compliments Roark’s ideals, yet unlike him, everyone thinks she’s just the most awesome being in the world. It’s a classic “everyone loves the girl but the girl only loves the main character” type of situation.



All in all, the book worked well. It established a philosophy disguised as an underdog novel with a splash of a love story. As I claimed in the opening sentence, you will either love the novel or hate it. I definitely loved it! Although minor flaws, it has empowered me to be and do more than I thought I had the ability to do. People often look down on others for not being who they think they should be or do with their lives. But this novel gave me the green light to contribute to society in my own creativity instead of someone else’s wishes.

This novel is for those who know they are meant for something big and need confirmation to fight the fight they think they are worth. It will help in strengthening a fractured ego that’s weakened by societal influence. Those who love to follow the pack should stay away. This is not for the man-haters.



From page 33, a confused Peter Keating asks for Howard Roark’s opinion on a crossroads in Keating’s life:

“You know,” said Keating honestly and unexpectedly even to himself, “I’ve often thought that you’re crazy. But I know that you know many things about it – architecture, I mean – which those fools never knew. And I know that you love it as they never will.”
“Well, I don’t know why I should come to you, but – Howard, I’ve never said it before, but  you see, I’d rather have your opinion on things than the Dean’s – I’d probably follow the Dean’s but it’s just that yours means more to me myself, I don’t know why. I don’t know why I’m saying this, either.”
Roark turned over on his side, looked at him, and laughed. It was a young, kind, friendly laughter, a thing so rare to hear from Roark that Keating felt as id someone had taken his hand in reassurance; and he forgot that he had a party in Boston waiting for him.
“Come on,” said Roark, “you’re not being afraid of me, are you? What do you want to ask about?”
“It’s about my scholarship. The Paris prize I got.”
“It’s for four years. But, on the other hand, Guy Francon offered me a job with him some time ago. Today he said it’s still open. And I don’t know which to take.”
Roark looked at him; Roark’s fingers moved in slow rotation, beating against the steps.
“If you want my advice, Peter,” he said at last, “you’ve made a mistake already. By asking me. By asking anyone. Never ask people. Not about your work. Don’t you know what you want? How can you stand it, not to know?”
“You see, that’s what I admire about you, Howard. You always know.”
“Drop the compliments.”
“But I mean it. How do you always manage to decide?”
“How can you let others decide for you?”


Now you’re ready to write your own! But, if you feel it’s too much or you don’t have the time, have no fear. Click here and I’ll be more than happy to write them for you 🙂 Hope to hear from you soon.