WRITING A REACTION

PAPER/REVIEW/CRITIQUE
REACTION PAPER
A reaction paper or response paper
requires the writer to analyze a
text, and then develop commentary
related to it. It is a popular
academic assignment because it
requires thoughtful reading,
research and writing.
In writing a reaction paper, you must be
able to justify your “reaction”. It is
important to provide reasons why. (Ex.
You need to provide reasons why the
thesis of a particular essay carries a strong
point. Of equal significance is your ability
to further support your reasons with
academic theories or even statistical data.
Tips:
1. Outline
2. Brief summary
3. First “reaction”
4. Other reactions “I think...”
5. Conclusion
Questions to ask
What is the main problem os issue that the author is
addressing?
What is the author’s central claim, argument or point?
What assumptions does the author make?
What evidence does the author present?
What are the strengths and weaknesses?
What are the possible counterarguments to the claims?
What are the important and interesting problems and
argumets?
WRITING A CRITIQUE
A critique is a genre of academic
writing that briefly summarizes and
critically evaluates a work or a
concept. Critiques can be used to
carefully analyze a variety of works
such as:
Creative works – novels, exhibits,
film, images, poetry
Research – monographs, journal
articles, systematic reviews,
theories
Media – news reports, feature
articles
Like an essay, a critique uses a formal,
academic writing style and has a clear
structure, that is, an introduction, body,
and conclusion. However, the body of a
critique includes a summary of the work
and a detailed evaluation. The purpose of
the evaluation is to gauge the usefulness
or impact of a work in a particular field.
Why do we write critiques?
Writing a critique on a work helps us to
develop:
A knowledge of the work’s subject area or
related works.
An understanding of the work’s purpose,
intended audience, development of argument,
structure of evidence or creative style.
A recognition of the strengths and
weaknesses of the work.
How to write a critique?
Study the work under discussion.
Make notes on key parts of the work.
Develop an understanding of the main
argument or purpose being expressed in
the work.
Consider how the work relates to a
broader issue or context.
 SEVEN (7) PRNCIPLES OF
EFFECTIVE CRITIQUE THAT
CRITICS SHOULD ADHERE
1. Objective – limit your critique to the
observed behavior of the writer and do
not criticize her/his personality, general
psychological traits, or physical
appearance. Be kind, but honest. Select
your words carefully and say what needs
to be said with minimum emotions and
without hurting the feelings of the
receiver.
2. Specific – a student/writer
sometimes cannot understand an error
and correct it if the critic is not specific
enough.
Ex. “your document is not good”
means nothing to a studentsince the
statement has no clues about
correcting the situation.
3. Constructive – try to give support
for the writer’s true strengths in your
criticism while presenting the negative
aspects as “issues that are open to
improvement”. Carefully selected
euphemisms (“room for
improvements” instead of “that’s
awful”) go a long way in this context.
4. Comprehensive – your critique
should be balanced an include both
good and bad points. It should not
leave out any important points
while prioritizing the solution steps.
5. Acceptable – the critic must be perceived as
legitimate authority before the critique can be
accepted by the writers. When there are
questions about the authority, knowledge, or
the fairness of the critic, the critique will fall
on deaf ears no matter how qualified and well-
intentioned it might be. If that common
ground of respect and acceptance is not
established beforehand, no critique will be
useful.
6. Flexible – a critic should be able
to shape his critique depending on
the audience, context, etc.You
should be flexible enough to take
into consideration human factors as
well as background, expectations,
and prior training of the audience.
7. Organized – a good critic takes the
writer by the hand and leads her through
a few steps as possible to the desired goal
of the instruction or the critique session.
Breaking a performance failure into
smaller parts and focusing on how to
improve each part in logical order works
well in most situations.
CRITICAL APPROACHES IN
WRITING A CRITIQUE OR
REVIEW
Criticism is an abstract, intellectual
exercise. It is an exchange of
informed opinion about a subject
for review. It is considered to be a
discourse. The common literary
criticism are:
Formalism – is placed at the center
because it deals primarily with the
text and not with any of the outside
considerations. Formalist argument
is inherent in the text because
meaning is determinant all other
factors are irrelevant.
Formalism advances that the
meaning of a text is form-
dependent. It also contends that the
author is dead and advances that
the milieu of the author have
nothing to do with the
interpretation of the text.
Biographical – asserts that a work
of art is done by a person and
understanding his/her life would be
helpful to understand the work
itself.
Marxism – Focuses on how literary works
are products of the economic and ideological
determinants specific to that era. Critics
examine the relationship of a literary
product to the actual economic and social
reality of its time and place (Class
stratification, class relations, and dominant
ideology).
Marxism opposes the idea that
consciouseness shapes society. It
retorts that society shapes
consiousness. It implies that one thinks
and feels in terms of the acquired and
established social codes. Hence, the
individual is muffled in favor of the
masses.
Psychoanalysis – Focuses on a work of
literature primarily as an expression, in fictional
form, of the state of mind and the structure of
personality of the individual author. In other
words, a literary text is related to its author’s
mental and emotional traits.
Focuses on the human being’s unconscious mind,
regrets fears, hidden desire, sexuality and
repression.
Influenced by Freudian concepts,
psychoanalytic approach integrates ego, id,
superego, libido, penis envy, Oedipus,
Electra complexes. It considers literature
as the reflection of man’s unfulfilled
desires. It stereotypes women as
whimsical, capricious, emotional, illogical,
weak, frail, defenseless, and rarely saints.
Archetypal – Dissatisfied with
Freud’s design, Jung developed his
own. This approach is opposed to
psychoanalysis.
Archetypal – Focuses on recurrent narrative
designs, patterns of action, character types, or
images which are said to be identifiable in a
wide variety of literary works, myths, dreams,
and even ritualized modes of behavior. Critics
tend to emphasize the mythical patterns in
literature, such as the death-rebirth theme and
journey of the hero.
Deconstruction—Focuses on the practice of
reading a text in order to “subvert” or
“undermine” the assumption that the text can be
interpreted coherently to have a universal
determinate meaning. Typically, deconstructive
readings closely examine the conflicting
forces/meanings within the text in order to show
that the text has an indefinite array of possible
readings/significations.
Feminism – Focuses on female representation in
literature, paying attention to female points of view,
concerns, and values. Three underlying assumptions in
this approach are: Western Society is pervasively
patriarchal, male centered and controlled, and is
organized in such a way as to subordinate women; the
concept of gender is socially constructed, not
biologically determined; and that patriarchal ideology
pervades those writings which have been considered
“great works of literature.”
Historical – understanding the subject by
using analysis of social, cultural and
intellectual context surrounding the work
of art.
Sociological – considers the cultural,
economic, and political context in which
the subject is created. It explores the
relationship between the subject and the
creator.
1. Reader-Response - Focuses on the
reader (or "audience") and his or her
experience of a literary work, in
contrast to other schools and theories
that focus attention primarily on the
author or the content and form of the
work.