Summerizing and Analysis

         What I got from the lecture on summary and analysis is that they can be easily mixed up. What I have learned about summary is that it basically explains what has happened in the reading, movie or whatever it is that you are summarizing. Ways you can tell if you are summarizing is when you are stating things that have happened like for instance in “Winnie The Pooh” by A. A. Milne. “Pooh Bear is always hungry for honey, and usually gets himself into some type of trouble or disagreement.” I mean it’s not the entire storyboard but it explains the main plot in most of the stories you read in the book. Also you could be describing something that happened, like “Pooh Bear ran into Rabbit and Rabbit was being grumpy and rude.” Other ways are simple to notice weak verbs like “is” or “about”. In a summary you inform the person about what they are about to read/watch or what they have already known.

         Analysis is when you take apart pieces of the reading/video and examining them and paying deep attention to each character or other element. It’s also like close reading, where you look between the lines. You want to criticize every important detail. There are a few types of criticizing, new criticism, political criticism, historical criticism and analysis criticism. So for example in “Winnie the Pooh” for analysis I could say, “In every Winnie the Pooh story, Eeyore has his house fall apart because he is negative to everything and everyone around him.” That could be true but not entirely. Someone could easily argue with me saying that it isn’t because he is negative; it’s just bad luck. Things you can look at when you are analyzing could be relationships, trends, consequences, causes, effects, strengths and weaknesses.

This was the first thing that I found when looking for further examples of summarizing and analysis here. I found it somewhat helpful. Although I enjoyed the lecture, it was much more helpful. I don't feel like I understand completely but I think I have a decent grasp on it. The site where I found my image is here.

Good Readers and Good Writers.

Nabokov mentions in his writing that, “We should always remember that the work of art is invariably the creation of a new world, so that the first thing we should do is to study that the new world as closely as possible, approaching it as something brand new, having no obvious connection with the worlds we already know.” He also mentions that a good reader is someone who rereads. I agree one hundred percent, I’ve read my fair share of books but when I reread a book I find things and understand things better than the first time around. Also, I believe that being a good reader completely falling into a whole other world is very important. We as readers should always distance our self from the actual world so we can get more from what we are reading.

I also have come to believe that the characteristics of a good reader can be very obvious, drowning in their book where if you try to have a conversation with them they wont even budge. I agree with what Nabokov says where a good reader not only rereads but has a large imagination and somewhat artistic. Most readers I’ve known who can go through a 1,000 or more page book within a day and that not being the first time they read it. They tend to be very distant to the real world; they seem to just about become invisible to the world around them.  I consider myself a mediocre reader. I prefer to read simple articles in magazines. But, when I do read books I find myself almost living through the book letting my imagination run wild.


The following link is to a website that has similar ideas of what makes a good reader. http://tinarathore84.hubpages.com/hub/readingstrategies

Intorduction Video