Summary vs. Analysis

Well, let me just start by saying that I am not now nor have I ever been what one would call ‘an avid reader’, although everyone else in my family was.  Over the years I have discovered the reason to be that I need to keep my hands busy.  When I am reading my hands have nothing to do – therefore I pretty much do not read anything that I do not absolutely have to.

With that said, my understanding of summary and analysis is as follows:

Many, many years ago, back in High School we had to read specific books and write essays (book reports) on them.  Clearly, not wanting to read books at all, much less books like Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee or Of Mice and Men, I in fact did not.  What I did do was buy the ‘Cliff's Notes’ for these and other books and more or less read them.  In fact, I must admit that I have even been known to read the back cover of a book, the first and last page and up to 10 pages in between and write perfectly good summary type essays. I could get the jest of the story and summarize it very eloquently and with just enough detail for my teachers at that time to believe that I had actually read the assigned books. Doing this, I never received less than a ‘B’; usually I received an ‘A’.  Now, I am not suggesting that anyone do this; I am just saying that it is pretty easy to be able to summarize a story this way.

There is no way that I could use the same technique and write an analysis of a story.  An analysis requires that you dig deep into what is written. You have to look for the hidden meanings (read between the lines).  You have to take a passage and tear it apart word by word, phrase by phrase.  You have to think about whether or not you agree with what you believe the author is saying.  And why you agree or disagree.  And then you have to be able to explain your thoughts as opposed to the authors.

Clearly, Analyzing something is a lot more work than Summarizing it.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8b/Of_Mice_And_Men_Poster.jpg Image by unknown