Before writing a review, read the text being analyzed. Highlight in it the main thing, pay attention to the development of the plot, the character system, their connection, the author’s style, the paper writer ‘s position, the expression of the main idea. Observe all observations in the draft by the points, theses.

Analyzing a work of art, it’s necessary to separately write out the means of expressiveness, to note their role in the text, the semantic load, the nature of use, the significance for the disclosure of the idea.

Try to find some discrepancies, an insufficiently written out image of the hero, a style discrepancy, perhaps the storyline is not clearly or not so logical, the scene is outlined.

Speaking of drawbacks, remember that the review should be correct. All the wording in a good analysis is academic, delicate. They should be preceded by the following words: “in my opinion,” “in our opinion,” “is in doubt”.

Write about the relevance of the work. If you can’t connect it with modernity, you can confine yourself to conclusions about the role in the work of the writer, the literary direction.

Each position of your review should be clearly argued. Give examples, facts, quotes, establish links and build logical chains.

In the review you can use the method of comparison, drawing a parallel with another work. Of course, for this it is necessary to have a certain horizon, to give an appropriate comparison, which really will help to look at the text in a new, more objective way to evaluate it. The analysis should look natural. However, if you can correctly apply this technique, this will be an additional advantage of your work. Now such comparisons are practiced:

the text is compared with another work of the same author;

a parallel is made between two works of different authors working in one genre or at one time;

Compare works written on one theme;

a reference is made to a work with a similar idea;

the work of literature is compared with works of music, screen versions, theatrical productions.

Comparison should not be conducted throughout the entire review, but a successful parallel to enrich your analysis, you will be able to make original, unexpected conclusions, to argue for a personal point of view.