write a critical book review of approximately 3-4 pages on “Feminism for the 99%” by Nancy Fraser, Tithi Bhattacharya, and Cinzia Arruzza. The review should include a brief summary of the work and its thesis (approx. 20% of the assignment’s length).
The rest of the review should be dedicated to analysis and critique. Be specific, even if you are not using direct quotes, and use quotes sparingly.
Limited parenthetical citation to the book under review is acceptable for this assignment. The book, “Feminism for the 99%. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/40667455-feminism-for-the-99
Feel free to organize the review however you like, just make sure you have a recognizable introduction and avoid simply describing the content of the manifesto (assume your TAs have read the manifesto).
Focus on the strengths and weaknesses of the manifesto’s main argument and if possible, reflect on how the manifesto engages with/expands upon other works you are familiar with. Feel free to support your arguments with quotations from other works (APA or Chicago style).
Have a look at the following helpful pointers:
-Think of the review as an argument built around your answer to the question, “What is the significance of this manifesto” Your argument may be historical, evidentiary, theoretical, or methodological, but in all cases, your review should constitute a critique, in the broad sense of advancing the discussion of the manifesto in the field of Gender and Politics.
Do not write a review that merely describes the contents of the manifesto under review; such information can be readily found on any publisher’s website.
-Include a short statement on what the manifesto is about and its central argument or purpose. Be sure to keep this brief; the bulk of the review should be focused on your critique.
-Set the manifesto in its political and/or historiographical context. Where does the book fit in the literature? To which subfield(s) does it belong? Does the work extend or challenge the existing literature, and if so, how?
-How original or significant is the central argument? How effectively does the manifesto back up the argument? To what degree are you convinced? Did this study force you to reconsider your thinking about the subject, and if so, how?
-Do you feel manifestos such as these are impactful in terms of advancing the arguments and beliefs of the authors?
-How sophisticated are the manifesto’s interpretations and analyses? Explain any particularly noteworthy strengths and weaknesses of the interpretive framework.
-Is the study well organized and appropriately written for its audience? Is it meant for professional academics, and activists, and/or intended as a text for students? Does it aim to be a crossover manifesto?