Essay on “Analyze, Don’t Summarize” by Michael Berube

Essay on “Analyze, Don’t Summarize” by Michael Berube Berube analogize student’s essays and watching sports commentary on ESPN, because students tend to summarize in their essays instead of analyzing it. Berube uses an example as to what he is trying to explain that the world of sports is metacommentary and no one actually summarizes on how the game is being played. Instead they analyze, they just point out the important part of the game. In the tenth paragraph he quotes “Well, Tony let me point out that last night, the Red Sox swept the Tigers and crept to within three games of the Yankees.” And then he quotes that “…I’m just pointing out that the Sox won 3-1, on a four hitter by Schilling, while the Yanks blew another late-inning lead.” Page 304 Berube uses this comparison to explain that no one summarizes the sports because no one in the sports world confuses summaries with analyses, meaning that he discuss the importance of what a thesis should look like. He quotes that “…When I tell them that an observation is not a thesis…” he wants students to write a paper in which the thesis can be arguable and to bring to the public’s attention, just as sports commentary do; pointing out the essential parts of the game. Berube’s response to student’s writing is to “Assume a hypothetical readership composed of people who have already read the book. That means that you shouldn’t say “In class, we discussed the importance in the clam chowder in chapter five. But more important it means you don’t have to summarize the novel…” Berube most convincing analogy would be when he quoted the Red Sox won 3-1with the Yankees. He gave two specific examples of what the difference of analyzing and summarizing. What he wants his papers look like. Well he uses the comparison with sports because what he wants his students to know that what he looks for is a paper that catches the public’s attention. He wants main points just as commentators argue about when a game is...