The subject is: Anthropology 149 – Selected Topics in Social Anthropology: Anthropology of Violence
Here are the instructions from my teacher:
Write a reading response (in response to the attached readings) which is a specific kind of essay that asks you as a reader to engage critically with the assigned material. What the reading response is not is a simple summary of the main ideas of readings (although it can contain a very brief summary of their main ideas as a starting point). The reading response is still a kind of essay; as such, it should have a clear organizational scheme that makes it easy for the reader to understand. Feel free to pose well-framed questions in your response.
The response should be 1 single-spaced page (approximately 500-550 words, 12-point Times New Roman font). No cover page is necessary. The reading response should be carefully proofread and free from typos and grammatical errors.
In writing a response you may assume the reader has already read the text. Thus, do not summarize the contents of the text at length. Instead, take a systematic, analytical approach to the text. Do not evaluate texts through a simple “I liked it/I hated it” approach. There are a variety of approaches that you can take to writing a reading response. It can critique the readings, identifying their useful and/or flawed aspects. It can discuss the use of specific sources, concepts, or methods. It can bring the readings into dialogue with other issues with contemporary academic or political debates. It can identify directions for future research.
Make sure to distinguish between a) what the author said, b) your interpretation of what he/she said, and c) your own thoughts on the subject. Examine your wording to make it as accurate as you can. Try to stay away from unsubstantiated overgeneralizations.
Here are some questions that you may consider while writing your response:
What issues are explored in the readings?
What are the questions that are posed by the authors? What problems are they addressing?
What are some of the key concepts introduced in the readings? How are they connected?
What are the positions of the authors? What are they arguing for or against?
Are there any ideas you disagree with? Why?
What are the links between the readings? Are there significant similarities or differences in terms of their arguments/authors’ positions/historical contexts etc?
Has the reading provoked new questions, dilemmas, or curiosities?