As a critical assessment, a book review should focus on opinions, not facts and details.

.Summary should be kept to a minimum, and specific details should serve to illustrate arguments

 What is the thesis—or main argument—of the book? If the author wanted you to get
one idea from the book, what would it be? How does it compare or contrast to the world
you know? What has the book accomplished?
 What exactly is the subject or topic of the book? Does the author cover the subject
adequately? Does the author cover all aspects of the subject in a balanced fashion?
What is the approach to the subject (topical, analytical, chronological, descriptive)?
 How does the author support her argument? What evidence does she use to prove
her point? Do you find that evidence convincing? Why or why not? Does any of the
author’s information (or conclusions) conflict with other books you’ve read, courses
you’ve taken or just previous assumptions you had of the subject?
 How does the author structure her argument? What are the parts that make up the
whole? Does the argument make sense? Does it persuade you? Why or why not?
 How has this book helped you understand the subject? Would you recommend the
book to your reader?

Ghandi claimed that mere converts ( muslims in india) could not claim to be a separate nation .1
because after all they were just a small minority in india

The writer states in the beginning that two groups which such divergence in thoughts beliefs and .2
.history could never come together happily without one sacrificing for the other

the author states that muslims were not a religious minority rather there were a whole nation 3
within a nation. He states that the difference between hindus and muslims were not only on the
basis of religious belief ( like the diff btw protestants and catholics or Christians and Jews) rather the
.diiference go deeper than religion

the writer sounds as he is in complete favor of the partition as he states that without a separate .4
existence enrichment of human thought is impossible and I think he is right here as without separate
existence the the creative genius of muslims was likely to wither away

sir syed ahmed khan played a vital role in improving the misery of muslims in india after British .5
named them petrators and blamed them for the war of 1857. The British persecuted muslims and
fired all muslims who were part of the government even be the job of a cleaner. In this situation sir
syed encouraged the muslims that the only way muslims could improve their situation was through
.befriending the British, gaining western education and not joining politics at that time

the congress was formed mainly by the British to pursue their interests and it was more of a .6
Hindu plus British party who claimed that they were representing all Indians hence sir syed was
staunchly against this party and told all the muslims to stay away from them and in the early years of
congress muslims meted out com-lete noncooperation to the congress

the opinion of sir syed was proven right after muslims saw the agitation of hindus on the partition .7
of Bengal and relief of muslims. The rights and violence that followed the partition made it evident
that the congress was not backed by secular politics rather it was religious revivalism that that drove
……it. It became clear to the muslims that congress was not for them