Review: Jean Wyatt: Risking Difference: Identification, Race, and Community.

Abstract

In lieu of an abstract, here is the first paragraph of the review: 

Reading academic texts in order to review them is a task I often find both rewarding and stressful. Obviously one typically chooses to review books that relate to one's own areas of research, and thus one in many ways seeks to learn whilst reviewing. Yet, on the other hand, reviewing often feels like an adversarial task - one must, in order to review a book, simultaneously critique it. There will of course be books one reviews that one loves, and others that one reacts aversively to. And then there will be books that produce both emotions (amongst others) - ones that thoroughly excite the reader, and yet also elicit concern over particular theoretical formulations or knowledge claims. This is perhaps as it should be - a good book should challenge, educate and stimulate the reader, and certainly few books are likely to achieve consensus amongst readers. Where this is problematic, however, is in the writing of the review itself - how does one balance critique with praise, and importantly, how does one not undermine the importance of a book when critiquing it?