Trisha Mae K.

Deiparine

Book Review

Political Analysis is not your average political science book. It is neither a step by step
nor just a mere compilation of information that is encapsulated in the umbrella of political
science. It is an engaging book that will enthrall you to read the book from the first chapter to the
next, to the next one after another.

It is a page-turner book that will allow you to explore and makes you love reading it for
the reason that every chapters are interrelated. A question may be posed at a current chapter you
are reading, the next chapter will remarkably answer the hanging question lay-upon the
preceding chapter. In this way the author made the book more interesting, giving you a fresh,
new approach to reading what it is about the political sphere.

This book has a novel like feel to it, it makes you want to read more. Reading the part at
the end of chapter one will make you feel comfortable and relaxed. The author presented the
order of his book in a manner that a reader will feel lightened and would not be burdened. At this
way it is really helpful that he took time to make a plot of the book not only a plot but he
expounded it. He presented how each chapters were interrelated to the next chapter after another.

At the last chapter he said he will gather all the disparate questions motioned by post-
modernists questions regarding political analysis thus answers it in a logical way.

In the second chapter tackles science as being apathetic, inhumane, detaching ones
feelings to the object being studied. For short, objective observation, or the physical point of
view. In one of Colin Hays Article titled Theories of the State, he said to develop a concept of
the state is to look at politics in a particular way.

But, political analysts are subject to its environment it is crucial and avoidable to be not
on that sphere that is why the society is and will be always his/her subject to his analytical
works.

At the next chapter it tackles about the structure versus agency, which currently the
concern in which why political analysts are divided. The question of structure and agency,
discussed the phenomena in which analysts have been seeking for some time already; the need
for a uniformed approach to the question of structure and agency. Thus, as to suffice the problem
that had been polarizing the term of structure and agency.

At this chapter titled the continuity and discontinuity in the analysis of political change.
It is more important to note that here it explain the complex social and political changes. As he
puts it. evolutionary and revolutionary perspective by contrast are capable of providing us with
highly parsimonious explanations, less likely to account for the nuances of complex social and
political change.

Next is the interpretation of the concepts of power, divided by common language. That
political scientists remained divided by the common language of power is perhaps testimony to
the centrality of concept to political analysis. As David Apter puts in his book in Introduction to
Political Analysis, Power is less neat and calculable Political science thus draws on theories
from other discipline to show how power is formed and used. Power as a concept is also one of
the reason also why political scientists are divided.

Next topic that continues the topic on power concept is the relative significance of ideas
and material factors and the last is the challenge of post modernism.

The book attempts to raise consciousness to some of the important questions of the
political science sphere in our time.

Colin Hay is professor in the University of Sheffield, he wrote the books such as the:
Why we Hate Politics and the library binding Restating the Social and Political Change. One
of the common approaches or attitude Colin Hay way of introducing his work is that it is
innovative in a way it catches a persons attention and enjoys it. He wrote the books wherein he
is likely to possess with a humorous approach to political science.

The strengths of this book is basically on the author synthesizing every chapter, it making
it more easier to understand. After discussing the specifics he then connects all the subtopics,
making it as a one topic. It is also written well because the book is really engaging, it makes you
participate with him while reading it. It is like he is the one lecturing in a class and you try to
cope up with him while he also discussed the main agenda of the chapter.

The book is carefully written probably one the most engaging political science books. It
is clear, and interesting.

Compared to his other books it is not negligible that he has an artistic way of catching the
attention of the readers.

Students alike and other professionals in the field will enjoy this book. It has a witty
approach towards political analysis.

The books main point is to argue on the need for a critical political analysis that is well
explained to the questions cited throughout the course of the book.