What characteristics embody a critique??

Before reading the essay concerning Daniel’s project with the Public Secret’s I had really only a general view or assumption about prison. Most of the knowledge I have obtained about the people, and the lifestyle the prisoners must conform to is molded by social media. Some times the image portrayed can be at totally different ends of the spectrum. One prison is depicted as a dilapidated space where fear and anxiety consumes the inhabitants. While the other prison is portrayed as jovial prisoners are friends and play schoolyard football together in harmony. So to read about things such as three million dollar razor wire fence at the California Correctional Women's Facility to me is astonishing. I could have never guessed that amount of money is disbursed to our correctional facilities. I especially thought it to be to the extreme for such a large amount of money for a measly fence. Her essay brought things to the reader’s attention that they may have not known otherwise. With the facts throughout her essay consumes it with characteristics that makes it easy to promote the literary piece as a critique.

The reading The basic Aims of Discourse refers to a George Miller, and in my opinion his theory helps support this piece as a critique. He believed that the informative use of language attempts to increase uniformity of fact and information in the community. I think Daniel does a good job of doing exactly that when she talks about how the project highlights individual women’s experience. She does this by making the project relatable to everyone by noting that the prison system diminishes everyone not just the prisoners. It impacts the community with a social problem, and questions the basic principals supporting any just and democratic society. She makes the problem a community problem not just an individual.

In Kinneavy’s basic Aims of Discourse it mentions you can gain an understanding for the aim of the discourse by considering the stated intention of the author and the reaction of a given reader. In Daniel’s conclusion it clearly mentions the fact that she believes that correctional facilities like Public Secrets come at a cost. The way prisons are run fashion projections and denials that can be both social and personal. I as the reader saw critiques being externalized left and right. As a reader I felt I was being informed and persuaded to side with the author that prison facilities are problematic in so many ways, and she continues to list off why throughout the essay. She did such a good job critiquing the issues with the prisons that she has made me become a skeptic about what the benefits are for how our current prisons are being run. If that is not equivalent enough to be considered a significant critique I am not sure what would be.