The articles, “Kalgoorlie riot proves Leak right” by Andrew Bolt and “White man’s manslaughter, Black man’s murder. White man’s riot. Black man’s uprising” by Chris Graham, present in this essay seek to analyse and examine the functions of evaluation and critique. Butler and Spivak define critique as a process of questioning that disrupts the dominant systems, notions and norms, not just to replace them with a better understanding, but by offering an opportunity to think differently (Butler & Spivak, 2011, p. para 2). The process of critique is to expose texts, signs and signifiers that would wish to merely function as evaluation. Evaluation seeks to avoid problematizing its own position so as to reinforce ideological systems and structures
…show more content…
para 8). Bolt employs many of the techniques of evaluation. Firstly, he compares Bill Leak’s appraisal of indigenous issues with the death of an aboriginal boy taking great strides of logic between … . He finds fault . He ‘punches down’ on individuals, not up to systems and structures which are reinforced, that is that aboriginal issues are not white issues and they of their own making. The article remains silent on issues pertaining to indigenous issues including “high Aboriginal incarceration rate, high detention rate of our youth, high homelessness, high poverty, high suicide with our mob, high suspension rates in our schools, high deaths in custody, high unemployment” (Roman, 2016, p. para 8). It simply purports that the death of Elijah Dougherty can be singularly attribute to his parenting, or lack thereof. No questions asked. This article functions as evaluation because it is reinforcing “ideology that works both to include and exclude” but it does not question nor does it seek to offer alternatives ways of thinking (Thwaites, 2002, p. 160). This text is evaluative in its attempts to maintain the inequality between the two people groups rather than examining what is causing the inequality. It can be argued in this case that Bolt’s article functions as evaluation because it …show more content…
O’Sullivan posits that knowledge that is considered being generally accepted but precludes social origins to the point that they “are suppressed, ex-nominated or deemed irrelevant” is an example of evaluation and not critique. (Ideology, 1994, p. 140)
According to O’Shaughnessy and Stadler, discourse is framing of an ideology through language and text in a way that organizes that knowledge and creates the currency of social power for the benefit of a particular dominant thinking or structure (O 'Shaughnessy, 2012, p. 69).
The relevance of examining critique is to examine the nature of discourses whose inherent unconscious acceptance of ideology at a societal level. The relevance of evaluation is to understand that ideology can be so pervasive and invisible that it is possible to miss noting that articles can actually perpetuate the ideology they seek at address thereby limiting and reinforcing dominant thinking instead of redressing it. The two articles that either seek to critique or evaluate the unconscious, shared ideology of indigenous
para 8). Bolt employs many of the techniques of evaluation. Firstly, he compares Bill Leak’s appraisal of indigenous issues with the death of an aboriginal boy taking great strides of logic between … . He finds fault . He ‘punches down’ on individuals, not up to systems and structures which are reinforced, that is that aboriginal issues are not white issues and they of their own making. The article remains silent on issues pertaining to indigenous issues including “high Aboriginal incarceration rate, high detention rate of our youth, high homelessness, high poverty, high suicide with our mob, high suspension rates in our schools, high deaths in custody, high unemployment” (Roman, 2016, p. para 8). It simply purports that the death of Elijah Dougherty can be singularly attribute to his parenting, or lack thereof. No questions asked. This article functions as evaluation because it is reinforcing “ideology that works both to include and exclude” but it does not question nor does it seek to offer alternatives ways of thinking (Thwaites, 2002, p. 160). This text is evaluative in its attempts to maintain the inequality between the two people groups rather than examining what is causing the inequality. It can be argued in this case that Bolt’s article functions as evaluation because it …show more content…
O’Sullivan posits that knowledge that is considered being generally accepted but precludes social origins to the point that they “are suppressed, ex-nominated or deemed irrelevant” is an example of evaluation and not critique. (Ideology, 1994, p. 140)
According to O’Shaughnessy and Stadler, discourse is framing of an ideology through language and text in a way that organizes that knowledge and creates the currency of social power for the benefit of a particular dominant thinking or structure (O 'Shaughnessy, 2012, p. 69).
The relevance of examining critique is to examine the nature of discourses whose inherent unconscious acceptance of ideology at a societal level. The relevance of evaluation is to understand that ideology can be so pervasive and invisible that it is possible to miss noting that articles can actually perpetuate the ideology they seek at address thereby limiting and reinforcing dominant thinking instead of redressing it. The two articles that either seek to critique or evaluate the unconscious, shared ideology of indigenous