Invisible Child: Poverty, Survival, and Hope in an American City

Nonfiction | Biography | Adult | Published in 2021

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.

Download PDF

Summary

Background

Chapter Summaries & Analyses

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

Part 6

Part 7

Key Figures

Themes

Index of Terms

Important Quotes

Essay Topics

Tools

Beta

Discussion Questions

Background

Authorial Context: Andrea Elliott

Andrea Elliott originally conceived of the work on Dasani and her family as a series of long-form articles. These were eventually published by The New York Times, but Elliott later expanded the project to create Invisible Child—an influential book that explores the systemic roots and deeply personal effects of poverty. Elliott cites Jacob Riis’s seminal 1890 work of photojournalism, How the Other Half Lives, as a model for her own work—as Riis did at the end of the 19th century, Elliott wishes to document the experience of urban poverty in our time.

To write Invisible Child, Elliott adopted a controversial approach referred to as “immersive journalism.” In addition to traditional investigative journalism approaches, she spent a lot of time with the family, “embedding” herself in a sense to witness the story as it unfolded. Immersive journalism often presents and interprets the subjective experiences of its subjects in a manner that we might more readily associate with fiction. A more conventional journalist would be inclined to report such perceptions through direct quotations from people interviewed.

Herein lies the controversy. An immersive journalist like Elliott might argue that she has spent a lot of time with the family and has witnessed most of the events described; therefore, she has direct knowledge of the perceptions and attitudes of those involved. A critic would argue that this approach renders Elliott’s approach susceptible to her personal bias. In anticipation of this criticism, Elliott has included an extensive “Notes” section in Invisible Child in an effort to document sources.

The immersive journalism approach Elliott relies on comes from a tradition of less conventional and more literary approaches to journalism. These include New Journalism (e.g., SuperSummary’s guide on In Cold Blood by Truman Capote) and Gonzo Journalism (e.g., SuperSummary’s guide on Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas by Hunter S. Thompson).

Historical and Political Context: Welfare

Welfare programs figure prominently in Invisible Child. Elliott delves into the history of welfare and the narratives surrounding it, noting that that at times it has been understood as a moral undertaking, with potential recipients sorted into the “worthy”—those deemed to have fallen into poverty through no fault of their own (e.g., children and widows)—and the “unworthy”—those determined to be responsible for their condition through their own actions (e.g., people with substance abuse disorders and criminals). The public conversation about welfare still often relies on this simplistic formulation.

However, Invisible Child demonstrates that the situation resists such simplistic moral categories. For example, drug abuse features prominently in the story, lending fuel to the argument that drug users are responsible for their poverty. But is their drug use a cause of their poverty or a result, or is it both? Depending on where we look, we might argue that Supreme and Chanel’s drug use causes lasting damage to the family, or we might argue that they have fallen into drug use because their prospects are so grim.

In addition to this complexity, Elliott also explores how changing attitudes toward welfare have altered policies that directly impact opportunities for Dasani and her family. Throughout the story, there are numerous periods in which rent subsidy programs are provided that allow the family to leave the shelter system. However, once these subsidy programs expire, little else has changes about the family’s situation, so they typically end up right back where they started. Moreover, Elliott notes that since the 1980s, the political discussion around welfare has shifted from providing support to children toward making parents responsible and self-reliant. This means that policies have been cut and become more stringent. According to Elliott, agencies responsible for offering benefits have become more intrusive in their monitoring of those receiving benefits while also providing less support to struggling families.