I actually prefer that her last name was omitted. When the author reveals the character, I believe that Dasani has some sort of essence to the lack of a last name. We put ourselves in a position where Dasani isn’t “Dasani Campbell,” for example. We hear the first name and the first name only because that is all that needs to be said.
Character development plays a big role in this profile because it ties very closely with story development. You can’t have the same emotional connection, empathy and sympathy for Dasani and her family without getting to know them first. If the story was 1,000 words, we would barely look at a story such as Dasani’s. The best way to describe it is the difference between one tv show and one movie. If I were to watch one thirty-minute episode of a show without any previous knowledge, it wouldn’t have the same impact than a feature-long movie.
I believe Elliott did a thorough job documenting the life of Dasani. She goes through her family life and her school life with such thoroughness it is as if Dasani is telling her story to a ghost writer.
Personally, the only way to fully understand a problem is to be inside the problem in some form. Going to see Dasani and documenting her, without a doubt, has to say something about the homelessness issue in New York. Basically, she showed us the problem without telling us what the problem actually is.
This ties in with the length criticism. If the story is too short, people would not have cared as much. Similarly, if there were more people added into the story, it would dilute the message Elliott was trying to express.
