A Rhetorical Analysis of Nicholas Carr’s “Paper Versus Pixel”
Nicholas Carr is an author who is well known for his articles and books on technology and business and most recently wrote the book The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains. Carr’s article, “Paper Versus Pixel,” was originally published by Nautilus on August 29, 2013. In this article Carr argues that physical paper text is not going to die out or be replaced by digital text. Throughout the years several writers have made the claim that digital text will eventually replace paper text to devices such as the phonograph, the audiobook, and the smartphone. To further develop his argument, Carr relies on a number of rhetorical strategies to get his point across.
In the article “Paper Versus Pixel,” Carr claims that paper text will not die out or be replaced by digital text. Paper has been necessary for our modern way of life, but we also resent it because we have unlimited amounts of it. Carr seemed to lean toward paper because reading a physical copy helps interpret and retain the information. Every new “communication medium” invented has lead to people proclaiming that printed books would die out. Carr also states digital text is best for quick news and shorter articles because it’s convenient. He also mentions a great research conducted in Norway to young readers, which shows if paper or digital text is more effective.
One strategy Carr uses to persuade his Nautilus readers is citing authorities. He points out the history of books and how every time an author or inventor says books will be replaced, that the book has managed to prove them wrong. One example of which is when Carr mentions an essay written in Scribner’s Magazine in 1894. The essay was written by French author Octave Uzanne and was titled “The End of Books.” Uzanne’s essay made the claim that Thomas Edison’s new invention, the phonograph, would replace books. Carr points out that Uzanne was wrong because it did not...