Back to the Future of Reading

     "The Future of Reading" by Jonah Lehrer is one of numerous blogs and opinion pieces expressing a preference of the tangible, classic book over the new-age e-reader. This particular post however, adds a little more fact than the others. Citing Stanislas Dehaene, a neuroscientist at the College de France in Paris, Lehrer explains that the act of reading is not one-faced. In doing this, the text expands its own intertextuality.

     Likewise, Lehrer utilizes a rhetorical situation in order to gain support for his (albeit readily supported) suggestion. The rhetorical situation here, which consists of an exigence, an audience, a rhetor, and constraints. It should be noted here that "constraints" include not only those things that limit an action, but also all devices (technical, rhetorical, etc.) that affect the situation.

     The exigence of "The Future of Reading" is that reading will become too simple. This feeling rides on both emotional and scientific ideas. The neurological conditions that lead readers to typically prefer the traditional format over the newer digital option resides in an emotion that many can't articulate as well as the more scientific portion of this blog.

     In terms of identifying the audience, it is relatively clear that readers of the two options are the primary targets. This is of course a somewhat broad interpretation of the audience. More specifically, writers who utilize print and digital media are expected to be interested in "The Future of Reading."

     Most obviously, the rhetor for the blog is the author. Lehrer explains his positions clearly and effectively. There is no sign of others prompting him to write this, nor did he write it as part of a group of any kind.

     Constraints of Lehrer's blog post range from its digital nature to its specific word choices. The sometime-scientific lingo  makes the audience a slightly more specific group, as does the Internet-based existence of this text. Choosing to criticize electronic text via an electronic medium is an interesting facet of the situation as well.

     As any EWM major would point out, Leherer's "Sooner or later, every medium starts to influence the message" quotation in one of his last paragraphs is quite fitting of both 1) our major, and 2) a typical, well-made criticism or analysis of a textual medium. It is quite clear that Lerher has read up on his Marshall McLuhan (famous media theorist noted for coining the phrase/idea, "the medium is the message").


     Bonus point: Lerher's statement on reading the same text in a different medium seems fitting in my life as well. I'm more apt to notice errors in print than in a digital format, it seems.

     Bonus bonus point: Lehrer's point regarding reading his Kindle before sleep almost sounds sponsored.