An AnnoTATEd sTudEnT ARgumEnT 69laptop, able to fast-forward, rewind, and pause with a delightful
and devilish sense of programming omnipotence. We are now
seeing it, slowly but surely, slay the giant that we never thought
could be slain: the world of books.
Contrary to popular belief, easier access to a wider
quantity of literature is not a universal revolution. The Kindle
speaks to the world that measures quantity by the number of
cable television channels it has, speed by the connectivity of its
wireless networks, and distance by the number of miles a family
travels for vacation. Yes, the Kindle is the new paradigm for uni-
versal access and literary connectivity. But it is much like a col-
lege degree in the sense that it is merely a gateway to a wealth
of opportunity. The problem, however, is gaining access to this
gateway in the first place.
Books often pass from hand to hand, from friend
to friend, from generation to generation, many times with
the mutual understanding that remuneration is not neces-
sary — merely the promise of hope that the new reader is as
touched and enlightened by the book as the previous one. This
transfer serves more than a utilitarian function; symbolically, it
represents the passage of hope, of knowledge, of responsibility.
The book, in many cases, represents the only sort of
hope for the poorest among us, the great equalizer in a world
full of financial and intellectual capital and highly concentrated
access to this capital. The wonderful quality of the book is that
its intellectual value is very rarely proportional to its financial
value; people often consider their most valuable book to be one
they happened to pick up one day for free.
The proliferation of the Kindle technology, however,
will result in a wider disconnect between the elite and the non-
elite — as the old saying goes, the rich will get richer and the
poor will get poorer. Unfortunately for the poor, this is no finan-
cial disconnect — this is a widening of the gap in the world of
ideas. And this is, perhaps, the most dangerous gap of all.
The Kindle Revolution, ironically, may end up contribut-
ing to the very disease that is antithetical to its implied func-
tion: illiteracy. Make no mistake, the Kindle was not designed
with the poor in mind. For those in most need of the printedCamp 234567In this paragraph, he
makes a claim of fact
about unequal access to
technological innovation
and offers a concession
to what many see as the
value of the Kindle.He supports his claim of
fact with evidence based
on experience: that
sharing books provides
something technology
cannot offer.He supports his claim of
fact with evidence based
on experience: that
sharing books provides
something technology
cannot offer.He supports his claim of
fact with evidence based
on experience: that
sharing books provides
something technology
cannot offer.He supports his claim of
fact with evidence based
on experience: that
sharing books provides
something technology
cannot offer.He supports his claim of
fact with evidence based
on experience: that
sharing books provides
something technology
cannot offer.Evidence from observa-
tion: not everyone has
access to new tech-
nologies, but people will
always have access to
books.An evaluative
claim — that the
widening gap between
rich and poor is danger-
ous — adds another
layer to the argument.A further evaluative
claim — that new tech-
nological devices offer
little hope to “victims” of
illiteracy — is followed
by a claim of fact that03_GRE_5344_Ch3_055_079.indd 69 11/19/14 11:06 AM