Printable View
Denmark and I listened to an audio book this week as we traveled around (good god, it's great to be home). While listening, I came to the conclusion that you can't really count it as "reading" a book. It's more like watching TV than actually engaging your mind.
That being said, I understand how it's good for people who don't have time to read but want to experience a book, and it was also REALLY good for what we used it for (11 hours of travel time).
What do you think?
More like radio really, and I'm not sure I'd say it doesn't engage your mind when you'd surely have to pay attention and 90% of the action still takes place in your imagination.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jinxie Poo
Still not reading, but not unengaging I'd guess. Never listened to one myself.
I don't see why it doesn't count as engaging your mind since you still have to visualize the characters and scenes and such, which is the entire point of reading to begin with.
I add audiobooks to my GoodReads for what it's worth. I don't listen to them much but Stephen Fry reading Hitchhiker's Guide is an A+ magical event that everybody needs to experience at least once in their lifetime.
I don't have the attention span to listen to audiobooks, but I don't see any reason they wouldn't be counted as reading.
I consider it listening if you want to be literal about it, but I agree with Vivi and Pike about the engagement. They remind me of the old radio shows that used to tell stories before TV became a thing. Just longer.
You guys have a point about engaging the mind.
I just meant you're not an active participant in the same way.
I don't feel like an active participant when I read either. Not since I stopped having to slowly sound out words to read when I was three or whatever. Whether it's a printed book or an audio book, it's words going directly into my mind either way.
Thinking about it the only entertainment media where I actually feel like an active participant would be video games. Or maybe choose your own adventure books I guess. xD
If you want to be an active participant in something, go play sports imo.
I feel like an active participant in books! I understand what you mean, though, Pike.
I don't think playaways/books on cd/audiobooks count as "reading", because you're not reading, you're listening. There is no doubt that it's still a "valid" means of consuming media, and there's no reason why you can't equate it with listening to a podcast, the radio, or good old fashioned storytelling. You still have to follow the plot, someone is just reading it aloud for you - which is pretty cool if it's the author, or a really good narrator!
This is my same reasoning. If I listen to an audiobook, I will say that I read it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pike
I consider it to count as "consuming a literary work"
Not for me.
The difference between audio books and real books are huge to me. When I listen to audio books (super great for road trips) I can multitask and do all sorts of other things. But books. Real books. They engross me. When I am reading that is all I know. Now, I can eat and drink and pee and poop while I read. I mean, I have to sometimes when I get super into a book. But I don't stop and put any mental effort into these things. For me, reading takes my mind over completely and lets me experience whatever I am reading in a whole different fashion than listening to an audio book or watching a movie.
Reading a book, by definition, involves actually reading words off a page/screen.
If someone prefers listening to audio books than reading that's fine, but they're two completely different ways of taking in a medium.
Huh. I suppose I've just never had this super magical/super engrossing reading experience you all are talking about, then. And I've read a lot. Maybe it's not actually my thing. I dunno. I think I'll bow out of this thread now because I feel like you all are talking about something I haven't experienced so I can't really discuss it. Sorry :shobon:
It's not reading in the traditional sense. However if you're giving it your full and undivided attention like you would when actually reading a book, then you are still engaging with the material. However you're engaging with someone elses interpretation of the material, the inflection and tone they put into their speech can affect how you visualize the story in your mind.
Damn straight. I was disappointed that it was Martin Freeman doing The Restaurant at the End of the Universe. I mean, I like Martin Freeman, but...Quote:
Originally Posted by Pike
I listened to Dune, and it had different voice actors, music and sound effects. It was brilliant!
I say it's reading. It's a really slow way to consume a book, though I probably say that because I used to spend my lunchbreaks listening to them.
Reading, in my personal definition, is going over and understanding letters/symbols with your eyes. Therefore I don't consider listening to audio books to be reading. Not that this makes any difference, mind you, since audio books can be just as engaging, or even more so, than books.
Although to me, that super engrossing reading experience comes only from visual novels. Combining the storytelling capabilities of books, movies, series and games all into one, that combo creates an immersion like I had never experienced before. That being said a medium like visual novels requires more conviction from the reader themselves. Reading a visual novel is quite demanding.
It's not technically reading based on the dictionary definition blah blah blah semantic dribble, but I'd say it's equivalent. The words are getting into your head one way or another. Sometimes people consume information better audibly rather than visually.
For me, it's about time. I have an hour and a half roundtrip drive to work every day, which extends even longer in the winter with the weather. Listening to audiobooks in the car is convenient for me in that time.
I can become either submersed or distracted just the same if I'm either reading a book or listening to it. If I'm listening and cleaning or cooking, I will become too distracted and not pay attention, so I've stopped doing that. In the car, though, I can focus much better. Even if I'm actually reading, though, often times something will spark my mind and I'll go off on a thinking tangent while my eyes are still scanning words on the page, and I'll have forgotten everything I've read for a couple of paragraphs. Does this happen to anyone else?
Either way, same information we are consuming, just in a difference manner of consuming it.
I wouldn't call it READING because it's not literally READING. But if I was making a list of books I've "read" this year, I would include audiobooks.
Especially if you're blind.Quote:
Originally Posted by Del Murder
As would I.Quote:
Originally Posted by Miriel
no.
No. Reading is reading.
I won't say it's not engrossing, and that it doesn't stimulate the mind. I think it certainly does. It's a great option for driving, flying, the hearing impaired, etc. I've thought about picking up some audio books, but my commute is only about 20-30 minutes, and outside of driving I have no reason to not just read a book.
Unless you're reading along with the audio books, then no it's not reading. Listening to an audio book is akin to listening to a podcast. Though I would still say finishing audio books count as you having completed the book. I agree with what others said though about the difference of reading vs listening. I know some people who are more audible learners, but I cannot for the life of me retain information if I listen to just the audio book. I have to also be following along, or I will just read it, which I prefer.
it's reading
the laser is reading the data from the cd/harddrive as you output the data into audio which then is processed by your auditory brain bits
data -> data -> data
But you are not reading, the CD player is :pQuote:
Originally Posted by krissy
As I told my lovely wife when she asked, it depends on your definition of 'reading' is and what the context of the question is. If it's being used as a synonym for 'consuming' then yes, it counts. If it's being used to mean 'absorbing information via retinal input of visual shapes,' no, obviously.
I can't multi-task while doing either one, unless one of the tasks is automatic/unconscious, like driving. There's no way I could play DotA or soccer or something while listening to a podcast or audiobook, unless I wanted to miss the book.
I wouldn't say its reading for the simple fact that if I'd listened to an audiobook and someone asked "Have you read X" I would say "No, but I've listened to the audiobook."
I don't think I've ever listened to an audiobook though. Just doesn't interest me
Then the question should have been whether we consider audiobooks as reading by a person only with no technological assistanceQuote:
Originally Posted by escobertBut you are not reading, the CD player is :pQuote:
Originally Posted by krissy
Although we can then argue that eyeballs and the optic nerve is nothing but biological tech that facilitate reading but the brain itself isn't reading, rather processing translations of data
And so if eyeballs are too silly a disconnect from the self to make, then proponents of the singularity might argue that a CD player is nothing more than another extension of the brain, and where the line between self and accessory is drawn depends on your ableness
Anyway, are comic books reading? Much of the story is pictures
Yet I say I read comics
I wouldn't say I partially read comics and partially view the frames of activity