It probably needs to be said: audiobooks counts as reading. (No, I'm not going to argue this point with you.) - ThreadSky

tadethompson.bsky.social • 174 days ago

It probably needs to be said: audiobooks counts as reading.

(No, I'm not going to argue this point with you.)

Comments

My ADHD and dyslexic wife went from liking books but barely touching them to mainling about a hundred books per year when she discovered audio books. It's reading.

stephencoxauthor.bsky.social•174 days ago

We can be absolutely certain from the earliest writing that things were read to other people. I remember some young whippersnapper saying blind monks could no longer be intellectually active. Young monk reads aloud and then takes dictation.

stephencoxauthor.bsky.social•174 days ago

In fact we know reading was usually at least mouthing the words at first and reading without moving your lips was considered genius level.

bloodravenlib.bsky.social•174 days ago

Again, the librarian approves this message. ☝️

bojanglespaladin.bsky.social•174 days ago

No argument, but isn't it a bit like saying Reading Music is the same as Listening to Music?

ikax.bsky.social•173 days ago

Ooh! I don’t think so? I think music is auditory and writing both is and isn’t. In poetry, both the look and the sound of the words are part of the meaning. There’s an audio(visual) dimension even in silent reading - it’s been said that the medium of literature is not language but imagination.

bojanglespaladin.bsky.social•173 days ago

Reading and listening engage entirely different cognitive functions. But Both are able to transmit information and knowledge, one of the primary reasons to take in the contents of books - to gain knowledge. So in that sense, audio books count as reading.

But listening is not the same as reading.

ikax.bsky.social•173 days ago

(Obviously audiobooks are reading)

bookwormtony.bsky.social•172 days ago

I agree that audiobooks are reading they are my companions on my daily commute and it’s worth checking out BookBeat fantastic selection of books

tadethompson.bsky.social•174 days ago

Also, folks popping in to say 'no.'...

I'm clearly not speaking to you. Just ignore and go your way.

I've done the helpful thing and blocked you so you don't get distressed by what I post.

zelaeria.art•173 days ago

The day people just ignore something on the internet is the day i become immortal xD

dantastic.bsky.social•174 days ago

You're very thoughtful in that way.

gummitch.bsky.social•174 days ago

In fact there's scientific evidence that audiobooking is the same as reading.
https://www.discovermagazine.com/mind/audiobooks-or-reading-to-our-brains-it-doesnt-matter

helenlovatt.bsky.social•174 days ago

I have better recall and engagement from audio. Much more likely to finish it. Can use it to make the boring bits of life interesting. What’s not to love?

mlrich24.bsky.social•174 days ago

I absolutely agree with you Tade.

thewitchling.bsky.social•173 days ago

people not even considering that it's just ablist af to say anything except visual book reading is "reading". blind people exist. vision impaired people exist. anyone who says audio book listening isn't reading hasn't stepped outside of their tiny world

kevinaiello.com•174 days ago

I’m not an audiobooks person, but I do agree. The odd thing is that the phrase, “I read book x,” doesn’t seem to fit with listening to a book. It just sounds wrong, but maybe we just have to be trained to think otherwise.

ohmz.bsky.social•174 days ago

Most writers don’t physically write their books with a pen, we don’t call them typers though…

tadethompson.bsky.social•174 days ago

It would sound just as wrong if we said, "I felt this book", and yet that's how braille is read. Nobody says braille isn't reading, despite using a different sense to engage the writing.

It's an adjustment, to be sure, but it's valid reading. Just with a different sensory modality.

stevejwright.bsky.social•174 days ago

Basically, I agree with you, but audio narration isn't *quite* the same, because (unless you're using some text-to-speech robot) you're also getting the narrator's own interpretation of the basic text. Which doesn't invalidate anything, of course, but it can (and should) add something to the text.

stevejwright.bsky.social•174 days ago

Sort of like translation, in a way - when you read a book in translation, you're also getting the skill and artistry of the translator as part of the experience (and translation is both an art and a skill.)

None of this says that audiobooks, or books in translation, aren't books.

kevinaiello.com•174 days ago

The braille comment is instructive and interesting. In terms of audiobooks, what doesn’t work for me (often enough) is what often sounds like a condescending reading of a book; that is, it’s like the reader is speaking to a ten-year-old and needs to add emotion to sentences to keep him interested.

tadethompson.bsky.social•174 days ago

It's true that the voice actor can be an obstacle.

kvjohansen.bsky.social•174 days ago

Though I love being read to, most often I only get audiobooks of books I know really well & enjoy. So often, especially recently, the readers are ... not so good. It's enjoyment despite the voice actor rushing & clearly not having a clue what words mean. But when there's a good one, it's great.

kvjohansen.bsky.social•174 days ago

& it's definitely reading!

gusharrisreid.bsky.social•174 days ago

I also think it sounds odd to call listening to an audiobook 'reading' - but then I remind myself that 99.9% of my so-called 'writing' should more accurately be called 'typing'... 😅

gusharrisreid.bsky.social•174 days ago

But whatever you call it, I absolutely agree that consuming a story via audiobook is every bit as valid/entertaining/meaningful as via paper or e-book 👍🏼

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply