The Semantics of Audio Books

[Deleted]

So i've recently taken up audio books, and i'm burning through books like never before, due to being able to listen to them whilst driving to and from work.

I have a question though. It may just be semantics, but i've been wondering this.

I often find myself in a situation where i am referring to a book i've listened to in a conversation and i dont know wether to say "i just read that" or some awkward version of "i just listened to that in an audio book".


Do you refer to audio books you've listened to as having read them?

[LiiLoSNK]

I'm actually blind and deaf, so whenever I finish a book in braille, I tell people that I just got done copping a feel on some sweet literature.

[callipygoustp]

When referring to audio books I always say "I listened to it". Never even thought of saying I read it. *shrug*

[Donald Hellscream]

No, I obviously didn't read it since it is an audiobook.

[Deleted]

I mean I am certain there are people who would be snobby enough to say that you haven't read it because you listened to it.

You decided to do something more productive during driving than listen to some raid talk show or just listen to music and relax. So imo you know the book's content which is enough for you to claim you've read it.

There is a slight chance that my subscription to audio books coincided with my having no more LoreWatch left to listen to.

- - - Updated - - -

No, I obviously didn't read it since it is an audiobook.

That's a fair point. I do think that you are allowed to take certain linguistic liberties in day-to-day language, though. I know that it is a very weak argument, but its just so very pleasant to use the word "read" instead of "listened". As i am writing this out i realize that i am on thin ice.

[eschatological]

To me, books require the immersiveness of actually reading them. Books, done as a background activity to something else, even something as mundane as driving, usually means less of a comprehension of what the book is about. So no, I wouldn't say I've read a book if I listened to it while doing something else. Books were the first, ultimate "immersive" experience.

And since audiobooks are generally longer than it would take to actually read the book, it's not actually a time saver if all you're doing is listening to the book while sitting around. It's only "convenient" to kill time with while being reduced to a background noise. IE - people only do it while they're doing something else. I think audiobooks would be kind of cool if people actually sat around listening to them, like they would listen to a storyteller. But that's not how they're used.

Don DeLillo would have something to say about that. I always find it kind of hilarious that White Noise is now able to be purchased as an audiobook.

[Coombs]

I say read, and if I care to elaborate I say "well really listened to". I try to both read and listen to the same books though, and I listen to the good ones multiple times. Most have shit voice acting though.

[Halicia]

depends on how deep you wanna get into the conversation... most've the time I think its enough that you cite the book its from, and not how you read/listened to it.

if there's a query about it, then you can elaborate "oh yeah, i've listened to the whole series when i drive to work"

Most have shit voice acting though.

well, thats cuz they generally aren't voice acting, they're simply reading.

[Coombs]

well, thats cuz they generally aren't voice acting, they're simply reading.

That's not true.

[Deleted]

To me, books require the immersiveness of actually reading them. Books, done as a background activity to something else, even something as mundane as driving, usually means less of a comprehension of what the book is about. So no, I wouldn't say I've read a book if I listened to it while doing something else. Books were the first, ultimate "immersive" experience.

And since audiobooks are generally longer than it would take to actually read the book, it's not actually a time saver if all you're doing is listening to the book while sitting around. It's only "convenient" to kill time with while being reduced to a background noise. IE - people only do it while they're doing something else. I think audiobooks would be kind of cool if people actually sat around listening to them, like they would listen to a storyteller. But that's not how they're used.

Don DeLillo would have something to say about that. I always find it kind of hilarious that White Noise is now able to be purchased as an audiobook.

You make a lot of sense. Reading sentences over again whilst reading a book, to make sure i understood makes for a much more thorough read. I can't do that in the car, so i'd say that i miss alot, whilst minding traffic as well.

But that being said, listening to an interesting book on my way to work, activates my brain and puts me in a very good state of mind for the day, so i will say that audio books have some merit.

Right now i'm listening to a very philosophical book, and i am sitting there actively arguing with the teller.

[Stormcall]

To me, books require the immersiveness of actually reading them. Books, done as a background activity to something else, even something as mundane as driving, usually means less of a comprehension of what the book is about. So no, I wouldn't say I've read a book if I listened to it while doing something else. Books were the first, ultimate "immersive" experience.

And since audiobooks are generally longer than it would take to actually read the book, it's not actually a time saver if all you're doing is listening to the book while sitting around. It's only "convenient" to kill time with while being reduced to a background noise. IE - people only do it while they're doing something else. I think audiobooks would be kind of cool if people actually sat around listening to them, like they would listen to a storyteller. But that's not how they're used.

That about sums up my views.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

well, thats cuz they generally aren't voice acting, they're simply reading.

All the audio books I've listened to the person reading the book creates distinct voices for each of the characters whenever they speak. Some are more successful at doing this than others.

- - - Updated - - -

I think audiobooks would be kind of cool if people actually sat around listening to them, like they would listen to a storyteller. But that's not how they're used.

Speaking for myself...that's exactly how I started listening to audiobooks. After getting laser eye surgery I spent an entire week unable to really use my eyes for anything involving any kind of focus...so no video games, no internet, no tv, no reading etc...so I got myself a few audio books and just sat there listening to them all day.

[Deleted]

I think if someone attempts to speak down to you because you've listened to the audiobook instead of reading the book, that persons opinion shouldn't count for much.

Saying that as someone who reads and listens to audiobooks, they are different experiences, neither one better than the other.

[prwraith]

I've never been able to do the audiobook thing. I've always found it distracting and I end up focusing more on the voice than my imagination with how I picture things are happening.

No matter how you get into books though, it's a good thing.

[Skizzit]

I always just say "read." I just find it easier to explain. I will tell anyone who cares that I listened to something on audiobook but pretty much anyone I have talked to agrees it's basically the same. I started delivering newspapers to make some extra cash and it's so quite and monotonous that I find it the perfect environment to listen to audiobooks and now I go through about a book a week. If you are interested, there is a company called Graphic Audio that puts out books with different actors for each character and has music and sound effects. It's a pretty interesting experience but I find that when using headphones the music is too loud and drowns out the readers.

To me, books require the immersiveness of actually reading them. Books, done as a background activity to something else, even something as mundane as driving, usually means less of a comprehension of what the book is about. So no, I wouldn't say I've read a book if I listened to it while doing something else. Books were the first, ultimate "immersive" experience.

Wouldn't storytelling be the first immersive experiences?

[Orby]

Only in this day or age we can say "I listened to a book today" :P

[Skizzit]

Only in this day or age we can say "I listened to a book today" :P

Or, you know, any kid who's parent ever read to them could also say it...

Audiobooks are not some kind of super high tech thing. Books on tape have been around for ages and the act of reading a book out loud to an audience has been a thing since well before that. Are they really all that different from radio plays? Those have been around for nearly 100 years.