[TV] The Wheel of Time

[eschatological]

Look, I may agree with you for my personal preference. But none of what you stated above is a fact.

But not everyone reads as fast as you, or I, do. For some people, audiobooks ARE faster for them than reading themselves. And there is such a thing as "auditory learning preferences" - for some people they remember what they hear, more (or easier) than what they read. Not even getting into the myriad of learning disabilities that effect this type of learning/processing as well that makes audiobooks actually superior, for some people, over reading and retaining "the written word."

That is my TED talk on understanding people are different. Thanks for attending.

The first time I read Dostoevsky, it was 800-900 pages. I did it in 10 hours. I am a fast reader, but assume you're a slow reader - and it takes you 50 pages an hour for 16-18 hours.

The audiobook is 37 hours long. You'd have to read at a snail's pace to take that long to read this book. 25 pages an hour, which is hilariously slow.

And I'm sure that some people learn better with audio. I have no problem with that. What I take issue with is the idea that people are sitting around for 37 hours listening a book and solely focusing on the book - like when you physically read it. I'm sure if aural learners do that, it may indeed be better. But that's not how 99% of audiobooks are consumed, even by those who learn better aurally.

I've never known someone who uses audiobooks to behave in that fashion. It's always a background thing, going on while driving, or doing something else on a different monitor, or while on an exercise bike. This is a strictly worse method of retention, no matter how good your multi-tasking is, or how you manage your ADHD. This has been studied. People who "read" a book via audiobook retain less of the book that those who physically read it.

[Koriani]

The first time I read Dostoevsky, it was 800-900 pages. I did it in 10 hours. I am a fast reader, but assume you're a slow reader - and it takes you 50 pages an hour for 16-18 hours.

The audiobook is 37 hours long. You'd have to read at a snail's pace to take that long to read this book. 25 pages an hour, which is hilariously slow.

And I'm sure that some people learn better with audio. I have no problem with that. What I take issue with is the idea that people are sitting around for 37 hours listening a book and solely focusing on the book - like when you physically read it. I'm sure if aural learners do that, it may indeed be better. But that's not how 99% of audiobooks are consumed, even by those who learn better aurally.

I've never known someone who uses audiobooks to behave in that fashion. It's always a background thing, going on while driving, or doing something else on a different monitor, or while on an exercise bike. This is a strictly worse method of retention, no matter how good your multi-tasking is, or how you manage your ADHD. This has been studied. People who "read" a book via audiobook retain less of the book that those who physically read it.

And I agree with all of what you said, of the above.

But your first post was coming off with a much more "Audiobooks suck and there's no reason for anyone to listen to a book over reading it - they are inferior" type of judgment with it. And that's why I wanted to point out what I pointed out. I work with people with these issues on a daily basis - so I felt a need to speak up and defend the 'other side'.

But I do acknowledge that, yes, those who learn better through audiobooks (or auditory anything) and those who DO sit and ONLY listen to the audiobook ARE a minority. My point was that minority doesn't deserve to feel 'inferior' because they appreciate, or enjoy, the "evil modernization" (paraphrasing you) that are audiobooks. If anything, people who are pro-books (or pro-reading) should rejoice and encourage the consumption of books in any form that allows a person to be able to enjoy that book, when they otherwise would not.

And absolutely, totally, agree - ANYTHING one is doing while multitasking is being done worse than if they were focused on only the one thing at a time. Because yes, no matter what we humans tell ourselves, our brains aren't capable of true "multi-tasking."

[Nymrohd]

I'd also assume most people listening to audiobooks are not listening to "In Search of Lost Time". It's probably mostly used for light "reading"?

[Witchblade77]

The first time I read Dostoevsky, it was 800-900 pages. I did it in 10 hours. I am a fast reader, but assume you're a slow reader - and it takes you 50 pages an hour for 16-18 hours.

The audiobook is 37 hours long. You'd have to read at a snail's pace to take that long to read this book. 25 pages an hour, which is hilariously slow.

And I'm sure that some people learn better with audio. I have no problem with that. What I take issue with is the idea that people are sitting around for 37 hours listening a book and solely focusing on the book - like when you physically read it. I'm sure if aural learners do that, it may indeed be better. But that's not how 99% of audiobooks are consumed, even by those who learn better aurally.

I've never known someone who uses audiobooks to behave in that fashion. It's always a background thing, going on while driving, or doing something else on a different monitor, or while on an exercise bike. This is a strictly worse method of retention, no matter how good your multi-tasking is, or how you manage your ADHD. This has been studied. People who "read" a book via audiobook retain less of the book that those who physically read it.

that may be so, but when you do not have time to sit down and solely focus on a physical book which is the case for a LOT of people, some retention is better then NO retention. or if you have a variety of eyesight etc issues that make it difficult to hold a book whether paper or digital. Audio books are not an inferior mode, they are an accessibility aid. (not to mention reading books out loud to young children is how you instill the love of reading among other things to begin with)

[Rennadrel]

And literally no one cares because season 1 was a disaster class in how not to adapt a beloved fantasy series.

[Xath]

‘The Wheel of Time’ Season 2 Adds Four Cast Members for Recurring Roles

Lol they can't even make the Aiel look homogenous at least not with the supposed Aviendah casting what a joke. Didn't know the Aiel were super open to tons of people joining them.

[rhorle]

Lol they can't even make the Aiel look homogenous at least not with the supposed Aviendah casting what a joke. Didn't know the Aiel were super open to tons of people joining them.

I don't know why you act surprised when it has already been established that the show is more diverse then the books. There really is no reason to rehash diversity-based arguments.

[Gumble]

‘The Wheel of Time’ Season 2 Adds Four Cast Members for Recurring Roles

Meh. More rafing of the story people loved.

At least they didn't waste as much money ruining this property as they did with LOTR.

[Fabinas]

Meh. More rafing of the story people loved.

At least they didn't waste as much money ruining this property as they did with LOTR.

Those showrunners are ruining the semblance of TV career they thought they had. And all that for that sweet Amazon cash.

I suppose they will do just so they can finish the series with as much money as they can, cause it will be difficult for those people to find jobs again, unless heavily connected.

[Rennadrel]

Those showrunners are ruining the semblance of TV career they thought they had. And all that for that sweet Amazon cash.

I suppose they will do just so they can finish the series with as much money as they can, cause it will be difficult for those people to find jobs again, unless heavily connected.

Hollywood is all about failing upwards these days. Doesn't help that Amazon Studios is run by someone who has clearly herself, failed upwards. Because any company that cares about success and profitability wouldn't let these talentless hacks piss away money on things that aren't drawing an audience that exceeds their programs budget.

[rhorle]

Hollywood is all about failing upwards these days. Doesn't help that Amazon Studios is run by someone who has clearly herself, failed upwards. Because any company that cares about success and profitability wouldn't let these talentless hacks piss away money on things that aren't drawing an audience that exceeds their programs budget.

How did she fail upward? It is crazy the things people concoct to try and justify their silly hate of a show, studio, or "leader".

Over the past two decades, Salke has established herself as one of the most prolific executives in the industry, being a major force behind some of television's most successful comedy and drama series, including This Is Us, Modern Family, The Blacklist, Superstore, and The Good Place, as well as Dick Wolf's hugely successful Chicago franchise.

Prior to joining Amazon, Salke was President of NBC Entertainment for seven consecutive years, where she was responsible for comedy and drama development, current programming, casting and diversity programming initiatives, as well as the entirety of Universal Television operations. Salke served as Executive Vice President of Creative Affairs at Twentieth Century Fox Television, after joining Twentieth Century Fox as Senior Vice President of Drama Development in 2002. Salke began her career at Aaron Spelling Productions in the early 1990s.

[rhorle]

And I guess they're on book 4 in season 2?

Season 2 covers plot from The Great Hunt (book 2) and The Dragon Reborn (Book 3).

[Xath]

And I guess they're on book 4 in season 2?

Increasing the pace and mashing the big scenes together is a sign of showrunners who aren't confident in their series. You need some small stakes episodes to let the characters grow and the plot to build. If it's done well it can be the some of the best parts of the series, like the Hound and Arya moments in Game of Thrones. These guys are going to have Rand taking tear (climax of the third book) happen sometime in the middle of season 2, after the Seanchan invasion and before the giant battle with Asmodean in Rhuidean (or else they're just skipping huge swaths of plot).

I think they are legit going to entirely skip Egwene being leashed the only people they have defending them now would start absolutely spitting venom at seeing a young black woman collared and leashed. We already know that those still defending this trash don't have a clue about the actual source material.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

I think they are legit going to entirely skip Egwene being leashed the only people they have defending them now would start absolutely spitting venom at seeing a young black woman collared and leashed. We already know that those still defending this trash don't have a clue about the actual source material.

I won’t defend it as a good direct adaptation but I’ll defend it as an decent not great fantasy show or a very loose/based on adaption and I’m all for seeing every moment of Egwene leashes and even extending it a bit given that Matt likely wont be as big as he was in the second book given that they pretty much just wrote him off in the first season.

[rhorle]

I think they are legit going to entirely skip Egwene being leashed the only people they have defending them now would start absolutely spitting venom at seeing a young black woman collared and leashed. We already know that those still defending this trash don't have a clue about the actual source material.

They have already changed them to a gag and gorget. There is no reason to start inventing an argument about people you don't like just so you have something to rage about. Just move on from the show instead of going out of your way to get angry.

[Corvus]

I don't know why you act surprised when it has already been established that the show is more diverse then the books. There really is no reason to rehash diversity-based arguments.

The books were plenty diverse. The whole point about the Aiel was that they stood out due to their appearance so much so that Rand kept on being mistaken for one. Remove that and the whole thing about Rand might as well not exist.

[Delekii]

Yay, more ragemode posting about how bad the series is, to supplement my entertainment along with the series that was a total hit during its first season!

Queue the utter cognitive dissonance that is the people on this forum talking about tv series and their relative popularity!

[rhorle]

The books were plenty diverse. The whole point about the Aiel was that they stood out due to their appearance so much so that Rand kept on being mistaken for one. Remove that and the whole thing about Rand might as well not exist.

Right. The show did remove it so it is silly to rehash it. Some of the people here will still be complaining about diversity with Season 3.

[hulkgor]

Looking forward to it.

Has some flaws, sure, but it's highly entertaining and i hope it sticks along for its planned duration.

[Katchii]

Yay, more ragemode posting about how bad the series is, to supplement my entertainment along with the series that was a total hit during its first season!

Queue the utter cognitive dissonance that is the people on this forum talking about tv series and their relative popularity!

It's an absolutely terrible adaptation of the Wheel of Time books, that doesn't make it a bad show and obviously doesn't prevent it from being a hit, but it's butchering the source material.