/lit/ - Literature

ngl WWZ is one of the few books that is better in audio version. Mainly because of its interview format.
But saying it's one of the best books books you've ever "read" when you listened to it, you're just asking to be bullied. Fuck this post-modern "everything has equal value" bullshit all my homies ride objectivism

Listening isn't the same as reading. End of. Simple as. F00k this whiny faggot

>>17698492
>Fuck this post-modern "everything has equal value" bullshit all my homies ride objectivism
this

I can't go on r/books without actually getting triggered.

>>17698492
>>17698520
um bastepilled nuch?

>>17698492
that's not what objectivism means retard
>>17698467
There's nothing wrong with audiobooks, WWZ being the best book you've ever read on the other hand...

It's a book called "World War Z". Who cares?

>>17698594
>objectivism
Atlas Sneeded may be squatting the title but there needs to be a name for believing in objectivity, because not everyone does any more.

>>17698599
Because of the book World War Z, I thought the movie American History X was going to be about zombies.

Boy, was surprised.

>>17698492
Whats the difference between listening to someones voice reading and listening to your own inner voice as you read?

>>17698622
You're thinking of upholding standards.

God I hate Reddit. They actually did the opposite of what they intended. They turned me against liberalism. At least you 4chan guys are fun and can take a fuckin' joke.

>>17698625
Great movie though

>>17698626
The
>as you read?
part you fucking fuck

>>17698626
Generally speaking, the process of reading a book is different. The pace is at the speed you process it, as opposed to the speed the audio book is set at. The eyes, while reading, jump around, giving less attention to shorter connecting words and more attention to longer important words. The eye will also jump backwards to fill in gaps during the process. Reading is also an active activity. It takes will power and attention to read, more so than the passive activity of listening to something. In both cases you are processing the actual material information, but the more procedural aspects of how the medium is consumed is distinctly different. Listening and reading are also two different skills, each with their own learning curves regarding endurance, speed, and memory.

I listen to plenty of audio books, and I put books I've listen to on my 'have read' list, but I completely admit they are different in very distinct ways.

>>17698525
sounds like you could use to control your emotions a bit better

>>17698658
actual good post from a trip wtf

>>17698467
I'll "gatekeep" whatever I please. If saying there's a difference between reading books and listening to audiobooks makes you insecure, it's because you know the difference is real and have a complex about it.

I fully believe you retain more information reading than listening. There are many studies that will support this claim, but my real reason for believing it is my own experience with reading books and listening to them being read.

You just retain more with real reading.

That said, I listen to audiobooks more often because it's convenient. They make commutes so much more enjoyable.

Some people are needlessly cunts about audiobook/book elitism though. People have even gotten on my case for listening to iliad/odyssey instead of reading them. Nigger, they were fucking oral tales, I'm closer to the original experience than you are. Same with movies and Shakespeare actually, if you can't watch the play then seeing the film version is closer to the 'real' experience than reading a script. Some people aren't just pretentious cunts, they're stupid pretentious cunts.

>>17698467
Audiodrama ≠ Book.

>>17698651
As far as processing the information of the book sweetie.

Another lamentation of gatekeeping by a narcissistic wanting reinforcement of their lifestyle.

If you like reading, and do so via audio "book," then keep doing it. If you have to complain about it, I question your authenticity -- especially if it comes to posting on reddit or social media in general.

>>17699187
>>17699220
There is nothing inherent in gatekeeping that makes it impossible for it to be irrational or evil.

>>17698467
Listening and reading might be mostly equitable but they definitely aren't equal. The medium your consuming is so different that you cant argue that you're getting the same experience at all. You might end up with a similar result but written text has a very different impact, especially when the author uses the written medium to its fullest

>>17699240
That's true for literally everything.
Fact is that people who get butthurt that they don't get cred for audiobooks are pseuds.

>>17699161
While I agree with you and I've read some studies as well that do suggest an improvement, it's at best very little. And when you factor in that you can do exercise (which significantly boosts longterm memory) while listening to an audiobook, it should about even out. I still vividly remember passages from books I've listened to while on a long walk.

>>17699240
>>17699484
gosh, i can't think of any exceptions because i'm retarded. you fellas must be right!

>>17699484
Is that the issue here?
It seems its about prejudice or bigotry against audiobook listeners, which is irrational because in both reading and listening one is still processing the information of the book, there is no fundamental difference in that regard.

>>17698467
Some narrators are phenomenal tho.

>>17699551
>Book read by author who's good at narrating
pure kino

>>17699178
Maybe there isn’t and maybe there is a difference. That’s not the point, it’s that words have meaning and quite literally listening to a book is not reading it.

>>17699537
>bigotry against audiobook listeners
So they can say they read when they don't?
...calling themselves something they aren't...
Ohh, now I think I see the issue.

>>17699653
An audiobook is still a book and contains the exact same information as a regular book. One 'reads' an audiobook with the ears instead of the eyes, but the result is the same as normal reading in that one processes the content of the book.

>>17699663
Listening is simply reading with your ears.

>>17699685
Bait

>>17699705
meaningless buzzword

does this person not know what the word "read" and the phrase "listen to" mean? you dont read music if you listen to it. if some kid in school and your teacher is reading a book to you, you are not reading it, someone is reading and you are listening. this is a literal objective fact

Idc. If people are listening to books rather than just watching auto suggest youtube shit, good for them.

>>17699240
>irrational or evil
>implying

>>17698467
It is different, but it depends on the book. A book where you're just receiving information is fine in audio form, but if its meant to be literature then the words themselves matter, not necessarily the sounds. Internalizing the book is different from listening to it.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/friendly-interest/201812/why-listening-book-is-not-the-same-reading-it

>>17698626
but I don't listen to an inner voice

>>17698634
go back now please

>>17699757
>tfw the anti-gatekeepers are sCiEnCe DeNiErS

Audiobooks are okay, depending on the context. There are some books with complicated concepts and imagery that really should be read to be properly understood but then some books can just be listened to.

I listened to the entirety of the Song of Ice and Fire series on audiobook while I was working in a factory doing repetitive manual work and it was definitely a pleasant way to make the shifts go by quicker, even if some of Roy Dotrice's pronunciations were baffling/infuriating. I probably wouldn't do the same with something like Dostoyevsky or Pynchon.

I guess the comparison can be made between fast-food and fine dining, in that the former doesn't matter where and how you consume it whereas with fine dining the setting and form of consumption is part of the experience.

>>17699220
Gate keeping gets toxic when it is only a way for gate keepers to circle jerk and deny another mind before listening to there opinions, creates a safe space that breeds bloated self gratifying egos which obscure from themselves there lack of original wit/merit. This board is rank with such mid wit intellectual larpers who criticise what they can't create.

>>17699653
>>17699729
>Reading is the process of taking in the sense or meaning of letters, symbols, etc., especially by sight or touch.[1][2][3]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reading

Reading does not necessarily involve sight.
Listening to a book is just auditory-based reading.

>>17699685
>>17699692
>>17700075
I think I eternally btfo anti-audiobookcels

Who cares, a thread died for this. Are you insecure about your humanities degree OP?

>>17698467
Have redditors never heard of just doing what they want and telling anonymous niggerlovers online that try to bully them to eat shit? I listen to audiobooks and claim I read them, who fucking cares? Go ahead and reply to this post insulting me, nothing will happen.

>>17698467
AB has its place but if you say you love reading books and you never actually read you're a moron

>>17698467
Nothing wrong with listening to audiobooks

But comparing them as equals is retarded, if you read actively you'd know there is a big difference in comprehension.

>>17698594
Could be worse. Best book I've read is a certain magical index nt vol. 10

>>17698467
brainlet here isn't the one arguing that we should ignore the actual meaning of a word (read) because most people understand what's being communicated when someone says they read an audiobook the one arguing semantics?

>>17698467
I 'read' the Odyssey from a book instead of inviting a poet to my house and listening to him, while surrounded by my family and servitors. Since I didn't hear him playing the Phorminx, did I really experienced the Odyssey?

>>17702478
cope

>>17702478

>>17702478
>did I really experienced the Odyssey?
No, but unironically.

>>17698525
r/literature has 10 times more pseuds and zoomers.

>>17698626
Read the short story Bungalow house by Ligotti

>>17699991
I kinda agree but audiobooks have their charm too, especially for appropriate books. Moby dick and Blood Meridian have amazing audiobooks primarily because of their language, I appreciated them more after reading them then listening to them. Most books don't bridge that gap well but some are meant to be listened to, eventually.

>>17703504
r/literature is also fucking dead.

>>17698467
I read WWZ like ten years ago. It was ok. I listened to the audiobook recently and it was... ok too. Entertaining, but not "the best book I've ever read". I wouldn't seat through it in it's written form, but the audiobook is some Youtube-tier decent content.

>>17702478
>'read'
Yes, you read it. You didn't listen to it like they originally did. These are different words you fucking spastic

>>17702097
Based

>>17702097
You're based but its sad that you're an audiobookcel

Audiobooks have been great for me, because listening is a passive activity I manage to get through much more while I go out for walks, or drive or exercise.

Vocal performance is also a big plus. I get to listen to the original Russian of War and Peace (reading would be too long and difficult for me), and the performance is outstanding, as was Jeremy Irons for Brideshead Revisited.

Don't sleep on audiobooks, for me they were revolutionary.

>>17698467
even if you actually read WWZ it still doesn't count as reading

>>17702097
redditors need to know they're accepted and belong
also you're a subhuman

>>17699178
Reading isn’t inherently tied to time. When you read the book you have to do so at your own pace and rely on your own imagination and what informs that. It’s the difference between making something and watching something ultimately. Not to mention there is now way you process something from hearing it once the same way you process it if you actually have to read it and go over specific things again with different outlooks. Can’t believe this is even a question.

>>17699039
You just summed up the current political scene in the West

Does listening instead of reading even work the creative side of the brain as much as? Don't they make different voices for different characters, which makes it easier in terms of creativity?

>>17698467
why are you on reddit?

>>17705821
As if this question needs answering.

Any brainlet can read a book at their own dull pace. Audiobooks are the true filter.

>listen to audiobook for I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream
>Harlan Ellison gets excited and literally starts shouting when talking about Benny's giant cock

>>17698626
Are you seriously asking this question.

>>17698467
Some books are superior in audiobook format. Mein Kampf and Nietzsche are great examples of this

>>17698626
My inner voice doesn’t have a British accent

Reading and listening are simply different activities. A demonstration: you're taking a German class, you've been tasked with reading Goethe. You decide to study him by "reading" [listening to] his works. Through this study you become extremely proficient at "reading" [listening to] German. It's now the end of the semester, you're sitting in the exam hall and you've been presented with an excerpt from Wilhelm Meisters Lehrjahre. Are you able to read it?

>>17698467
>listening to World War Z
Opinion discarded

>>17700036
this is why subcultures exist, if you and enough other people disagree with the way things currently are, then form a new community of people who oppose the status quo

Are audiobooks even useful? I don't see how any person is able to retain any information from listening to an audiobook and processing it on a deeper level as oppose to doing it through a book.

>>17708801
It's nice when you have to drive a lot because you can listen while performing mindless tasks with your eyes and hands. I listen to fiction and read non-fiction, which works out nicely.

>gatekeeping

>>17698622
there's a difference between believing in objectivity and postulating that books are superior to audiobooks reflects some eternal truth hahaha like that's a value judgement i make but do you think it's some kind of platonic truth hahahah. you're not a conservative or a traditionalist man (which are, at bottom, sceptical philosophies) you're a freak.

>All these elitists

Read every word -> your eyes see every word -> every word is in your brain

Listen to every word -> Your ears hear every word -> every word is in your brain

I thought you all were consequentialist chads, don't tell me you're filthy
>don't pull the lever because actions matter more than consequences
Plebs

>>17708801
I find it pretty easy to, but understand some people might not. Probably same thing that determines whether or not someone found lectures at university useful or not. I do avoid certain kinds of book on audio, however. For instance nonfiction with a substantial visual element (maps, diagrams, etc.) and books with a lot of footnote, endnote, or appendix content it's worth looking at while reading. For most fiction they're pretty great with the right narrator.
I tend to call it listening rather than reading, but some anons have made good points here and it makes people who think they're too good for oral tradition seethe, so perhaps I'll change my habit.

>>17698467
>audio reader
Reddit genocide when?

i suppose it's just semantics then. do you say read or listened to? i don't think it matters as the language has yet to settle on one option, it's communicating the same thing because it is already specified with 'audiobook'.

what you get out of an audiobook depends on the person, surely some people just passively listen and it is absolutely no substitute for reading, the level of engagement that is, but that doesn't mean everyone does. i've only just started listening to audiobooks myself because there are a few that are quite good and add a lot, as you would expect a good narrator would, but i generally prefer to read directly. something to be said about poems and plays though, given they are meant to be performed and many older ones lose their uhmph without it.

What books are better as audiobooks? I need something to listen to that I wont be missing out on by not reading

>>17698467
>best book I ever read
>listened to audio book
Yeah, Katy Perry moaned in my ear as I fucked in the ass. Only I had my headset on playing her songs, and I was jerking off on the couch.

>>17701072
No you didn't, people don't wanna reply to your stupid fucking bait.
Reading is a separate act from listening, it's two entirely different ways of engaging with a text you fucking retard. Do you think a podcast is a book you simpleton? If you close your eyes in the cinema, did you then read the movie script? An audio book is fine for entertainment, but it doesn't require the same fucking focus as reading a book, faggots can literally put on an audio book and blast it for 8 hours during a work day and then claim to have read a 1000 page novel or some shit. It's two different ways of engaging with a text, and requires vastly different amounts of focus and concentration. It's becoming a bigger and bigger meme to say you "read" something, while having listened to 3/4 of it as audio. Hell you might as well just watch the movie "Lord of the rings" and then say "yeah I read the series, but by watching the movies". It's fucking retarded. It isn't even that audio books are bad in themself, it's that you retards must insist on claiming it's the same, when it literally is 2 different ways of interacting with a written text. One takes more effort and concentration, the other allows you to cook dinner and clean while you get it read to you, because modern faggots like you can't sit the fuck down and read for just an hour every day in your zoom zoom lives.

>>17702097
I think you're based, but also a fucking pseud. Only a faggot trying to seem smart would say he "read something" when he actually listened to an audio book. It's like you're trying to hide the fact that you didn't actually read it when you say it like that. When I hear someone say they "read" something in real life, and find out they mean they listened to an audio book I always pause and look at them to figure out why they're being dishonest and why they would try to hide the fact they listen to audio books. If audio books are so great, why not just say "I listened to the audio book, it was good" or something? But no, guys like you must appear as pseud, because it sounds better to say you read something than just listening to an audio book version.

r/books is basically the terminal stage of the commodification of literature.
As a commodity, literature sells the idea of being intelligent. The commodity is closely tied to physically reading the words with your eyes, because Audiobooks are a relatively new innovation and haven't had time to integrate into culture.
If these people cared about the contents of the book rather than the action of reading in in of itself, they wouldn't give a shit about what other people think of their preferred reading format. But, again, r/books consists of people who consume literature as a commodity, not as art. If people aren't validating their actions, then there is no point to performing them. And these consumers are self-conscious, they know they don't read to learn but to "be a reader". Just look at all the wacky relatable memes about le epic book stacks.
By telling them that audiobooks aren't physical books, you are devaluing the commodified personality they have adopted, and treat it as a direct attack on their character, because they know no difference between the products they buy and their inner self.

>>17698626
I read comfortably at around 700 words per minute, up to 1200 if I'm deliberately rushing, because I wasn't born retarded. There is no "internal voice" I'm listening to because I think (and read) much faster than it is possible for a human being to speak.

The fastest reader I know could handle approximately 4,000 words per minute, at his best. I don't consider myself particularly remarkable and I am not a genius. You are just stupid. Sorry.

>>17710182
Yeah, when I read I don't really hear the words, the "feeling" of their meaning briefly flashes through my subconscious and I move onto the next word. I'm pretty sure everybody above 3rd grade reading level reads like this.

>>17710155
>I listened to Ride the Tiger
Sounds like you listened to a 80s rock song.

>>17698998
was thinking that too

Audiobook is very when good bat not but bad if and only bad where onomatopoeia juxtaposition on floor wood marble tiles.

>>17710204

To all the faggots in this thread trying to rgue that listening = reading, I have something for you to try and argue against.

>the medium is the message

There try to disprove this old media theory from Marshall Mcluhan, you fucking retards.

>>17710236
The medium is not the message, it's the medium [by which the message is transmitted].

>>17710188
>I listened to the audio book, Ride the Tiger
Isn't a big difference and it gives more clarity as to what you did. Its like me saying "I drove the bus", instead of "I took the bus". It's the same with this, read is one verb meaning to actually fucking read with your eyes, and listen means to use your ears to listen to something.

>>17710163
>By telling them that audiobooks aren't physical books, you are devaluing the commodified personality they have adopted
Hit the nail on the head, this is why they insist on saying they read something, instead of being upfront about audio books. If audio books are so great, then why hide the fact that they listen to them? It's because reading sounds smarter and more sophisticated, so they can get big boy intellectual points and seem smart.

>>17710271
>I read the physical book, Ride the Tiger

>>17710243
The choice of medium alters the message. All audio book fags always review the narrator and not the actual book itself, because that's all they're gonna get from it anyways. The medium changes the experience to the point of it being two different things.

>>17710284
Just say "I read the book" unless you're in a context where e-book / physical book is important. Fuck me, faggots argue about the difference between reading on screen and physical books, studies are even being done on it. These people still insist that listening is the same as reading, my God.

>>17710302
>The medium changes the experience
That's not the message. If the medium was the message, then it'd be impossible to understand Homer's message from reading it instead of listening it from a rhapsode. Why can reading encapsulate the listening but listening can't encapsulate the reading?

>>17710310
"read" is a verb that signifies the object is a book, which is why audiobook listeners use it, so they don't have to further detail the form of book they engaged with (audio).

>>17698467
Audiobooks are great, provided voices are good. It's nice to take a strain off your eyes and listen for a while.

>>17698467
>a listener and a reader can have a conversation about the same book and not realise the difference in format
Unless the conversation is both superficial and brief, I doubt it.

Why are vision-based readers so arrogant and intolerant of audio-based readers? We are all readers after all.

>>17698467
Children have stories read to them. Adults actually read.

Let me tell you the crux of the issue: this is not about truth. If you think "reading an audio book" is valid, you're a progressive. If you think it's invalid, you're a conservative.

If you think you're apolitical yet you have an opinion on this, you are lying to yourself: you're not apolitical.

>>17710318
I haven't said that reading can encapsulate listening anon. Do you think the theater is the same as watching a movie? The medium changes the experience so that the message itself gets altered, it's like a phone conversation and a normal conversation. You do things in a phone conversation you wouldn't in real life, because the medium changes how you must convey what you want. Same with listening and reading, a good narrator is more important for audio books, but reading yourself is a completely different experience.

>>17710328
They should though. It's like saying "I drive this car" even though I am in the passenger seat. It's not the same, but fags want to sound like they read because it's more intellectual to do so. It's nothing more than this, it's zoom zoomer and productivity retards who want everything fast, and therefore can't commit to sitting down and reading a book and concentrating. I like podcasts as well when I do tasks, but its a completely different medium. I don't say "I went to this debate about capitalism" when what I really did was listen to a podcast,even though it was a podcast debating capitalism.

>>17698515
It is the same don't be a fucking dork

>>17698467
Another benefit of the ease and convenience in which an audiobook can be read, and which completely negates the comprehension argument, is that an audiobook can be effortlessly listened to MANY times, greatly increasing comprehension.

>>17710528
You could also play an audiobook on repeat, while you sleep, so to subconsciously absorb the information of the book for even greater superior comprehension. Vision-based reading is impotent in this regard.

>>17710389
I agree.
Imagine talking to an audio book fag and he starts sperging about the narrator. Seriously read reviews of audio books, 90% of them are about the narrator. Audio book fags are coping if they think there is no difference. I don't care about their narrator circlejerk, because I jsut read the fucking book.

>>17710586
When looking at reviews for audiobooks the narrator is the most important thing. You can find reviews of the book itself elsewhere, you don't want to only find out an hour in that the narrator has a habit of making retarded voices every time a female character speaks

>>17710602
You wouldn't have this problem, if you read the books.

>>17710466
Don't get what your shitpost means. For me audiobooks are great if I want to relax my eyes. Especially true if it's for entertainment.
You can do some fancy thigs with audiobooks too, like add in sound effects like some guy did for LotR audiobooks, but that's just a bonus.

>>17698467
Unless you're in a situation where you cannot read like driving, audiobooks are retarded. I can read faster than I can listen to an audiobook.

Audio or print, still better entertainment than netflix.

>>17710779
The argument is about whether or not it is the same. Anon is retarded, but his point is probably that a conservative would reason that "a white and black man is different" and "an audio book and book is different". A progressive would say "there is no difference between a white and black man" and "there is no difference between an audio book and a book". He doesn't explain it well, but the connection is there.

>>17710908
You're so fucking dumb holy shit you buffoonous moronic fuck, what an absolutely retarded thing to say I cannot believe a human actually came up with this

>>17710953
Calm your panties, I was explaining another anon's point. Learn to read, mongoloid.

>>17710908
Ok, fair enough, that is true, they are not the same, but I don't see a need to fight over audiobooks beyond that.

>>17711204
I mean that is my only gripe with audio books, that people say they read a book as if they read it. It's a different experience, but so many people deny this simple fact. I mean what is the point of different mediums then, like a theater and a movie. If all experiences are the same, form doesn't matter, only content, then we could all just watch everything on the TV and say we experienced it. I climbed Mount Everest, because I saw a documentary, or I saw a play of Shakespeare even though it was just the King Lear movie. People would never mix these two up, but with audio books everyone insists on listening and reading being the same, and it's blowing my fucking mind. Would these people hold that same logic when it comes to music and going to concerts? Probably not. Would they hold that logic when it comes to racing a car and playing a racing game on a Playstation? Probably not. That's all I have against these audio book fags, that they must insist so heavily on it being the same as reading, because then they can chug big novels while working and tell everyone "I read War and Peace hehe". No you didn't, you listened to an audio book while doing dishes and working manual labor, it's not the same action and experience of sitting down and reading in a book.

>>17699556
Matthew mconahey autobiography

>>17698467
He could just say 'I listened to a book' but 'reading a book' has a connotation of being intellectual, intelligent, smart; while listening is apparently just like watching a video or something.
Listening to book is lighter than reading, but it's not as bad as watching or reading a summary somewhere and saying you know the book; you don't in that case.

>>17698626
Reading literally activates different areas of your brain, and therefore different understanding, than listening does.

>>17711718
They're redditors and want big boy intellectual points, but won't dedicate any of their important zoom zoom internet time to read instead. Hence the audio book can keep their ADHD brain entertained while they do other tasks, and this would be fien, but they must insist on LARPing as intellectuals and say it's the same as reading, because else they can't brag about how much they read.
If a person reads regularly and use audio books as well, it's more forgiving, but if a midwit or brainlet only ever listens to audio books and claims to be a reader they are coping pseuds.

>>17699757

That was a dreadfully circular piece of self-aggrandizing ”””journalism.”””

>>17698658
so reading and listening are the same thing, except that the listener has a little more difficulty getting all the information from the book? so there is no information that only a reader can get, but not a listener?

>>17698467
Go back to your shithole sojaboy

>>17710508
They are completely different because you're using a different medium to engage with the content.

>>17699161
The closest to the original would be the original Greek you redditor piece of shit

If the book is garbage than the audiobook will be fine. World War Z and Stephen King and stuff like that work well as audiobooks because they are entirely surface level.
An audiobook of Ulysses will not be Ulysses. Even an audiobook of Moby Dick will not be Moby Dick. If you only read for the story you may as well read the wikipedia summary.
There's also a lot of retarded talk about how language is fluid and changes and therefore we should just accept that "read" can now also mean "listened to." This is bullshit. "Read" is not filling a lexical gap. These pussies whining about gate-keeping and elitism are the ones with the issue -- they know they have not "read" the book but want to belong to an ever-diminishing (dare I say elitist!) club of "intellectuals" (ha!) who still read.
If you argue that there is actually no difference between the mediums you are an idiot.

Oxbloodcolored
Ox blood colored

>>17711463
It's just a figure of speech, people aren't just gonna say yeah i listened to it.

>>17712840
If I listened to an audiobook I'm far more inclined to say "I listened to [a reading of] X", not say I read it, because I didn't.

>>17712543
Good post, anon. All this nonsense about being able to rewind audiobooks a few seconds in order to cover the critical aspect of reading (or listening); it doesn't fucking matter - it's not the same thing as being able to reread a sentence, or a clause, or to dwell on specific words.

>>17710155
Agree honestly. I listen to more audiobooks than I read books normally these days, and I do think that for the overwhelming majority of books (especially fiction) it's just as good as reading. At least if you have good auditory processing ability. There are exceptions obviously, books poorly suited to audio format, but most are fine with a good narrator.
But I call it listening. I routinely say stuff like "I listened to X book, the narrator was really good" bc it is nothing to be ashamed of. Anyone who criticizes it—and nobody ever has to my face—is a faggot pseud. But so is anyone who tries to hide it.

>>17709791
>Read every word > eyes see all words > brain has full book
>Listen every word > ears hear all words > brain has full book
this, audiobook haters on suicide watch

>>17700036
Only fags and women use the word toxic

>>17698467
Reading Ulysses as opposed to listening to the audiobook was definitely more challenging but more rewarding in the end.

>>17698467
>le 10k upboats
fucking homosexual redditoids

>>17698467
Reminder that poetry is always meant to be listened to.
If there is no audio book available for a poem then you are supposed to recite it out loud yourself.

>>17698525
You have to sift through the crap there but I realized recently it may be one of the conservative leaning subs left.

>>17713882
You're out of your mind if you think r/books is even slightly conservative.

>>17698492
yeah sick of having to make retards feel special and equally valid

>>17711763
>You can't be a food enthusiast if you don't cook.
Thats all your argument is. Nothing pseudointellectual about taking in all the same info in a different format.

>>17703740
We'll i guess I'm just a post modernist ;^)

>>17698626
If you hear an "inner voice" while reading, you're not doing it right.

>>17714490
It's an outer voice since I read everything out loud

>>17714490
Non-subvocalizing speed-reading is lame, its not a race.

Milton, Homer and Borges were blind

>>17713998
>yeah I'm actually a food critic
>I have youtube videos reviewing McDonald's on my channel

The only audio book I would ever be interested in reading was if trump narrated Art of The Deal

oh I see the value of audiobooks now, they perfect way to keep retards out of reading

>>17714967
Trumps needs to listen to an audiobook and then claim to have "read" it.

Retards like >>17702097 won't get this but reading is an act that challenges your dedication and discipline. It's an escape from all of this digital cyberspace nonsense. When you listen to an audiobook you're just admitting to yourself that you're unable to look at words for longer than 10 seconds without feeling exhausted. Audiobooks are precisely marketed towards those weak-minded consoomer shits. It's the age of hyperconsumption where everything from the greeks to hegel has to be neatly packaged for mass audience. Let them have their fun but don't go into conversation with them. They won't be able to cite anything, let alone remember the content of any mildly challenging work.
And just to cover the semantic aspect: No it does not count as reading, because you literally still have the reading comprehension of a middle school bully.

>>17710163
thread should've closed with that one. spot on

>>17715102
I enjoy both vision-based and audio-based reading.
If its a good book I will read it in both mediums.

>>17715129
>audio-based reading
>audio
>reading
>/lit/ - Literature

>>17715196
Reading is the process of taking in the sense or meaning of letters and symbols; it is not exclusively vision-based which is why one can read braille.
Hence listening to an audiobook is simply audio-based reading.

Awful lot of copers itt that seem to think the value of reading is a status symbol for your endurance to overcome boredom. Engagement with the concepts and ideas sure but the act itself? I'm not going to harass someone that listened to War & Peace - we ought be more bothered with the cancer that is YA lit over taking the medium and arresting reader development well into people's 30s and 40s.

>>17702097
based

I listen to more audiobooks than most of you faggots read books and I read more books than I listen to. Here's something none of you midwits thought of: practice matters. Of course you will have better comprehension and retention when reading a book, if you never practiced actively listening to 10 hours of structured speech.

>>17698625
>>17698658
are you using a trip because you think you have something particularly important to say? perhaps reddit is more your speed.

>>17715888
>trips wasted on a niggerfaggot who replies to tripfags
Stop giving them attention or you are part of the problem

>>17710163
Audiobooks necessitate a lower of engagement with the text. They implies no note taking, no checking references, no flipping back to chapter one to reread definitions, and no comparing notes from multiple sources. It's passive consumption. Imagine reading Euclid's elements without seeing the page. Imagine reading a philosophical text without time to stop and think.
Yes, you can passively read physical books, but at least with physical books there exists the possibility for serious engagement.
No one ever became erudite from listening to audio books. No one ever "read" 500 audio books and sat down to write their magnum opus.
If all you ever read is Oprah and pop science, sure go for audiobooks. But don't lie to yourself by pretending you're in the same class of people pushing themselves to understand Duns Scotus' Reportatio Parisiensis.

>>17711959
Yes, and orally is objectively better.

>>17715888
Nice trips.

>>17698626
See >>17714490 >>17699822 and >>17710182. You have to glance at the book cover, bounce to the table of contents, jump to the first paragraph of the book, read the entire paragraph at once without vocalizing it, skip to the ending, look up the Wikipedia summary, go back to the first chapter, read the last paragraph all at once without vocalizing it, and then skim through every paragraph without vocalizing with excessive ink covering the margins of every single page while covering all the text with a highlighter.

>>17702478
Since it was a translation you obviously haven't properly experienced it

>>17716982
worst meme

Audio books are good for me, I can no longer concentrate when i read. Getting old sucks. I wish i was 17 again.

>>17713882
>it may be one of the conservative leaning subs left.
The absolute state of basedddit

>>17717795
Total cope, stop being such a lazy pig. How old do you think academics and authors are?

>>17717993
The good ones.

>>17710508
>"hey bro, did you read that last song by Green Day?"

Bugmen should be hanged

>>17698467
I would agree that listening is not reading, but focusing on this instead of the actual contents of the book, or whether these contents have been properly transmitted and understood seems very shallow.

i love audio books
in my experience they can be the same as reading but they're easier to get distracted from
i usually have to listen to audio book chapters two or three times to get the same effect of reading it once

>>17698467
Audiobooks are really useful for long commutes. No way in hell I'm wasting 2 hrs of my day merely driving. If you try hard ones, like works of philosophy that aren't really particularly great for audio format, you can practice your "listening" comprehension, and you can always supplement your listening by referring back to the original text.

>>17716172
>>17715102
>I don't have to commute or work

>>17720027
why the fuck do you have to make a 2 hours commute everyday faggot, how poor are you?? Move closer to your job

>>17720050
>how poor are you
By the looks of it poorer than you, but not for long

>>17720050
I work on the road

>>17698515
I agree. The poster makes fair points about it being the same content. But reading is reading. Listening is listening. At the end of the day it's a waste of energy getting pissy about whether people read or listen, but listeners shouldn't feel the need to use the word read and readers shouldn't get hot and bothered about people who listen.

>>17720081
Shut the fuck up faggot there will be no such reconciliation, readers and listeners should continue to shit on each other for eternity, in ever increasing intensity, producing blind audiobook savants and deaf reading machines justly insisting on the purity of their respective paths

>>17720081
Tbh listeners are tapping into ancient oral traditions they have nothing to be ashamed of but they're not reading

>>17715473
I hadn't even thought of braille. Good point desu.

The posts about comprehension and retention are full of people outing themselves as brainlets with shit memory and low verbal ability. The sort of people who couldn't remember the contents of a lecture within half an hour of leaving the hall. Very embarrassing!

>>17720095
Based.

>>17720050
I have a commute just under 2 hours, because I work in the city but wanted to live somewhere my kids could have an actual backyard, in a town with no poor people and near good schools. I could get an apartment in the city for weekdays, but I like to actually see my family.
With that said, about 80% of the commute is on a train. I tend to listen to audiobook on the driving portion then read physical book or prepare stuff for work on the train, unless I really want to continue with the audio.

This thread is retarded, and people actually kvetching over semantics are autistic spergs and should just be ignored.

I would prefer to read but when I'm working or driving or some shit and I can't read why wouldn't I listen to an audiobook? I'm never going to finish all the books I want to read anyways you morons there just isn't enough time in life. You guys don't even read anyways you just shitpost about books and everytime you post pictures of your shelves it's all the same books 4chan told you to read you are just as bad as normie bugmen and you'll never even write a book fuck off

>>17720628
Stop trying to justify a 2 hour a day commute; you’re not going to make it not sound bizarre

>>17720628
>I have a commute just under 2 hours, because I work in the city but wanted to live somewhere my kids could have an actual backyard
Wouldn't you rather your kids have a father?

>Audiobook has sound effects
Pure kino

>>17698467
Imagine sitting down and typing these paragraphs

>>17717795
that has nothing to do with age and everything to do with your zoomer lifestyle. you are not old enough to be deteriorating mentally

>>17720081
Sure, but the crux of the matter is that listeners are whining people don't just accept them as reader. Which makes no sense.
I doubt anyone who reads as a hobby actually ahs a problem with audio books, there is just a problem when peopel act as if they were the same.

>>17703443
This, but unironically unironically.

>>17698467
You think THAT'S bad? Wait til you hear of an app that gives you 15 minute summaries of books (audio, obvious), and unironically compares that to reading, telling you after every summary you've listened the statistics of how many more books per week you read than the average.

>>17721162
what is even the point of that? if you are going to brad don't bother to go around reading in this roundabout fashion and just lie about the number of books you have read.
If you aren't reading to enjoy it why even do it in the first place? Who cares if you read 1 or two books a year as long as you had a good time with them it's fine.

>I love reading pewdiepie and mr. beast books on youtube!

>>17721257
People think reading is about getting information in and nothing more. That's what these audio book people comparing it to regular reading don't get. Reading a book is more than that, it's an activity where you concentrate on thr content of the pages and its a hobby. Audio books are good for busy people and you can do other things, but its a different activity than sitting down and reading yourself and it requires different skills. Nothing is wrong with this, but modern zoomers don't have the attention span to imagine opening a book and reading slowly. They want to watch a YouTube video telling a summary about the book, or do other productive shit while they do something else, because they can't cut down on their internet time. That's why reading is different, you can't dick around at work or in your apartment with a book, either you read it or you don't. An audio books plays no matter what, while a book is only being read when you actively put in effort. Nothing wrong or right with either, but its not the same.

>>17710155
>>17715102
Nice paragraphs retards why don't you write a letter to your congressmen about it I'm sure they care

>>17721257
It's literally catered to pseuds.

I don't think it's a bad idea by itself, though. You still get a better overall understanding and an introduction to books you may possibly actually read. But the mere fact that the app calls a 15min summary "reading" and even goes as far as to compare your "score" to that of others is borderline cringe. Oh and add to it that the guy who told me about this app is the kind to send "school of life" esque videos on all kinds of subjects.

>>17721579
Tbh I'd say most of my motivation comes from a thirst for knowledge, regardless if it's fiction or not.

>>17721162
I wish I never read this post...

>>17721701
>school of life videos
Either make him read the source material and the necessary secondary literature or execute him.

>>17721953
kek

>>17721859
https://www.blinkist.com/

Here's the app lmao

>>17698626
>your own inner voice
you are being npc phobic right now

>>17710182
How do you regain your reading speed if you've lost it over time? I used to be an avid reader who could read a 180,000 word fanfic in like 5-6 hours, now, I can barely read 200ish words a minute if I'm going all out. I've clearly slowed down when it comes to my pace and it's frustrating.

>>17724634
exercise, eat healthy, and get a full night's sleep

>>17702097
Based retard