Are you going to make the one hundred books read goal?

[FizzyWater]

When this was first posted, I thought it was not likely I would finish this goal. And I was appalled last year when I "only" ready 168 book (which was down from the years before).

I've been in a HUGE project at work this year and on top of that, "training" new management (don't you love teaching your boss how to do your job?)

Anyway, I had begun a list in Goodreads and stopped adding books in February. So I pulled out the Sony (I bookmark the last page of every book I read) and started updating the list. Then I added in the audiobooks I could remember listening to.

And much to my surprise, I'm at 110.

Most of my NEW reading was done between January and April this year, before the project got really time intensive. But I've been picking up old favorites that I could read more quickly whenever I had time. And when I wasn't reading, I had an audiobook in the MP3 (although, for the most part, I listen to MP3s of books I've already read).

A quick count tells me I only read 46 new books this year, and that's very low for me. I like to re-read, but I try to restrict it to a handful of favorites because my TBR pile is huge and not getting smaller. Seems silly to keep re-reading books when I've got other books I've paid for and never read.

So I'm hoping next year my 100+ books list is mostly NEW book reading.

[issybird]

Originally Posted by FizzyWater

(although, for the most part, I listen to MP3s of books I've already read).

These are the only audiobooks I can manage. I tend to zone out while I'm listening, so it has to be a book where I can pick up the thread without feeling I've missed something.

Mostly I like the quiet, though.

[JSWolf]

I don't think audiobook should count. Reading is not the same as listening. Besides, if audiobooks were to count, then so should movie adaptations of books. And I don't think they should count.

[Loosheesh]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I don't think audiobook should count. Reading is not the same as listening. Besides, if audiobooks were to count, then so should movie adaptations of books. And I don't think they should count.

Isn't the content of unabridged audiobooks the same, word for word, as the text versions? How is that comparable to movie adaptations?

[sabredog]

I listen to audio books whilst driving to and from work. I do not get abridged versions and try to find narrators that put some form of drama into the books rather than simply read pages.

[FizzyWater]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I don't think audiobook should count. Reading is not the same as listening. Besides, if audiobooks were to count, then so should movie adaptations of books. And I don't think they should count.

I wouldn't agree entirely. A movie tells me what to think about everything, and tells me a very abridged version (and often changed) version of the story.

When I read a book, I have to "create a picture" of everything, based on the author's words.

I'll agree that an audiobook is a more passive way of experiencing a story, and the narrator "creates the picture" in terms of the characters' tone of voice, etc. Sometimes a phrase will catch my "ear" and I'll think, "I don't think that's how the author meant that..." But the narrator does supply that one part that I'd have to while reading visually.

But the audiobook - at least the unabridged one - contains the author's entire work and I still "create a picture" as I listen of the setting and the characters and so on.

It's not my first choice, but given the project I was on this year, it turned out to be the only way I had time to experience many books this year. I could listen on the way to work, sometimes when doing something tedious at work, on the way home, while doing household tasks... My TV has been off more this year than ever before.

I hope next year I can visually read more and listen less. Heck, even if it's just to be able to skim certain scenes! I don't know if the official rules for this challenge excluded audiobooks, and if they did, then - for this challenge - I'd have to discount them.

But for myself, I'm counting them.

[orlok]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I don't think audiobook should count. Reading is not the same as listening. Besides, if audiobooks were to count, then so should movie adaptations of books. And I don't think they should count.

Couldn't disagree more. Having someone read to you is no different to having read it yourself (apart from the obvious difference of their vocal interpretation). You still have words, you still know the story, and you still get great enjoyment out of it, hopefully.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by orlok

Couldn't disagree more. Having someone read to you is no different to having read it yourself (apart from the obvious difference of their vocal interpretation). You still have words, you still know the story, and you still get great enjoyment out of it, hopefully.

I think reading and listening are two different things. If the kindergarten teacher reads a story, the children can't say they've read the book--they've heard the story.

However, for our purposes here, I would still count audio books.

[JSWolf]

Well, for 2012, we'll have to let Nyssa make the call on audiobooks.

[sun surfer]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I don't think audiobook should count. Reading is not the same as listening. Besides, if audiobooks were to count, then so should movie adaptations of books. And I don't think they should count.

I think whatever one wants to count should count.

I personally have never listened to an audiobook, but I don't see a huge difference from reading. I don't think using your eyes to scan words on a page is somehow intrinsically better than listening to someone speak the same words.

Even if audiobooks are abridged, I don't see a difference. If someone read an abridged version of a book, it would still count as a book read.

On the other hand, film adaptations are just that - adaptations. They are a different form of art and so have nothing to do with reading or listening to a book.

[JSWolf]

A film adaptation is different. But then so is an abridged edition different (be it text or audio). (IMHO) If audiobooks are going to be allowed to count, I do think only unabridged ones should count.

Yes let's thrash this out thoroughly. Then let the polling begin. Should audio books count? Abridged books (written or audio). Film adaptions?

This is just a voluntary game to set a mark for ones self and to take a measure against others. It's impossible to cheat because it means what it means to any individual, and there is no prize awarded at the end.

P.S 107 so far, all unabridged books with a mix of paper and ebook

[sun surfer]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

A film adaptation is different. But then so is an abridged edition different (be it text or audio). (IMHO) If audiobooks are going to be allowed to count, I do think only unabridged ones should count.

I don't prefer abridged books, but they are still books, just of different, shorter lengths. And unabridged books are all sorts of different lengths, as are abridged. There are plenty of unabridged titles that are shorter than plenty of other abridged titles.

For instance, from a quick search just now on Amazon, there's an abridged version of War & Peace at over 600 pages.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by sun surfer

I personally have never listened to an audiobook, but I don't see a huge difference from reading. I don't think using your eyes to scan words on a page is somehow intrinsically better than listening to someone speak the same words.

Listening is passive. Reading is active.

It's similar to the difference between going to the theater and seeing a live performance, and sitting at home watching a video of the performance on PBS, for example. Even though the content is exactly the same, the experience is completely different.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Catlady

Listening is passive. Reading is active.

It's similar to the difference between going to the theater and seeing a live performance, and sitting at home watching a video of the performance on PBS, for example. Even though the content is exactly the same, the experience is completely different.

Very well said.

There are other differences I've been thinking of. It's also the background activities one can do while reading vs. listening to an audiobook. One cannot drive a car and read. One cannot watch TV and listen to an audiobook. So yes, they are two different activities (IMHO).

As far as abridged goes, I do think abridged should not be allowed. If it's abridged, it's not the complete book. So you did not actually read the entire book. This is not the same as reading say the original version when the author has put out an expanded version. The Stand is just such an example.