Listening is the new reading

[issybird]

Originally Posted by Catlady

By the same token, how any narrator interprets it is irrelevant. It's the same text whether the reader sees it or hears it.

I disagree. You had seemed to suggest that the author's interpretation somehow has some validity. AFAIC, the text is neutral from any author's narration; it was the author's responsibility to express his meaning in the words alone. Narration matters. Heck, we all have narrators we like and those we loathe, which says in itself that the process of narration changes things.

You can't really call an author narrating his or her own book an intermediary; it's not an additional person getting between the reader and the author.

Sure I can! It's the author getting between his written words and the reader (i.e., listener).

[drjd]

I have failed to become a good audiobook listner despite various attempts. My mind wanders elsewhere while 'listening' a book and I often miss the narreted contents. My brain perhaps doesn't accept 'narrated' words comfortably as compared to 'read' words. Although I purposefully bought an Onyx Boox last year with TTS capability to listen to ebooks, but that device is lying idle now, and I am back to normal 'reading'. I wish I could have adopted the listening habits and give more rest to my straining eyes, but it didn't work for me. Perhaps my brain is a little bit orthodox about the concept of books.

[issybird]

Originally Posted by drjd

I have failed to become a good audiobook listner despite various attempts. My mind wanders elsewhere while 'listening' a book and I often miss the narreted contents. My brain perhaps doesn't accept 'narrated' words comfortably as compared to 'read' words. Although I purposefully bought an Onyx Boox last year with TTS capability to listen to ebooks, but that device is lying idle now, and I am back to normal 'reading'. I wish I could have adopted the listening habits and give more rest to my straining eyes, but it didn't work for me. Perhaps my brain is a little bit orthodox about the concept of books.

I found that listening to audiobooks was a learned skill. It took effort, it took concentration, and I had to refocus frequently. I got better at it, but even now I can zone out. It was/is worth the effort for me. Audiobooks provide entertainment when my hands/eyes are otherwise occupied and they let me get through more content.

My suggestions, if you want to try again, would be to try professional narration instead of TTS and to start with mindless books, light fiction, or something you already know well so you don't lose the thread. You can listen to OverDrive books for free through a smart phone or tablet, so that you don't have to make an investment in more equipment or the audiobooks themselves.

If you want to wonder over to the Audiobooks forum, I'm sure we'd all be happy to recommend favorite narrators/books!

[Larla]

I think the biggest difference between reading a book and listening to an audiobook is the loss of control you have while listening. The words continue to come at you while listening without you be able to control the action. You can't (easily) re-listen to a word that you are confused about and if something attracts your attention while listening you will definitely miss some content.

Sure, you can stop and rewind, etc. but very few do that and if you had to do it much at all you wouldn't enjoy the listening session. While reading text, it is a trivial operation to reread something and even looking up a word in the dictionary is pretty simple.

If you can concentrate completely during the listening session then I feel that there is no difference between listening and reading text; but for most of us the listening session can be easily affected by real life and thus comprehension is diminished.

[sun surfer]

Originally Posted by issybird

AFAIC, the text is neutral from any author's narration; it was the author's responsibility to express his meaning in the words alone...

I would say not exactly. I think, because we're mostly much more used to reading texts than listening to unabridged audiobooks, both singularly, culturally and historically, that in a discussion such as this we've become blind to the visual interpretation as well, and that it's somewhat beside the point to dwell on a narrator's reading as 'interpretation', or many people's difficulty in focusing as well on an audiobook simply because they're not nearly as used to them.

There are visual differences in text that can affect our view of a work, such as font, sizing, spacing, typos and errors, quality of paper, cover, binding, device, etc. We can be just as annoyed by too-small text in a pbook or typo-riddled text in an ebook as a grating narrator in audiobook. Pictures and illustrations in a book can really affect our intake of the material; would you consider reading a text without pictures any more 'reading' than reading the exact same text with a big pictures illustrating the story every other page?

If you argue that a colourful narration can be influencing on a larger scale, then (1) we're beginning to discuss degrees of influence rather than assuming there are no visual influences, and (2) this is a choice by listeners since, as Catlady pointed out, it is definitely possible to listen to an audiobook by a monotone or even robotic narration which takes out any possible colourful interpretation.

[arjaybe]

Originally Posted by drjd

I have failed to become a good audiobook listner despite various attempts. My mind wanders elsewhere while 'listening' a book and I often miss the narreted contents. My brain perhaps doesn't accept 'narrated' words comfortably as compared to 'read' words. Although I purposefully bought an Onyx Boox last year with TTS capability to listen to ebooks, but that device is lying idle now, and I am back to normal 'reading'. I wish I could have adopted the listening habits and give more rest to my straining eyes, but it didn't work for me. Perhaps my brain is a little bit orthodox about the concept of books.

Two suggestions that might help. My mind wanders like yours, I think because the reading isn't moving quickly enough to force it to concentrate. You could speed up the playback until you don't have time to wander, and/or you could do something else to occupy your mind's excess capacity. Listen while you're doing something else that prevents you from reading, like cooking or whittling or playing solitaire. Like issybird.

[issybird]

Originally Posted by arjaybe

Two suggestions that might help. My mind wanders like yours, I think because the reading isn't moving quickly enough to force it to concentrate. You could speed up the playback until you don't have time to wander, and/or you could do something else to occupy your mind's excess capacity. Listen while you're doing something else that prevents you from reading, like cooking or whittling or playing solitaire. Like issybird.

Ah, good point! I make heavy use of the speed function, especially with nonfiction. It's fantastic the way you can listen to something faster without it's going all chipmunk on you.

I'll add that audiobooks mean I exercise much longer than I would without. My waterproof MP3 player in particular was a life-changer, but it even applies to going for walks.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by issybird

I disagree. You had seemed to suggest that the author's interpretation somehow has some validity. AFAIC, the text is neutral from any author's narration; it was the author's responsibility to express his meaning in the words alone. Narration matters. Heck, we all have narrators we like and those we loathe, which says in itself that the process of narration changes things.

Sure I can! It's the author getting between his written words and the reader (i.e., listener).

Of course the author's interpretation has validity, which isn't the same thing as saying it's the be-all and end-all, and no other interpretations are allowed. It's the author reading what the author wrote; the author intended the text to have a certain meaning. Whether it actually HAS that meaning to anyone else is another issue entirely.

I may like or dislike a narrator, but that doesn't mean I can't evaluate the text on its own merits.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by Larla

I think the biggest difference between reading a book and listening to an audiobook is the loss of control you have while listening. The words continue to come at you while listening without you be able to control the action. You can't (easily) re-listen to a word that you are confused about and if something attracts your attention while listening you will definitely miss some content.

Sure, you can stop and rewind, etc. but very few do that and if you had to do it much at all you wouldn't enjoy the listening session. While reading text, it is a trivial operation to reread something and even looking up a word in the dictionary is pretty simple.

What basis do you have for saying "very few" stop and rewind and relisten? I do it all the time. I get distracted and go back to the beginning of a chapter, or I might replay a passage because I'm not sure of a word. I read a lot of thrillers, and sometimes I'll realize I've fallen for a bit of misdirection, and I go back to see how I was bamboozled.

If you can concentrate completely during the listening session then I feel that there is no difference between listening and reading text; but for most of us the listening session can be easily affected by real life and thus comprehension is diminished.

When I'm reading text, I am generally also listening to something--TV, music, whatever. Audiobooks simply allow me more scope in my multitasking. You can't clean toilets and read an e-book.

[Larla]

Originally Posted by Catlady

What basis do you have for saying "very few" stop and rewind and relisten? I do it all the time. I get distracted and go back to the beginning of a chapter, or I might replay a passage because I'm not sure of a word. I read a lot of thrillers, and sometimes I'll realize I've fallen for a bit of misdirection, and I go back to see how I was bamboozled.

I was thinking of the effort involved in stop, rewind, and re-listen as opposed to virtually instantaneous stop and rewind while reading text. People are generally lazy if too much effort is involved. In the case of listening while driving, obviously stop and rewind is actually dangerous.

[barryem]

Originally Posted by Catlady

You can't really call an author narrating his or her own book an intermediary; it's not an additional person getting between the reader and the author.

It's not at all uncommon for an author to read their own book as if they didn't really understand what it was all about. It's funny how idiotic some of them sound.

I think the question is whether the narrator affects your perception of a book and I think a good narrator does, usually in a positive way. They add emphasis you may not have considered or make something you read yourself as dry become more interesting. Of course it can work the other way as well.

I'm not sure this has any bearing on whether listening is reading. No-one has argued that they're identical experiences. With a poor narrator I don't think listening is as good a way to enjoy a book as reading. With a good narrator it can be every bit as good and sometimes even better.

I listened years ago to Cyril Cusack read Graham Greene's "Monsignor Quixote" in a kind of casual, offhand sort of manner that gave the book a whole new level of beauty. It seriously improved the book. I had previously read it and liked it but after that I loved it. I understood it far more than I did after reading it.

I do realize that I've just made a little argument against my own position that listening is equivalent to reading. Sometimes it's just better.

Then there's this to consider: if HarryT and others really aren't demeaning listening what does all this matter anyway? I've always taken semantics seriously and always decried the statement that something is just semantics. But that might apply in this case unless listeners are being demeaned.

Barry

[drjd]

Originally Posted by issybird

I found that listening to audiobooks was a learned skill. It took effort, it took concentration, and I had to refocus frequently. I got better at it, but even now I can zone out. It was/is worth the effort for me.

I think I was not patient enough to carry on the efforts and practice the art of listening painstakingly. I guess nowadays I read the books (be it fiction or non-fiction) more casually and not like serious students who want to learn something out of them.

Originally Posted by issybird

My suggestions, if you want to try again, would be to try professional narration instead of TTS and to start with mindless books, light fiction, or something you already know well so you don't lose the thread. You can listen to OverDrive books for free through a smart phone or tablet, so that you don't have to make an investment in more equipment or the audiobooks themselves.

That is a good suggestion, thanks. I'll try it out soon as I find a reasonable free time to spend on learning this art.

Originally Posted by issybird

If you want to wonder over to the Audiobooks forum, I'm sure we'd all be happy to recommend favorite narrators/books!

Never been to that forum. Sure I'll drop in there and thanks for the invite, issybird!

Originally Posted by Larla

I think the biggest difference between reading a book and listening to an audiobook is the loss of control you have while listening. The words continue to come at you while listening without you be able to control the action. You can't (easily) re-listen to a word that you are confused about and if something attracts your attention while listening you will definitely miss some content.

Sure, you can stop and rewind, etc. but very few do that and if you had to do it much at all you wouldn't enjoy the listening session. While reading text, it is a trivial operation to reread something and even looking up a word in the dictionary is pretty simple.

This! Exactly this is another reason for my aversion to listening books. One has to do a lot of excercise to re-listen a word, a piece of text or a paragraph to fully absorb it and it becomes more cumbersome for a non-native speaker like me. To follow this process while physically reading a book is obviously much simpler.

Originally Posted by sun surfer

I think, because we're mostly much more used to reading texts than listening to unabridged audiobooks, both singularly, culturally and historically.....

Very true, I agree. The tradition or habit has taken hundred of years and many generations to evolve.

Originally Posted by arjaybe

Two suggestions that might help. My mind wanders like yours, I think because the reading isn't moving quickly enough to force it to concentrate. You could speed up the playback until you don't have time to wander, and/or you could do something else to occupy your mind's excess capacity. Listen while you're doing something else that prevents you from reading, like cooking or whittling or playing solitaire. Like issybird.

I'll sure keep this trick in my mind for my next attempt to listen a book! Thanks!

[spindlegirl]

In my volunteering with folks who were newly adjusting loss of vision, one of the mindset hurdles they wanted to overcome, was the idea that listening to an audio book wasn't "real reading". In the support group setting, they were encouraged to think of it as reading. One person came in on the last week of the group and said they read the Game of Thrones book and we were so happy.

Now, I think "the new" reading (implying that visual reading is going the way of the dinosaur) is a bit of a stretch, but I can see how it can sell more books. It's probably meant half jokingly.

Audio books count as reading, IMO, even for someone like me with no vision loss issues. Sometimes listening is the better way to absorb the content, and I am very glad that for many books there are talented voice narrators who read those books. I imagine that folks with reading comprehension disorders would also agree.

[Alohamora]

Originally Posted by Larla

I was thinking of the effort involved in stop, rewind, and re-listen as opposed to virtually instantaneous stop and rewind while reading text. People are generally lazy if too much effort is involved. In the case of listening while driving, obviously stop and rewind is actually dangerous.

Depends on the setup. My car has Bluetooth controls built in, so all I have to do is tap the rewind button. I use it fairly often.

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by spindlegirl

In my volunteering with folks who were newly adjusting loss of vision, one of the mindset hurdles they wanted to overcome, was the idea that listening to an audio book wasn't "real reading". In the support group setting, they were encouraged to think of it as reading. One person came in on the last week of the group and said they read the Game of Thrones book and we were so happy.

Now, I think "the new" reading (implying that visual reading is going the way of the dinosaur) is a bit of a stretch, but I can see how it can sell more books. It's probably meant half jokingly.

Audio books count as reading, IMO, even for someone like me with no vision loss issues. Sometimes listening is the better way to absorb the content, and I am very glad that for many books there are talented voice narrators who read those books. I imagine that folks with reading comprehension disorders would also agree.

I normally don't do audio books but I discovered Atlas Shrugged is much easier in audio form.