Back in February, I joined a book club. I can read on my own just fine, but I can’t resist the siren call of a potluck themed after the pick of the month. And it meant an opportunity to engage with other readers’ tastes and preferences, encouraging me to pick up titles that I probably wouldn’t have on my own. We’re a pretty relaxed bunch, with members being able to opt in and out if they happen to know the upcoming book won’t be their cup of tea. We’re also not all that concerned with which format anybody wants to use: conventional reading or audiobooks. In my experience this is a normal attitude, but apparently there are book clubs (and isolated readers) out there who disagree.
I want to begin by laying out some definitions. This post is not about the basic idea of reading, which is visual by nature and involves interpreting written symbols and information (such as letters and charts). This post is not about literacy, phonics, or the difference between looking at a map and asking your neighbor for directions. Today, my specific interest is with the matter of audiobooks and whether using that medium to experience a book counts as having read it.
Full disclosure: I technically don’t have a dog in this fight because I don’t use audiobooks. Audiobooks and my brain simply don’t get along. I’ve tried! New books coming out every week, and only so much time to sit and point my face at a book each day, when I could be using the time that I wash dishes, take walks, or drive? You don’t have to convince me of their convenience because I’m fully on board. Alas, my listening skills and my reading skills were not created equal. And the reality is that we can’t have a conversation about the validity of audiobooks without recognizing the readers for whom the opposite is true, and the reason audiobooks exist: readers with visual impairments, readers who need to engage their attention span with extra activities while they listen instead of sitting quietly while their minds wander, and more. I think this is reason enough not to hold audiobooks on a separate level of validity, but I also think to do so just kind of sucks in general.
When I sit down with my book club friends and we start sharing our favorite passages and biggest pet peeves, the audiobook users are just as capable of joining in as the conventional readers. The text they played in their cars and on their phones was the same text printed in any copy I picked up from the library. They were experiencing the same words carefully chosen and published by the author, the same turns of phrase in the same order. They weren’t watching a movie adaptation, skimming the cliff notes, or getting the story secondhand from somebody who did read it.
One objection mentioned in the response to Easy Listening’s letter that I find fascinating is the idea that audiobooks are cheating because a narrator is able to impart tone and inflection into the text instead of the reader being forced to interpret it alone. Even though it’s included in this example, I hope it’s not a common piece of the argument because it’s goofy as hell. If a conventional reader struggles to interpret the tone - because it’s a weak point of theirs or because the writing is unclear - is that more of a barrier to having read the book than getting an extra clue from the narration? (Do I have to interpret everything else on my own to count? Did you know that sometimes I have to look up a word I don’t recognize in the dictionary?) In Time Magazine’s contribution to the topic, psychology professor Daniel Willingham brings up a similar objection to screen readers: “If you’re wondering why printed books may be better than screen-based reading, it may have to do with your inability to gauge where you are in an electronic book. ‘As you’re reading a narrative, the sequence of events is important, and knowing where you are in a book helps you build that arc of narrative.’” Like my troubles with audiobooks, I do have that same issue trying to read using an e-book. But while I do know book snobs who prefer the smell over an old paperback over a Kindle any day, I've never heard one try to claim that using the Kindle doesn't count.
Although that does make me wonder - any conventional reader has had that moment where they say a word out loud that they’ve only encountered in print before, and discover that they’ve been pronouncing it all wrong in their heads. Do audiobook users have that same moment but with spelling? Inquiring minds want to know!
Your peers captured everything I would say and more about your post, Emily. I'll just add that this line might be my favorite: "I can read on my own just fine" ... I made me actually lol.
Wow. This is one of my favorite blogs by you so far. As a child, I was the kid in the library taking home twelve books at a time. This had definitely peaked my interest and I am interested in joining one.
Interesting article, I have always wondered whether you can count it as a book you have read if it was an audio book. I love audio books and think they are very useful. I think audio books should count as book you have read because you can still retain the information.
Great post. I personally use both depending on my mood and schedule. If I’m busy doing house chores or driving, then audiobooks are definitely the way to go. However, I agree that listening to a book in detail can be hard at times. I know I can get distracted, and the audio is really just there as background noise for me. That said, its no different from when someone forgets a passage that they read, so I think that audiobook listeners have just as much to say in a discussion as regular readers.
I loved reading your post! I'm a big reader and I love audio books, reading a physical copy, and doing a hybrid of the two. However, when I do listen to audiobooks I always feel shamed by the book community. I think of listening to an audiobook as a way of watching tv without actually watching tv and I love doing it at work. I love at the end where you discuss the miss pronouncing of a word and then hear it read to you, because I am always in shock at some of the names authors create.