3 ms·
IMHO screens and audio don't count as reading books.
by world2vec 3mo ago
IMHO screens and audio don't count as reading books.
- KaiserPro 3mo agoCould you expand on the audiobook part? Im assuming that screens dont count because its not novels/literature but audio books are the same content but delivered by a different medium, I am genuinely curious as to your opinion on is not counting
- world2vec 3mo agoI just think listening to a book is not the same as actually reading it. Just my personal preference, really, and I'm not knocking down on audiobooks. Listening to audiobooks, IMHO, is a more passive and less focused way of consuming literature.
- malloryerik 3mo agoI must say this truly depends. I can sometimes be more focused with an audiobook. An extreme example? Heidegger's Being and Time, Macquarie and Robinson translation. The audiobook version read by Martyn Swain is a godsend for helping one try to grapple with this monster. Though his only commentary is in timbre, rhythm, speed, it absolutely enriches the reading. The audiobook is something like 24 hours long, but there's just no way you finish in that time (if you ever do finish); if you're like me you've gotta rewind rewind rewind, baby. A talented reader can work magic. Ukemi and Naxos have great titles.
- KaiserPro 3mo agoThank you for this. You're not the first person to say this. I have some empathy for this view, even though its the opposite of mine. For me, audiobooks offer, more space for imagination. More recently its also a more consistent way to get unbroken narrative into my head. However I strongly suspect that is down to how I process information. I didn't really read properly until I was quite old, however talking radio was quite ubiquitous in my house. There were lots of audiobook-like content. so perhaps its training?
- thfuran 3mo agoAnd it’s my understanding that, auditory vs visual processing aside, studies demonstrate that the brain activation is essentially identical between reading a book and listening to it.
- BoingBoomTschak 3mo agoDepends on the amount of focus you dedicate to your listening. But unlike reading, it's much easier to use it as background activity. Also, I'm very much convinced that the brain is distracted away from the content by the voice acting and intonation; same way that most people physically can't concentrate when listening to music with vocals, evolution made us really sensitive to the human voice.
- hbn 3mo agoAudiobooks do not feel like disconnecting. It feels like another app on my smart device pumping digital sound into my ears. Leaving my devices inside and sitting on the porch, reading a book feels much healthier for my brain. And more intentional consumption than passive noise to kill time.
- bcjdjsndon 3mo ago> feels much healthier Isn't that how tarot cards and all that bollocks works?
- esseph 3mo ago> but audio books are the same content but delivered by a different medium, I am genuinely curious as to your opinion on is not counting Audio books are passive content. It's not reading. Not remotely the same brain process.
- watwut 3mo agoImo, audio books are perfectly comparable to listening to podcasts. Calling it reading is absurd. It is not reading, it is listening. And reading on screen is reading.
- randusername 3mo agoIMO audiobooks and physical books are an identical experience for passive reading, but not for active reading. So audiobook genre fiction is reading, but audiobook War and Peace or audiobook The C Programming Language doesn't count. Not for arbitrary gate-keeping reasons, but because reading those books implies a more active form of engagement than marching linearly through it.
- paulryanrogers 3mo agoThe article doesn't distinguish reading books from reading anything else. Though it's pretty short and light on details. The article it cites strongly implies the reading is only books. All that said, [I find] reading books is overrated. They're often outdated, low effort slop, and even more so in this AI era.
- world2vec 3mo agoHow could fiction books become outdated? That is an absolutely alien opinion for me! -edit- I said "non-fiction" when I meant "fiction". Of course non-fiction books become obsolete quite fast sometimes.
- dvdkon 3mo agoPretty easily - I don't think reading a medical text from the 19th century will give you up-to-date information. I'd agree that the concept doesn't apply to fiction, though.
- paulryanrogers 3mo agoI was mostly speaking of nonfiction. Though I find most fiction doesn't age well in any medium. Appreciating it often requires social context I don't really have time to learn. And many fictional works from the past are chock full of racism, sexism, irrational social phobias, etc. For those who put in the work, there isn't even a cultural bond to enjoy since most of the people who originally consumed those works are themselves dead and buried. (Modern niches and widely studied "classics" notwithstanding.)
- esseph 3mo ago> Though I find most fiction doesn't age well in any medium. What a crazy take! > Appreciating it often requires social context I don't really have time to learn. ???? > And many fictional works from the past are chock full of racism, sexism, irrational social phobias, etc I have some news for you. That stuff has lasted for as long as humans have existed, and will continue to exist as long as humans do. It is intrinsic to humans, unfortunately.
- nicbou 3mo agoI disagree. I read books, but I also read essays, newsletters, blogs, Wikipedia articles, discussions and so on. These also contain important and useful information. It's not a dichotomy between books and slop. Hell, a lot of books should have been blog posts. Audiobooks are also valid, as are podcasts. Sure, they might not engage you like text does, but they still impart knowledge. To me, this is like ranting against electric bikes because they're not as difficult. If they get more people to engage in a fun activity, then they serve their purpose.
- dust-jacket 3mo agoI don't think anyone's saying audiobooks aren't "valid" or worthwhile. Just that if someone asks you if you were reading this morning, you should probably say "no" if you were listening to a podcast. It's not a value judgement, just a category.
- rupertdev 3mo agoI personally think that though the medium is different, audiobooks are at least _similar_ to reading a book. Screens however, are you including something like an eReader as _not_ reading books?
- esseph 3mo ago> I personally think that though the medium is different, audiobooks are at least _similar_ to reading a book. Very different brain processes. They're the same in that they are both forms of entertainment based on a written story, I guess.
- world2vec 3mo agoI think screens, in this context, means stuff like reading blog posts and whatnot on your phone or laptop.
- pier25 3mo agoScreens don't count?