Poll: Are Audiobooks Shameful?

[suitepee7]

hell no. i work night shifts where we're 'allowed' (used to be allowed, haven't caught me since they banned it) to use mp3 players. would i rather listen to music for 10 hours, or forget that i'm even working and get engrossed in a story... hmm, i wonder which makes the time fly by faster.

seriously though, it isn't cheating at all, it's simply more convenient for people who have a lot of stuff going on. i would love to read properly more, but i do not have the time. and when i do get some free time, there are other things i also like doing. audiobooks lets me enjoy a book alongside these other tasks. also, i challenge anybody to listen to stephen fry narrate harry potter and not think it is the best possible way to enjoy those stories

 

[RealRT]

No. I personally couldn't care less about audiobooks, the idea of listening to books isn't my cup of tea, but it's nothing more than a form. It's no better or worse than traditional books, it's just books. And really, as long as you don't mess with other people's entertainment, don't let them tell you how you should get yours.

 

[Floppertje]

it kinda depends, if you're listening to an audiobook while driving, i don't think you can (or should be) focussed on the book, so in that way you're not giving it enough attention. on the other hand, if you listen to an audiobook while at the gym or riding the bus or whatever, i don't see how it's any different from reading a book, in that you still get the same story. the only difference is that you're adding another variable, being the person who reads it. Some people are just more pleasant to listen to than others and it's quite possible to either muck up what would have been a great literary piece, or add a new layer to what would otherwise have been quite boring.

 

[floppylobster]

I always get distracted by the reader and start to criticize the way they read certain lines. It's like listening to famous actors voice characters in animated films. It takes me right out of the experience and I focus on that so much I can't enjoy or picture what is being told to me. For that reason I stick to reading books. Though I'm a terribly slow reader. It took me nearly a year to finish Moby Dick. Several months for Crime & Punishment and it's been two years since I stated Tale of Two Cities. I'll get back to it one day but I can only read a couple of pages before my mind starts to wander. I blame video games.

 

[Smiley Face]

It's not shameful at all. I'm a prolific reader, and got introduced to audiobooks by a friend of the family who also loves books, but unfortunately her sight has deteriorated to the point where she can't do so any more, so she gets audiobooks, and a lot of them. I find they're great, you can listen to an audiobook in circumstances where it's problematic to read a physical book, such as when you're trying to fall asleep, you can put it on low volume and slowly drift off for half an hour, or when you have your hands full or eyes occupied, such as when playing a video game or shoveling snow or mowing the lawn or baking or walking the dog. Any time I'm performing some task or other that takes minimal mental effort nowadays, I tend to listen to an audiobook, because actual books are ill-made for multitasking, and even if I do somehow manage to pull it off, the effort of multitasking with a book makes it more difficult to follow and retain what's going on.

And some audiobooks are really good in their performances. The Dresden Files audiobooks are so well done that given the choice, I'll listen to the audiobook before reading the physical copy when a new one comes out.

Of course, they've got their downsides - with a physical book, you can just sit down and go as fast as you can read, start weaving the picture inside your own head and get sucked into the world in a way that you can't quite with anything else. And sometimes you'll get a poor narrator, and there's also the cost. But it's in no way shameful to listen to audiobooks, and if you give it a try, it's surprising how often it comes in handy.

 

[Someone Depressing]

...No?

I don't think being illiterate in the first place is neccesarily a negative quality; I think people should read more - from shitty Mary-Sue self-insert fanfiction involving bishie werewolf-half-vampire-half-intelligent zombie, to Tolkien's great masterpieces, from Lord of The Rings to The Sillimarilon.

Reading just isn't for most people. I do hate people who say "if it's any good they'll make a movie out of it".

Makes me fucking cringe.

Of cours,e there'll always be people who say you're illiterate because you listen as appose to read. They are pretentious twats.

 

[Hagi]

Nope, don't see anything wrong with audiobooks. If it gets more good stuff to more people I honestly don't see the problem. Even from an educational point I'd say being able to listen attentively for a long duration is as valuable a skill as being able to attentively read long pieces.

I personally don't like them though, mostly because I'm able to read quite fast and audiobooks just can't keep up that pace. So why listen to one book when in the same period of time I could have read three or more?

 

[Techno Squidgy]

So, over the past few weeks, I've "read" 2001: A Space Odyssey, Solaris, Slaughterhouse Five, the first two Foundation books, The Thing on the Doorstep, Shadow Over Innsmouth and several trashy Horus Heresy novels.

By "read", I mean listened to.

Whenever I discuss these novels with someone whose opinion of me I care about, I make sure not to specify that I consumed them in audio form.

Am I being an overly self-conscious pejorative, or should I just go commit Sudoku right now?

There are Harry Potter audio books read by Stephen Fry, and I think Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy as well. How anyone can call listening to Stephen Fry read a great piece of literature shameful, I do not know. Personally I prefer to read the book myself, but that's because I sometimes zone out while listening to audio books and have to rewind them.

 

[Verkula]

Few years ago I was finally able to experience the 2 Jurassic Park stories via audiobook, WHILE I was working on a small Jurassic Park animation for a contest. So no, it's kinda amazing actually.

 

[Bestival]

Stephen Fry listens to audio books, and he is infallible.

I actually gave audio books a shot originally because Fry said he lost weight by going on long hikes and listening to audio books while walking.
I just thought that was a pretty cool idea, so I loaded up a Chuck Palahniuk book (Lullaby), and set out into the woods. And yeah, I liked it, and easily walked for 2~3 hours.
Only problem was that I like reading in bed, and I don't like having to follow 2 stories at the same time. So I tried audio books in bed, but I kept dozing off.

Will probably try the walking thing again now that the weather is getting nice again though.

 

[Techno Squidgy]

I don't think being illiterate in the first place is necessarily a negative quality;

A negative quality, not so much, but lacking an extremely important life skill, especially in the 21st century, yes. To be unable to read and write in this day and age is such a massive handicap that anyone that can't should most certainly seek to learn.

Unless of course you didn't actually mean illiterate...

I think people should read more - from shitty Mary-Sue self-insert fanfiction involving bishie werewolf-half-vampire-half-intelligent zombie

Read more? Yes. Read more crap fanfic? No. Perhaps as an example of how NOT to write, but as regular reading material, definitely not.

Reading just isn't for most people. I do hate people who say "if it's any good they'll make a movie out of it".

Makes me fucking cringe.

Of course, there'll always be people who say you're illiterate because you listen as opposed to read. They are pretentious twats.

I disagree with reading not being for most people, and I certainly think people should make more time to read, whether it's fiction or fact, reading does you good. It expands your vocabulary, gives your imagination some exercise and there's a wealth of information locked away in text books and on the internet that people can greatly benefit from.
People who insist that if a book is a good it will be turned into a film don't seem to realise how much a story loses in the transition from page to screen, or how the reinterpretation of the story can completely change certain messages and themes. That and the very different pacing of a book and a film can completely ruin a story.

 

[Robert Marrs]

I wouldn't really call them shameful. People can consume media however they want and if it means people here stories they might not have heard otherwise more power to them. I can't actually see myself using an audiobook though. I prefer to just read and get it done faster.

 

[Soulrender95]

Am I being an overly self-conscious pejorative, or should I just go commit Sudoku right now?

I think you mean seppuku, unless your planning to commit to a numbers based puzzle game.

And no, seriously it's not shameful. I tend to listen to audiobooks while playing minecraft because the ingame music gets repetitive.
I've gone through Harry Potter, The Dark Tower, hitchhikers and several discworld novels, most of which I read book copies of years ago and just didn't have the free time to devote to sitting down and re-reading, and currently going through the Dresdan files series, which I honestly think I would have given up on if i'd had to actually read Book 2 (it's not bad, it just drags on with increasingly higher stakes and feeling like it wasn't going to end)

Edit: Protip, never listen to an any audiobook Stephen King personally reads.

 

[UniversalRonin]

On a lazy summers afternoon, very few things are better than lying in the garden in the nuddie, with a nice cold Irn Bru, and some Agatha Christie being read to you.

 

[lacktheknack]

Am I being an overly self-conscious pejorative, or should I just go commit Sudoku right now?

I believe you mean "seppuku". Sudoku is a logic puzzle.

OT: Only if you're sitting on a chair and staring at the wall. If you're actually doing things, like cooking or driving, audiobooks are great.

 

[samaugsch]

My god... I am so buying that shit. My childhood...

OT: The only books I have ever gotten an audiobook for were a shitty star wars book (seriously soured me on all adapted books) and an audiobook for Ulysses. After I was finished with that I actually read the book again, if only to try and make sense of it. Honestly, I see no problem with getting books in audio form. Saying that listening to audiobooks doesn't count strikes me as a "they sound better on vinyl" type of comment. Also I am just going to assume that the "sudoku" comment at the end was a joke.

it was "The Vile Village" #4 I think....

I tried to read Ulysses...then I realised I'm not an appreciator or fine literature and thats ok

I thought the miserable mill was #4. I think the vile village was #6 or #7.

OT: why on earth would audiobooks be shameful?

 

[rcs619]

So, over the past few weeks, I've "read" 2001: A Space Odyssey, Solaris, Slaughterhouse Five, the first two Foundation books, The Thing on the Doorstep, Shadow Over Innsmouth and several trashy Horus Heresy novels.

By "read", I mean listened to.

Whenever I discuss these novels with someone whose opinion of me I care about, I make sure not to specify that I consumed them in audio form.

Am I being an overly self-conscious pejorative, or should I just go commit Sudoku right now?

Nah, nothing wrong with audiobooks. The important thing is that the books are being consumed by people, no matter the form.

For me, I could just never get into audiobooks. It's the fact that it's usually just one person reading the whole thing. Hearing someone try to do the voices of different characters, especially of the opposite gender, just takes me out of it. I mean, I get why they do it, because of the costs involved... but still. I really wish more of them were actually read more like a play, with different people at least voicing the main characters. More of a personal complaint than any sort of issue with all of audiobooks though.

 

[TheDrunkNinja]

Audiobooks are the only way I can get through my eight-hour work day. Given those circumstances, I feel no shame in letting people know that I've consumed books in that form, and if anyone gives me shit about it, I'll be more than happy to tell them the reason I consume books that way.

I'm not even sure I would feel ashamed if it wasn't a necessary means to keep my sanity. I mean, when you listen to an audiobook, you can do other things while you're listening, similar with music. You would think that might have a positive effect on your ability to multitask.

 

[Silvanus]

Not shameful at all. Not one bit.

I don't tend to listen to them myself, but since Charles Dickens used to perform live readings of his books, and T.S. Eliot created recordings of his poetry, there are highly respected writers and poets that consider audio versions of their works to be a perfectly legitimate way of taking them in.

 

[Ratty]

Personally I find something extremely satisfying in cracking open yellow paged old books to sit down with a hot cup of tea and relax. When it comes to stories told through audio I prefer radio shows myself. But then that's an artform that died out in America around the early 1960s with the advent of television. But I don't see anything inherently wrong in consuming audiobooks, some people can probably imagine better when the story is told to them, some can imagine better when reading themselves. At the end of the day you're all just consuming a book for personal enjoyment, so what's the harm?

It's the fact that it's usually just one person reading the whole thing. Hearing someone try to do the voices of different characters, especially of the opposite gender, just takes me out of it. I mean, I get why they do it, because of the costs involved... but still. I really wish more of them were actually read more like a play, with different people at least voicing the main characters. More of a personal complaint than any sort of issue with all of audiobooks though.

Have you ever tried radio shows/audio plays? They were equivalent to television in popularity and influence in the US from about the 1930s until the 1950s when actual television supplanted it. But such programs are still being made in the UK and some other places.