Are audiobooks the same as reading?
I’ve just been checking out an interesting project over at Audible.com. It’s an audiobook called The Chopin Manuscript and is being billed as the first-ever audio serial book. It’s written by 15 successful thriller writers; Jeffery Deaver conceived of the characters, story and wrote the first chapter, with 14 other writers including David Hewson, Lisa Scottoline and Lee Child contributing chapters and Deaver bringing it to its conclusion. It’s narrated by Alfred Molina and proved to be one of the fastest-selling audio titles of 2007.
I had heard of the book when it was first released in September but wanted to wait until all the chapters were available. Then I forgot about it until I was looking around Audible earlier. So far I’m enjoying it; I’ve just about finished Deaver’s chapter and the story is interesting, even if it does sound a little like The Da Vinci Code. Alfred Molina’s narration is excellent as well.
What’s interesting about the project is seeing so many writers not just embracing audiobooks but using them as a medium. So far there’s no printed version of The Chopin Manuscript and it feels very visual compared to other audiobooks. I’ve grown to like audiobooks over the last few years… I’m a fast reader but I enjoy listening to books as well and they’ve been very useful while I’ve been having trouble sleeping.
A lot of people don’t like audiobooks. I can understand that; they think it takes away from the reading experience, from the conversation between author and reader. Of those people, a number are very dismissive of listeners; I’ve offered audiobooks to people who haven’t been able to find the printed version, only to have it refused as it’s not “real reading”… I have a problem with that. I agree that audiobooks are not the same experience but to say they’re a lesser experience bugs me. What you get out of them is different, yes, but they both have value.
To me reading isn’t about interpreting words visually as much as understanding language. If someone’s telling a story then it doesn’t matter if I’m reading the words off the page or hearing them inside my head, that’s still reading. It provides a different experience, an auditory experience, but I’m still getting the same story. For certain books it can actually be an advantage, particularly if it’s a book that’s difficult to read. And if you think about it, listening to a story long predates the written word. When we’re listening to an audiobook we’re really tapping into our ancestors sitting by the campfire, listening to a storyteller weave his magic.
The main disadvantage with audiobooks is that the feeling can be quite different. I don’t know if you’ve listened to a book you’ve read previously but it feels different. The reason is because the narrator is interpreting the story rather than you; he or she places the emphasis on certain words differently than you might, so it’s never exactly the same. And sometimes dialogue which sounds right on the page doesn’t seem believable when read aloud. That’s why personally I’ll always prefer the printed page; I just like the feel and smell of paper, hearing the words in my own voice. But that doesn’t mean that I think audiobooks aren’t the same, just that I get something different from them. Usually the kind of audiobooks I listen to are classics or thrillers, which are more visual anyway, and I listen to quite a few short stories as well. I listen to them the same way I’d read normal books: on my own, unwinding with a good story.
If you’re interested in audiobooks, they can be a bit pricey, but Audible is great; they give you discounts and the subscription works out to a half-price book each month. They’ve also just been bought by Amazon so there’s a chance the prices might drop. And there’s Lit2Go as well, a great service on iTunes. It provides free audiobooks for download and the narration is excellent. You don’t need an iPod, just iTunes, and it’s well worth checking out.
What do you think of audiobooks, though? Do you listen to them? Is listening really the same as reading or does it make the experience lesser? Would you listen to The Chopin Manuscript or other audio-only titles? Maybe you could try the sample over at Audible and let me know what you think.
I’ve been an audiobook listener (and audible subscriber) for years now — and your stance on their place in literature (not less than reading, just different from reading) pretty much mirrors my own. A good book read by a competent narrator can be every bit as rewarding as reading the print version…but it’s a different experience.
People who get hung up on that need to get over themselves, and in my experience, they’re generally the ones who are most likely to attempt to impress you with the lists of authors they’ve read — people who are more worried about what their tastes in reading say about them rather than to them.
The next time I mention audiobooks to someone and hear the old refrain of “whatsa matter? don’t know how to READ? yuk yuk yuk,” violence will most likely follow.
CJ: Hi Greg, thanks for the comment. Great to hear from another Audible subscriber! I agree that a good book that’s well narrated can be very rewarding; what you’re really getting is a performance and I still remember the feeling I got listening to The Iliad for the first time… I’ve read it many times since as well, so I guess I’ve covered it both ways.
In my experience people who have a problem with audiobooks don’t understand them; they think it’s replacing reading, but really an audiobook is meant to complement it. It’s just another way of experiencing the story and when I put it like that they seem to get it more, though I’ve still had some heated disagreements. In the end it’s a personal choice; if they can’t accept that, it says more about them than anyone else.
Thanks for stopping by.
i haven’t tried an audiobook before simply because it’s cheaper and easier to borrow the book and read. i’m a bit biased to that experience too, though i understand it’s a totally different one. reading this, i might be open to that experience, if someone has an audiobook i’d want to ‘read.’
hmm, maybe it’s good to listen to an audiobook. i’ve been wanting to improve my enunciation and develop an accent. i love my malaysian accent, but if i can develop a ‘caucasian-sounding’ one it could lead to good job opportunities in my country.
CJ: That’s the main problem with audiobooks, the price! I was just looking at The Kite Runner which is well over $25 US but you could buy the book for $9 US. If the prices were more competitive I’m sure more people would consider trying audiobooks… right now it’s mainly just people with disposable incomes or who don’t have the time to read.
You certainly pick up a lot from audiobooks, so it might be worth you trying one, sulz. Who knows, you might surprise yourself and really enjoy it!
Most libraries have a reasonable collection; that’d be a great place to start, or with short stories. They’d give you a sense of if it’s your kind of thing.
I’ve never listened to an audiobook. I really like the feel of a book in my hands. I also like being able to read sections I savor again and again. I think the transition might be a hard one for me but that doesn’t mean I won’t give listening a whirl.
CJ: Nothing really beats the feel and smell of a good book, does it? Sometimes I miss that while I’m listening, and being able to go back and reread a juicy twist… overall, though, the experience is so different. An audiobook is really like another version of the same story… something which complements a written book but isn’t exactly the same. I think that’s probably the best way I can describe it.
I remember Stephen King said something in his autobiography that he always has an audiobook playing when he drives or has a free minute; it’s just become normal for him and he listens in spurts, so perhaps that’s one way to get past the transition… hope you enjoy one if you ever give it a try; I’d be interested to know what you think.
I don’t think audiobooks are the “same” as reading, but an alternative. I have great difficulty listening to a lecture, story, or discussion if I’m just sitting still listening, whereas I can get totally pulled in by a written book, and lose touch with my surroundings. I think this kind of experience is partially because of the way our brains are structured. A reason could be left-brain or right-brain dominance, or preference for auditory, visual, or tactile learning styles. There is some research indicating many people take in information “best” using one of those three “information inputs” if you will.
Obviously a primarily auditory-type-learning individual will love audiobooks, and will thrive by recording lectures and playing them back.
A printed book serves primarily visual people (although we’ve all been trained to use them somewhat) with a little tactile thrown in. If one is primarily tactile, s/he will feel deprived with an audiobook.
A while back, I had a fairly routine desk job, and at the time there was a radio show which broadcast an hour of a skilled reader reading from a novel each day. It was like a magazine serial–you had to tune in every weekday at 3 to get the next chapter or “chunk of book”. This was ideal for me, because I could “read” a novel while simultaneously getting the job done. It was even better than listening to music while working, in my case—gave me more focus.
I think my favorite book I “heard/read” this way was one of Jeffrey Archer’s. I agree with you that it would be difficult to “hear” a book after “reading” it. This reader “audiated” Archer’s characters very specifically, and I would have heard the “voices” in my own head differently if reading.
Audiobooks are of course also a huge help for blind people. For most of them they are a vast improvement over Braille books. I wonder though, if a blind person is a tactile learner if they’d prefer the Braille, though.
Good topic, cj, I’ll check out Audible.
CJ: An alternative’s a good way of looking at it, Muse. Like another version with a slightly different experience… interesting, though, because I’m the exact opposite in that I don’t like doing anything else while I’m listening; I just like sitting somewhere quiet and letting the story wash over me. It’s not why most people listen to audiobooks, but I guess my brain just doesn’t work that way.
That makes sense about our reading habits relating to whether we’re an auditory, visual or tactile learner… I wonder what that makes exceptions, though? If you enjoy reading a book as well as listening to one, just in different ways, does that mean you’re visually and auditorally balanced? Or maybe you always have some preference; if I had to choose I’d still prefer reading the book, in the end.
The radio show sounds like it was a great idea… Archer would be an interesting author for that as his writing is quite visual, so I can see how it would narrate well. It’s the sort of thing you’d think would be done more often, actually, particularly on community radio. It would be a good service for blind people and people with learning disabilities… I couldn’t imagine trying to read with their kind of difficulties.
Thanks, Muse. Audible’s well worth a look; who knows, you might find something you like.
Great post CJ I know that a lot of quilters and craftspersons swear by them as it can be hard to do handicraft while watching the TV. I’ve also heard a lot of quilters say they listen to an audio book while on the sewing machine for hours. I can’t read and do other things[though when I was young I used to wash up apparently with my book propped on the taps] so it appeals to me as otherwise my reading these days takes a backseat to sewing.
The other thing is that as I get older and the old arthritis gets a hold, I even find it hard to hold books these days due to their weight and the so I may give this a try, that is if I can hear the damn thing. [apparently I am going deaf too!!!!!!!]
CJ: Thanks, MQ! I imagine listening to an audiobook (or music) makes a lot of sense when you’re quilting, as something to fill up the room and help you focus… the sewing machine’s an interesting one though. Wouldn’t it be so loud that you wouldn’t be able to hear the audio?
As long as they’re unabridged then I think audiobooks are a great way to go… it’s a different experience, but you’re still getting the story. I think it would be great for thrillers and crime books in particular as their pace is ideal for narration. And you’re not deaf, btw. Just auditorally-challenged.
I have never tried an audio book. And I don’t think I will anytime soon. However, the audio book is like a modern take on ancient oral storytelling traditions. After all, speech was the medium of storytelling long before the written word took over.
Ok you wrote that in the post too but whatever. I missed that bit when I first read the post.
CJ: I actually didn’t try audiobooks myself for a long time; it wasn’t until I was near the end of school and had so much work that I realised they might be worth a try. Even then they took a while to get used to… so you never know, Bharat, one day you might try one and find it grows on you!
And it was a good point to bring up. I wish I’d developed it more in the post, actually, as I find that kind of thing very interesting… ah well, next time.
I have three comments: First, it’s important to think of an audiobook as a performance, an experience that is different from simply reading. While you lose something from the experience of seeing the words on the page, you gain something from the narrator’s expressive reading of those words. Great readers can make a mediocre book quite enjoyable (e.g., The Da Vinci Code
).
Two, and related, one’s not inherently “better” than the other. As CJ writes, our original storytelling was all oral. Another way to think of it is reading Shakespeare vs. seeing it performed. I defy anyone to say that one should only read it. Even just listening to a great performance brings something that the printed page simply cannot provide. (Of course, Shakespeare wrote plays, not novels, but it’s worth noting.)
Last, as Magik points out, you can listen to audiobooks in contexts where you simply cannot read. For me, it’s while commuting. This is time that is otherwise dead, useless, and audiobooks not only fill the time, they distract and entertain from an otherwise soul-sucking experience.
I wish that I had the time to read, like I did when I was younger. I can’t even manage to watch 2 hours of TV a week, though, so I’m pretty sure my available time is really gone. Finding that dead time, and making use of it, is like a gift of a few extra hours a day, that aren’t allocated to somebody else’s agenda. In that way, audiobooks are better than reading.
CJ: That’s a great way of looking at it, a performance. I’ve been thinking that an audiobook really complements the written form, the same story but a slightly different experience… if you think of it almost like an adaptation, then why it can feel different makes a lot of sense.
I often watch people on the bus or train when I’m on my way into the city; some read a newspaper or a book, but a lot listen to an iPod. I’ve always thought they’re listening to music but I wonder how many are actually listening to an audiobook? It’s a great way to kill time while commuting, so perhaps more than we’d think.
I tend to listen to a lot of classics as audiobooks. They’re a bit cheaper and I find that they seem to have dated less when you hear them narrated; like you said, they feel like more of a performance and while I’m not sure they’re better than reading, personally I prefer listening to them. I guess it’s personal choice, in the end. Thanks for stopping by.
Um CJ I meant to say they use Walkmans or the present day equivalent, something with headphones. Maybe I should try that.
CJ: Ah, headphones make sense. I should have realised, LOL.
They’d be good for you, particularly if you can find some which can cancel out noise as well. Then you’d have no distractions.
I think Audiobooks can be the same as reading simply because of how they both put images in your head while listening or reading. BUT I don’t think Audiobooks are for everyone. Especially people like me. Some people have trouble reading which is why an audio book could be good for them. I would not benefit from an audiobook simply because my mind would drift waaay too much from listening to the reader and I would probably end up reading it anyway to get what I missed.
You always write nice things
CJ: Thanks, Dya. That’s a good point; they’re both telling the same story, so the images they’re putting in your head (whether listening or reading) are similar. I have several books in audio as well and they give me a slightly different image; one I “see” because it’s being described to me, the other I “sense” because I’m creating it in my mind. But it’s more a feeling and the scene is the same, so really they’re much the same, in the end.
The thing with an audiobook is that you tend to absorb what’s going on in the story; you can drift away from it more easily than reading without losing your place. That’s why people can multitask while they’re listening. But you’re right, they’re definitely not for everyone; some people find them relaxing, others boring as hell! I think a good narrator makes a difference; then you’re listening to Ian McKellen or Alfred Molina tell a story, rather than someone just reading a book. Unless of course you just go see them in the movie instead.
I prefer reading books to listening to audiobooks, but I agree that they’re very different experiences. I find that I take in more of what is said in an audiobook - it seems to sink in better.
I know what you mean about reader’s interpretations, but the only problem which I have with audiobooks is that they very much depend on the quality of the reader. My mum recently bought a copy of the Penguin Classics audio collection (which turned out to be abridged). Most of the books are all right, but the reading of Pride & Prejudice is rather irritating and off-putting, like an overly-condescending children’s story.
I’m quite fond of Stephen Fry’s readings of the Harry Potter novels, which are very well read. The only real problem with them is his tendancy to give certain characters (Susan Bones and Pansy Parkinson, if I remember correctly) unconvincing, exaggerated speech impediments that aren’t in the books. I don’t know why he does that, but it’s very annoying! o_o
CJ: For certain books I find that as well. Reading Tom Clancy is quite difficult sometimes, but I find I absorb it more through an audiobook… maybe it’s something to do with how we process information through different senses?
I’ve tried a few of those Penguin Classics. Some are okay but quite a few aren’t that great, so I’m not surprised about Pride & Prejudice. You just feel like the narrator is reading, not telling a story… some of those classics are on Lit2Go and they’re actually better! Who’d have thunk it?
Haven’t heard any of the Harry Potter ones, though… I’ll have to check them out, I love Stephen Fry. I’m not sure why he’d give them impediments like that, though… I guess JK Rowling must be okay with it. I wouldn’t want to be messing with her characters otherwise.
Audio books are here to stay . I am in love with them . Not only its interesting to hear voices , you can enjoy them while moving. I hear audio books all the time in my car . One of my friend is so crazy about audio books . He takes long routes to get back to his home . You can find some cheaper audio book library online .
CJ: I agree, I’ve been really impressed with audiobooks. What’s surprised me is that the books I’ve wanted to read for years but haven’t been able to find are available; I just bought PD James’ first novel unabridged and I’ve never seen it to buy as a book. I’ll have to have a look at some of the other services; Gutenberg’s another good one too. Thanks for stopping by.