Comments on: What is Reading? and Audiobook Review of The Book Thief

By: Eva

Eva — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 00:24:28 +0000

Thanks for letting me know! I’m a non-science person too, so I’ll have to check this out.

By: Rebecca Reid

Rebecca Reid — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 00:04:43 +0000

@Eva: I am very much enjoying Discoverers–I’m reading it aloud with my husband and we make very slow progress, so I anticipate we’ll enjoy reading it for many more months. It seems more like history and social development than hard core “science” thus far so it’s very approachable for a non-science person like myself.

@Jessica: it’s hard to think of reading as not “processing” something …

@BooksPlease: I think reading a book with a particular type face, chapter headings, etc. makes a difference like an audiobook reader could in terms of making memories of the book. Silly example, but I read Harry Potter 1-6 in the US from the US version. I read the last one here in Australia from the UK version. The book is a difference size and the format/font, etc are different. It felt like a different type of experience….

By: BooksPlease

BooksPlease — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 08:41:49 +0000

I like your definitions.

I’ve only listened to a few audiobooks. If I don’t like the reader’s voice I do find it difficult to overcome being distracted by that - but usually I’ve got used to it. One audiobook I listened to was “Simisola” by Ruth Rendell a mystery that I’d seen on TV - I hadn’t read the book. The audiobook was read by George Baker who played Inspector Wexford in the TV version. It was so funny because he did all the voices, but he did it very well and I enjoyed listening even though I knew the outcome.

I haven’t read your full review on The Book Thief as I’ve only just started to read the book, but I was very interested to read how listening to the audiobook was an experience, not just reading. It’s impossible for me having seen a dramatisation or listened to an audiobook not to visualise or hear the reader’s voice - I completely agree that this changes my version of the book forever, which is why if I’ve loved a book I don’t want to see a film version.

By: Jessica

Jessica — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 04:30:43 +0000

I love your definition of reading as anything that increases literacy and understanding. I completely agree. (I also appreciated your thoughts on The Book Thief. I LOVED that book!)

By: Eva

Eva — Sat, 31 May 2008 13:56:47 +0000

I just noticed that you’re reading The Discoverers: are you enjoying it? It’s on my list of possibles for the science book challenge, but I haven’t come across any book bloggers who have read it.

By: Rebecca Reid

Rebecca Reid — Sat, 31 May 2008 09:45:14 +0000

@Ann Darnton: When I was in some political science classes in college, I went through a political cartoon kick where I “read” dozens a day. I’ve since become bored by it, but I certainly they are a form of reading. Thanks for sharing. That is so interesting that it’s actually be studied!

By: Ann Darnton

Ann Darnton — Sat, 31 May 2008 08:13:42 +0000

What you say about the cartoon is interesting. I did some research some years a go that suggested that in many instances a cartoon was either the climax or denouement of a story and that if you couldn’t reconstruct the rest of the story in your mind you didn’t see what was funny about it. The best part of that was that it was research suggested by a group of ten year olds who had intuited the fact for themselves.

By: Rebecca Reid

Rebecca Reid — Sat, 31 May 2008 03:27:07 +0000

@ndixon: I think that’s why I usually listen to nonfiction rather than fiction via audio because it’s easier to listen to sometimes. But a good reader makes the difference! @Chris: I see a huge difference between movies and audiobooks too. Audiobooks still are the author’s words, simply being read aloud. I have to internalize them and connect them to make meanings. I guess we could consider movies as abridgments: the movie makers are putting their own visual interpretation to words and taking out the things they don’t consider necessary. Thanks for your comments!

By: Chris

Chris — Sat, 31 May 2008 02:30:42 +0000

Since the author’s words are being read, then I think it counts. It’s not like a film version. That’s why I hate abridgements. It’s not the author’s words but an edited version. I don’t like that.

By: ndixon

ndixon — Fri, 30 May 2008 09:05:11 +0000

I am currently publishing my novel as audiobook in weekly episodes (prior to the print version) and strongly believe this growing and evolving format is providing a valuable and real alternative form of experiencing a book. Audio brings stories to people who have got out of the habit of reading and as a media creator, I am very enthusiastic about the format.
However, I personally find audiobooks for the most part difficult to absorb. I find by only having sound that my concentration drifts while I want to give the words as much focus as they deserve. Having so many audiobooks released as abridged versions of the original text is also a negative for me, and very rarely will I dip into an abridged recording.

By: John Alwyine-Mosely

John Alwyine-Mosely — Fri, 30 May 2008 05:35:12 +0000

Interesting reflections