I’ve ‘read’ a few books in audio format now, and I’m not sure if they are as good as reading the old-fashioned way. The problem I’m having is that it’s much more difficult to focus when you’re listening to a book as opposed to reading it. Without the text in front of me, I start thinking about a bunch of other things and lose track of the storyline completely.
If I don’t process a line when I’m reading, I can go back one line and re-read it. If I don’t process something from a CD, I have to go back to the very beginning of the chapter and listen all over again.
Audiobooks save you a lot of time, there’s no question about that. But I don’t think you get as much out of it, especially if you only listen once. Do you agree?
Audio books vary in quality depending on the reader. When I was in grad school I did a lot of temp work - stuffing envelopes and other mind-numbing tasks - and used to get audiobooks from the library to listen while working. Some were really good and others were awful. Some readers completely misread dialog, misplacing emphasis and tone and really ruining the whole experience for me.
YMMV
I think they’re great when driving. Otherwise I prefer the reading experience because when I listen to somebody the person’s voice alters the way I picture the story in my head.
I have trouble following audio books for the same reasons you do Surreal I need the words to keep my mind focused, and to pause to understand what I have read before moving on. I tried Hawkin’s “Brief History of Time” on tape, it didn’t work so well. Kid was it you that had the thread last week about Guns Germs & Steel on tape? Did you keep going?
The only audiobooks I have heard have been Stephen King’s Dark Tower series. The first three were read by ole Stevie himself. His voice leans towrds the nasal at times, but I feel he did a pretty good job. The fourth was done by Frank Muller. Unfortuantely, (especially for Muller) he was in a horrifying motorcycle accident last year and is still a long way from a full recovery. He had done quite a lot of these books and the doctors are playing them for him in hopes it will help him regain his ability to speak.
I think they’re fantastic, if there’s a good performer reading them. I think a lot of Stephen King novels read better in audio than in print, and I know that King thinks the format is important- the main character in ‘Rose Madder’ is even an audiobook reader.
There’s a fantastic version of ‘The Screwtape Letters’ read by John Cleese that is not to be missed.
I love them. I have a long commute, and books on tape really makes use of the time. In addition, I find that I “hear” a book differently than I “read” it. I hear things tha I miss when I read, and vice-versa. In addition, some books are actually better when read – epics like *The Iliad and The Odyssey, The Epic of Gilgamesh, Beowulf. In addition, The Handmaid’s Tale is interesting on tape, because the premise of the book holds that it as ecorded over other things on series of cassettes.
Some history and biographical tapes take advantage of the medium to use actual recordings – David McCullough’s bio of [BTruman** includes recordings of speeches, and uses a recording of Truman playing the piano as background for the closing credits.
Stephen King’s The Mist was recrded in “3D” sound, which makes difference.
As others have noted, the reader makes a difference, too. Thre different people, to my knowledge, have recorded Rumpole mysteries, but the ones recorded by Leo McKern are the best. Several guys have done Nero Wolfe, as well. John Lithgow is priceless recording The Bonfire of the Vanities, although his version is abridged. Sometimes the author him/hersef records the work. Stephen King does a good job, as does McCullough.
On the other hand, some people shouldn’t record their own work. John McPhee sounds ike someone who is recording words he has never seen befoe. Ernest Hemingway is tough to listen to. And th absolute worst I’ve heard is T.S. Eliot – he sounds like a cold and soulless robot reading his poetry.
For me, reading is a very sensory experience. I take in the paper weight, texture, and color; the type font and page layout and design; the smell even, especially of old musty books. I enjoy holding the book in my hands, running my eyes across the page, rereading particularly delightful passages. I study the art and ponder how it was created. I giggle at the typos.
Is it clear that I don’t care much for books on tape?
I’ve gone through phases where I’ll get a bunch of audiobooks out of the library (especially if I’m going to be working on a pencil portrait or some other project that takes a while). I have some tapes of James Herriott reading his own works (love his voice) and now I cannot stand to listen to his stories read by anyone else. Ditto Peter Mayle reading A Year in Provence. It was just so funny and so well done. I must have gottten that one out of the library four or five time. Later I got Toujours Provence, brought it home and discovered that it wasn’t read by the author. I didn’t even finish listening to it, I was so disappointed!
I get a kick out of Michael Beck reading Grisham. He does a great job with the voices.
A good reading or bad reading can make all the difrence in the world
this gose for any thing you are have read to you
Ps
that’s kinda of why i think poetry is kinda snubed by the mass of americans becuse we don’t realize that poems are meant to be read allowed and i have to say that when it is read well Poetry is very moving