• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

Are books on tape still considered reading?

Banocanut

Banocanut

New Member
I have a light hearted question and I am curious how readers feel about it. I am starting to listen to books on tape for my daily hour commute, but when someone asks me the question have you ever read "insert title here" how am I to respond? Sure I listened to the whole story, but without actually reading it.

Do you snub your nose at someone who listened to a book rather than put in all the labor straining your eyes?
 
Audio Books

I agree with Sparky. I just started listening to audio books to entertain me for my hometown visits. If someone asked me if I've read Under the Dome (the audio book I'm listening to now), I'll probably just say yes.
 
I don't snub anyone who reads anything,but I think it should be called *listening* tsk tsk
 
To read or listen, to me the same thing. My friend only listens as he is unable to read anymore due to a vision problem.

On long bus trips I play my walkman with tapes from my local library, it is easier than trying to juggle a book.
 
I don't snub my nose at anyone who listens to audio books. However, I wouldn't classify it as reading. Any audio books I have listened to I don't mark the corresponding literature as "READ".
When you're listening to an audio book you're just listening to a story, just as you would listen to your friend or family member tell you a story about an event that happened to them.
 
I also don't consider audiobooks "reading", but they've helped many a roadtrip pass pleasantly.

I find that some books that I had trouble finishing (The Hobbit, for example), I am able to "complete" in audio format.
 
I definitely think listening to audio stories is reading. You are still exposed to a narrative, plot, characters just the way you are when reading with your own eyes. The images that form in your mind are the same as the images that would be formed if reading. The only difference is that the story is told to you, therefore there's an addtional influence, if you like, between you and the author. This means you can argue that the story would be perceived as different to how it may have been if you had read it yourself, but I don't think you can describe listening to an audio story as not reading. You probably wouldn't go and pick up a book you've already listened to on audio (unless you wanted to re-read it) as you would know what happened already, and so speaking, have already read it.
 
Listening and reading require entirely different skills and provide very different experiences. I enjoy audio books, but I would never choose listening over reading.
 
Well if you are talking about the proper use of the language then I'll probably vote for "listening". But why be so stiff about it.

The exact words are coming to you anyway, weather you're listening to someone reading or if you read the lines as well... I'd say "yes" if someone asked me if I had read a book (even though I listened on the tape).

Audio books are nothing that I, personally, enjoy. I find it hard to listen to someone else's voice reading the book. I need my own inner voice when I read.

Although I know people who does not have the fortune of being able to use their eyes or hands, they get this fantastic opportunity to know a book anyway. This is probably one of the greatest inventions ever! :)
 
I too would never choose listening over reading myself as I also need to hear my own inner voice. However, it was exactly the less fortunate who are unable to read that I was thinking about in comparing the two. My grandfather lost his sight many years ago and was an avid reader, so I'm always on the look out for audio stories for him.

I don't think using different skills or senses make a difference. Your perception is still the same. For example, if you hear or read "the cat sat on the mat", every single person reading or hearing that would have their entire own interpretation of that line. For me, if I read or heard it I would imagine a cat that has been in my family. I would imagine a mat that may be by the back door. Because I would visualise the same thing upon either reading or hearing this, I think it's both one and the same.
 
eh, you get the same information out of the source, so I count it as the same. Doesn't really matter if I am reading the words or if someone else is as long as I am getting the information into my mind. That said, I'm way too cheap/poor to buy audio books haha.
 
Just from a historical point of view - the idea of written literature is fairly new, isn't it? Most "reading" was done by ear before the 19th century or so (because books weren't widely available, because people weren't literate, because people didn't have radios and had to do something on long winter evenings), and in many parts of the world it still is. Does that mean nobody read books before then?
 
Some stories are better heard by audiotape. For example, I struggled reading Sense, sensibility, and sea monsters b/c reading Jane Austen style writing is tough. On the other hand, I heard Pride, Prejudice, and Zombies Dawn of the dreadfuls and was getting cramps from laughing so hard. Same style story but to hear it made all the difference.

So, audio cds... I still count as reading.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top