Lydia Conwell

Actually, I have some questions about #AudioBooks

You can't say you've read the book, but having read a book is a common phrase that people understand. 'I've read that book.'

While 'I've listened to that on audio book' is accurate, it doesn't have the conciseness of 'I've read that book'.

Do you think there needs to be a new phrase to describe the act of listening to an audio book?

Like: 'I've audio-read that book.' or 'I've audioed that book'.

Audio-read sounds OK, I think.

#AudioRead #Reading #Books

Apr 3 at 7:08amWeb
Show threadDenny1d ago

@lydiaconwell "I've heard the book" is true, but will sound a bit weird until it gets used more I guess 🙂

I flip between "I'm listening to" and "I'm reading" depending on whether I think anybody really cares, but my personal bias towards clarity means I say "listening to" much more often currently.

I have a friend who is a published author, and she refers to listening to her (professionally narrated) audiobooks as reading them, in her blogposts etc.

(The series I'm currently listening to (The Dresden Files) is read by James Marsters, which was an unexpected bonus when I grabbed the first one.)

Show threadLydia Conwell1d ago
@denny I've not read many audiobooks. I do like reading books myself, but I imagine some books improve with a good narrator.
Show threadroboticus lastius (not a bot)1d ago
@lydiaconwell When two people travel by car to A, we say they drove to A. We don't get caught up in the fact the one person technically held the wheel while the other was passenger. We say they drove. They both went through the motion, were in the vehicle, travelled from A to B through driving.
That's how I consider reading. Sometimes I read a physical book and travel through the pages by myself. Sometimes I benefit from a narrator as I travel that book. In both cases I say I read the book.
Show threadLydia Conwell1d ago

@lastrobot I'd feel like I was deceiving a little if I said I read a book when I'd listened to it being read.

But I could tell people I devoured the book. Or ingested it. That could work.

Show threadroboticus lastius (not a bot)1d ago
@lydiaconwell How curious. You clearly are not technically devouring the book. Is that not also deceiving? Or do some words get a pass?
Show threadLydia Conwell1d ago
@lastrobot Well, I think if the metaphor is more clear, people would be less fooled.
Show threadroboticus lastius (not a bot)1d ago
@lydiaconwell I don't think I really get why the concept of 'fooling' is so present and important in this. Is there some big 'fooling people about reading' thing going on? I'm at a loss why such considerations are material.
For me I like talking to people about books they've read, no matter how they read them. I expect someday I won't be able to read physical books myself. It would sadden me to think that folks would judge me a liar if I used the word 'read' for audiobooks.
Show threadDThoris1d ago
@lydiaconwell Do you not call it reading if the reader uses braille? Would they have to say, "I felt that book"? I think forcing the use of a different verb for listening to an audiobook is exclusionary. Regardless of the way you take in the words and ideas of a book, it should just be called reading for ease of reference.
Show threadSpace Catitude 🚀1d ago
@lydiaconwell
I think that, unless you are conveying exact information about how you consume literature, like "I read the Project Gutenberg e-book of 'Dracula' on my phone", rather than simply "I have experienced that work", then "I read" is just fine.
Show threadJim Bowering1d ago
@lydiaconwell "Read" is fine.