If I don't have as much time to read, but I listen to audio books, can that be as beneficial as reading? My spare time is spent writing, and the grammar and style I can do. It's not like I never read anything, but I am mostly in the car and can listen.
-
Basic Writing questions is not a crit forum. All crits belong in Share Your Work
Can listening to audio books help make up the time you can't spend to read?
- Thread starter LearningTwoWrite
- Start date
I am a big, big, big audiobook listener. About 80-90% of my reading comes in audiobook form. This is partly because I don't have a lot of time for eyeball-book reading; often in the evenings after work my eyes are more tired than my body, so I can close my eyes and listen to a book, during a time when other people might be reading with their eyes. It's also because I can listen while I do things that would not permit me to read - driving to and from work, doing kitchen chores, running.
I can listen as analytically as a I read; I can think about style and technique and structure as I listen to an audiobook just as I would while reading a book. Oftentimes I'll listen to passages (or even to a whole book) more than once, when there's more I want to learn from it, just as one might reread passages of a book for closer study.
I have encountered snooty folks who insist that reading an audiobook doesn't "count" or is somehow lesser than reading a book with one's eyes. I find this sentiment absurd (not to mention ableist). But even if it WERE true, I'm still better off having listening to hundreds of books in the past several years than I would be not having read them at all, which is what would have happened had I adopted such a purist stance against audiobooks.
I know that not everyone's experiences with audiobooks are great - some people will surely pop up and tell you that they find them hard to listen to and follow. That's a legitimate variation on the experience and I wouldn't tell those folks they were wrong. But if you aren't one of those people - if you do not find audiobooks hard to listen to - then by all means reap their benefits. Even if it's not "as beneficial as reading" -- and again, I don't subscribe to that -- it's surely better than not reading at all.
I can listen as analytically as a I read; I can think about style and technique and structure as I listen to an audiobook just as I would while reading a book. Oftentimes I'll listen to passages (or even to a whole book) more than once, when there's more I want to learn from it, just as one might reread passages of a book for closer study.
I have encountered snooty folks who insist that reading an audiobook doesn't "count" or is somehow lesser than reading a book with one's eyes. I find this sentiment absurd (not to mention ableist). But even if it WERE true, I'm still better off having listening to hundreds of books in the past several years than I would be not having read them at all, which is what would have happened had I adopted such a purist stance against audiobooks.
I know that not everyone's experiences with audiobooks are great - some people will surely pop up and tell you that they find them hard to listen to and follow. That's a legitimate variation on the experience and I wouldn't tell those folks they were wrong. But if you aren't one of those people - if you do not find audiobooks hard to listen to - then by all means reap their benefits. Even if it's not "as beneficial as reading" -- and again, I don't subscribe to that -- it's surely better than not reading at all.
i enjoy audiobooks. but it is a lot different for me than reading and 'hearing' the unspoken words of the writer of them. i do find it helpful to read my stuff aloud. helpful in that...i realize it is not quite audiobook material yet!
I prefer reading to listening. However, if I'm driving, or on the treadmill, reading is contraindicated. In those and similar cases, I'm fine with audio books. I'm currently listening to "Writing Great Fiction" from The Great Courses on Audible.
Some people aren't able to use their eyeballs/brains the same way others do, for varied reasons, and that IS how they read.
And yes, you can absolutely enjoy audiobooks while you do other activities.
I notice different things in audiobooks than when I read printed or ebooks. If an author has a tick, it will stand out to me more in audiobooks. If the pacing is dragging, I'll really feel it in the audiobook, since I can't just skim for the next interesting part. But I'll also be more likely to think about choices an author made because it's easier for me to multitask while listening than while reading.
One issue might be if the audio book is not the same unabridged version.
Audio books are long. They are normally read at 150–160 words per minute, which means a 100Kword novel would require 11 hours to hear. The Lord of the Rings would take over 53 hours as an audio book.
My recollection is that people read (when not skimming) at about 500 words per minute. I checked myself here just now:
https://www.staples.com/sbd/cre/mar...rch-centers/ereaders/speed-reader/iframe.html
and it showed 650 with verified comprehension. Its graph showed that people vary in reading speed by a considerable amount, not reaching adult speeds until age 19, but college students are much higher, etc. I suppose it’s largely practice.
Since some audiobooks I see are noted as being “complete, unabridged text” I surmise that many are not. Look at the length in hours, or the number of CDs it requires, to get a feel for whether it could be unabridged.
Is it as beneficial? How about instead asking if it can be beneficial in its own way? On a long driving trip, having things to listen to was very good. Otherwise I would have gotten bored. If you are spending an hour walking/running, listening to something is a win because you would not have been reading anyway — you gained an extra hour, or eqiv. or 20 minutes reading time that you would have lost.
For non-fiction learning, you might find listening is better for you than visual reading for some subjects; or doing both is synergistic.
Audio books are long. They are normally read at 150–160 words per minute, which means a 100Kword novel would require 11 hours to hear. The Lord of the Rings would take over 53 hours as an audio book.
My recollection is that people read (when not skimming) at about 500 words per minute. I checked myself here just now:
https://www.staples.com/sbd/cre/mar...rch-centers/ereaders/speed-reader/iframe.html
and it showed 650 with verified comprehension. Its graph showed that people vary in reading speed by a considerable amount, not reaching adult speeds until age 19, but college students are much higher, etc. I suppose it’s largely practice.
Since some audiobooks I see are noted as being “complete, unabridged text” I surmise that many are not. Look at the length in hours, or the number of CDs it requires, to get a feel for whether it could be unabridged.
Is it as beneficial? How about instead asking if it can be beneficial in its own way? On a long driving trip, having things to listen to was very good. Otherwise I would have gotten bored. If you are spending an hour walking/running, listening to something is a win because you would not have been reading anyway — you gained an extra hour, or eqiv. or 20 minutes reading time that you would have lost.
For non-fiction learning, you might find listening is better for you than visual reading for some subjects; or doing both is synergistic.
I listen to audio books during commute time quite a bit. I find the pacing to be too slow generally, so I play most books at 1.25 or 1.5x speed. Perfect at that pace, and I enjoy them.
Audio books in the car, reading in the house. I love both. Sometimes I get both because I'm almost done with the audio book but can't wait until I'm in the car again to finish the story. The library makes it affordable for me.
Last edited:
I love long audiobooks. Some of my favorites are 25 or 30 hours long. I get wistful when they are coming to an end!
Wow, there is no way on earth I could read 500 words per minute! I took that test you linked to and I got 250, and I wasn't completely sure of the answers to one of the verification questions. And that was a very short passage. On a longer passage (or a more complex one) I would almost certainly be slower. I have thought before that I am a relatively slow reader. And it's not for want of practice, for sure. It's just the way my mind works, I guess.
A reputable audiobook publisher labels clearly whether what you are getting is unabridged, abridged, or a dramatization. You just have to pay a modicum of attention to what you are buying (or renting or checking out of the library).
^^This!! Except for the notion that the hour is only worth 20 minutes' reading. As I said above, I don't think that's true for me.
I used to listen to audiobooks while going to and from work. SF Bay Area, I had lots of time to make use of.
If it's unclear from the description whether an audiobook is abridged or not, the length of the recording is a pretty reliable guide. An unabridged audiobook of a novel of average length will typically run about 7-8 hours. Longer books can be much longer - the unabridged Count of Monte Cristo (a magnificent novel, beautifully read by John Lee) is 52 hrs. Abridged audiobooks, otoh, are usually closer to 4 hour, maybe 6 for a very big one.
When I had a long commute I consumed audiobooks voraciously. They're an excellent way to make good use of drive time! Also very good at the gym, out walking, at home while knitting or crafting, pretty much any time that your hands or eyes are not available for reading a book. It's a somewhat different experience than reading -- for one thing, you can't flip forward or backward easily but have to stick to the linear flow, and you can't skip ahead or skim things. As a writer-in-training you may find this beneficial, because it forces you to experience every word and phrase and scene as the author wrote it, and to deal with their structure and pacing. (Those 52 hrs of The Count of Monte Cristo move very very quickly!)
One other way an audiobook is different from a print book -- it's not just you and the author constructing the text, the reader is also an active partner in the magic. And there's a lot of variation in the quality of audiobook readers. Some, to be blunt, are much better than others. Everyone who listens to a bunch of audiobooks quickly identifies things they particularly like or dislike in a reader, & has their favorites. (I myself would listen to Simon Vance or David Tennant read laundry lists with pleasure.)
(Audiobook readers fall into 2 main categories that I call "reading" and "performance." A "reading" reader just reads the words, the way you or I or the kid next door would read it. What you hear is a text read by a person. A "performance" reader takes a more dramatic approach and creates different voices for the characters and narrators, so what you hear is more like a movie for your ears. Either style of reader can be good or bad, depending on their skill and your taste.)
When I had a long commute I consumed audiobooks voraciously. They're an excellent way to make good use of drive time! Also very good at the gym, out walking, at home while knitting or crafting, pretty much any time that your hands or eyes are not available for reading a book. It's a somewhat different experience than reading -- for one thing, you can't flip forward or backward easily but have to stick to the linear flow, and you can't skip ahead or skim things. As a writer-in-training you may find this beneficial, because it forces you to experience every word and phrase and scene as the author wrote it, and to deal with their structure and pacing. (Those 52 hrs of The Count of Monte Cristo move very very quickly!)
One other way an audiobook is different from a print book -- it's not just you and the author constructing the text, the reader is also an active partner in the magic. And there's a lot of variation in the quality of audiobook readers. Some, to be blunt, are much better than others. Everyone who listens to a bunch of audiobooks quickly identifies things they particularly like or dislike in a reader, & has their favorites. (I myself would listen to Simon Vance or David Tennant read laundry lists with pleasure.)
(Audiobook readers fall into 2 main categories that I call "reading" and "performance." A "reading" reader just reads the words, the way you or I or the kid next door would read it. What you hear is a text read by a person. A "performance" reader takes a more dramatic approach and creates different voices for the characters and narrators, so what you hear is more like a movie for your ears. Either style of reader can be good or bad, depending on their skill and your taste.)
I envy you people who can drive and listen to audiobooks at the same time. I tried to do that, but as soon as anything happens on the road that requires my attention, I've lost the story, so it's just a frustrating experience.
My grandmother (from whom I probably inherited my bookworm tendencies) was very grateful for audiobooks in the last decade of her life, when she lost her eyesight to diabetes.
My grandmother (from whom I probably inherited my bookworm tendencies) was very grateful for audiobooks in the last decade of her life, when she lost her eyesight to diabetes.
I have read 36 books so far this year. All of them Audiobook format. I can't read more than a page or two at a time without dozing off, and since I spend about 4 hours a day in my car, I get through audiobooks fairly quickly.