THE AUDIOBOOK CONTROVERSY (AGAIN)
I wrote an article some time ago in which I detailed my first experiences with audiobooks after I’d started using them when I had a period of eye strain. In addressing that enduring question regarding the worth of audiobooks compared to their physical counterparts, my conclusions were that yes, given a good voice actor and undiverted attention, they are just as rewarding as reading a traditional book.
A couple of years on, and I find that my views have changed somewhat. I’ve continued using audiobooks occasionally, averaging two or three a year, again when I need a break from extensive use of my peepers. However, I’ve learned not to choose anything ‘important,’ anything I would want an actual physical copy of. In fact I regret two major works I listened to that in hindsight I would much rather have read in book form. Why? It’s just that for me at least, engagement is just so much greater when reading rather than listening.
And that brings us back to the issue that apparently provokes such strong reactions on social media, namely the nonsensical question : do audiobooks count as reading?
It’s nonsensical because by its very definition it isn’t reading - it’s listening - which is a completely different thing. What people really mean is whether it is as valid as reading. The answer is yes, but with caveats - I still contend that audiobooks are a perfectly fine way to consume literature - there’s no doubt about that. However, although both listening and reading require the brain to process the incoming signals, the level of engagement is much more variable in listening. When you read a book, you are actively engaged, and although your mind can wander, you can’t multitask - it’s very hard to read a book while doing the dishes or taking the dog for a walk. With listening, it can be anywhere from you lying down with your eyes closed, fully immersed, to merely having it on in the background while you do any number of other tasks requiring different levels of attention. Even the most mundane and automatic tasks like washing the dishes distract you to a certain extent.
As far as I can tell, people generally don’t give audiobooks thier full attention the way they would a book. I’m not criticising here - I don’t either, usually. I use them the same way I use podcasts or the radio - listening when I’m doing something else, usually something menial like household chores or even playing the guitar. I’m not fully engaged, and that’s why I choose less important works for my listening so that I’m not to bothered if I’m not taking it all in.
I’m sure the attraction of audiobooks for most people is precisely that, even if they don’t want to admit it - something you can do in a half-arsed way without properly engaging. Many people site time constraints for preferring audiobooks over actual reading, which is symptomatic of modern life, but there’s also a large measure of laziness, the desire to get something with minimal or no effort. I think there’s a big difference between killing time with an audiobook on a long tedious commute or a run, which is great time management, as opposed to just having it on in the background at home while you’re swiping on your phone, or as something to fall asleep to - well, that’s a suboptimal and inefficient way to engage with the material in my opinion.
The lazy “something for nothing” mentality seems to particularly appeal to those people in the book sphere on social media, where the insane competitiveness leads people to seek out easy ways they can claim to have ‘read’ a book, to add it to their tally. Audiobooks are perfect for that - “oh look, here’s a short story I can consume in the background in an hour - a story that in print would have been part of a larger collection, but here I can claim it as ‘a book.’ Hey, I can have these things burbling away in the background and I don’t even have to really listen!”
In the end it’s up to you how you consume literature, and it’s nobody else’s business. I can only say that from my own experience audiobooks are worthwhile, and I use them, but they offer a less direct and meaningful interaction with the material unless your attention is undivided.