|
I’ve read 94 books so far this year, some of them on Audiobook  The people I despise are people who have read or listened to an abridged version and then have the balls to review it, often poorly, on goodreads.
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 07:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 11:29 |
|
|
Nurglings posted:Thoughts on people representing that they read a book, only to later admit they listened to it on audiobook? Idk why but for some reason it really irks me. Less of an investment? I can't read a book while driving to work. The defendant represented he had read a book but later admitted it was an audiobook, confessing before a jury of his peers to the crime of listening. He was sentenced to drive to work in silence for a period of no less than five years. The plaintiff expressed his satisfaction that justice had been served today, stating what a personal affront it is when people try to get away with using imprecise terminology to describe how they consumed literature. "How can the public trust whether someone has made a proper investment in a text if they are allowed to represent themselves as readers whether they use their eyes or their ears?"
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 09:07
|
|
|
There was that year when the man booker was judged by an ex-spy who admitted she judged the entrants from what the voice-to-text on her kindle made of it when she was driving to another job.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 09:40
|
|
|
learnincurve posted:I’ve read 94 books so far this year, some of them on Audiobook I despise the facts that abridged audiobooks even exist. And that there's no way to automatically filter out abridged audiobooks on Overdrive.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 14:41
|
|
|
StrixNebulosa posted:That's the pettiest possible thing I can think of. There is no difference in the book the person consumed. counterpoint: the medium is the message e: bitch chernobyl kinsman fucked around with this message at 18:56 on Oct 25, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 18:53
|
|
|
I refuse to talk with people who read paperback copies of books. Or, god forbid, mass market paperbacks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 19:01
|
|
|
graventy posted:I refuse to talk with people who read paperback copies of books. Or, god forbid, mass market paperbacks. I only read Classics Illustrated editions Who has time for extra words
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 19:06
|
|
|
chernobyl kinsman posted:counterpoint: the medium is the message counter-counter point, neither medium is less valuable than the other e: whore
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 19:08
|
|
|
I read my grandmas Reader's Digest version of Jaws (in Danish) when I was 12
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 19:19
|
|
|
A human heart posted:It's totally different and they haven't really 'read' the book because the act of listening completely changes how you interact with the text.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 21:12
|
|
|
it's at best a radioplay you didn't read anything. the medium which you consume something is just as important to art as knowing what happens in a story
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 21:15
|
|
|
On a different topic, I bought a book from the tiniest indie press I could find: http://www.wordcraftoforegon.com/ There's some neat fiction in there and rare books and it's cool that they're still alive.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 21:18
|
|
|
you can't just change the topic like that when you brought it up in the first place!
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 22:39
|
|
|
A human heart posted:you can't just change the topic like that when you brought it up in the first place! I have bad news about your reading comprehension skills; perhaps try the audio version of this thread?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2018 22:47
|
|
|
Any suggestions on reading faster? I want to read more but want to read so many books. I have a very, very visual brain and imagination so when I read I end up making every book into a movie by doing tons of sub vocalization. I realize that reading faster is all about limiting that but it’s a hard habit to break.learnincurve posted:I’ve read 94 books so far this year, some of them on Audiobook Like this guy. I want to be like this guy and read 100’s of books a year.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 03:33
|
|
|
StrixNebulosa posted:counter-counter point, neither medium is less valuable than the other its not a question of value, i didnt say listening to audiobooks was less valuable than reading books or whatever. but the medium through which you experience a work of art is the defining characteristic of that work. you dont get to say youve seen Venom if you read the script or heard some guy give a blow-by-blow account of it at the bar last week or whatever
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 03:41
|
|
|
Himuro posted:Any suggestions on reading faster? I want to read more but want to read so many books. I have a very, very visual brain and imagination so when I read I end up making every book into a movie by doing tons of sub vocalization. I realize that reading faster is all about limiting that but it’s a hard habit to break. Thread recommends audiobooks at 1.5x speed
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 04:03
|
|
|
Kidding, I have no idea. I have at times tried to speed up my reading as well, but I lose comprehension and/or nuance and have accepted I can only read so fast.jagstag posted:it's at best a radioplay you didn't read anything. the medium which you consume something is just as important to art as knowing what happens in a story I've been listening to old Gunsmoke radio shows from the 50's, and have recently watched Gunsmoke TV episodes based off those radio scripts, and the same story in a different medium definitely changes my reception of it. There's familiarity but not a sense of "I've seen this before".
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 04:04
|
|
|
Himuro posted:Any suggestions on reading faster? I want to read more but want to read so many books. I have a very, very visual brain and imagination so when I read I end up making every book into a movie by doing tons of sub vocalization. I realize that reading faster is all about limiting that but it’s a hard habit to break. My honest answer is: don't try reading faster, be more willing to not finish books that aren't worth your time. What that means exactly varies by the person, but personally if I get about a quarter of the way into a book, sometimes less, without it grabbing me somehow I ditch it. Trying to learn to read faster, in my experience (and general experience of a lot of friends/acquaintances) means less enjoyment or absorption. Not much point to being able to read two books a week if you don't remember them or miss half of the nuance in whatever it is you're reading. Believe me, I get the impulse to put a big reading list together and churn through it, but honestly the books that are most worth reading, imo, are worth taking your time. I've read 70-80 books a year for the last two years and in retrospect I wish I hadn't. I mean, if your natural reading speed is such that you get through that many, more power to you. But for me it meant rushing/skimming a higher percentage of the books I was reading than I'm willing to do in the future. About halfway through this year, I started putting down books that weren't good and it's made my life significantly better. Also yeah, audiobooks are a good way to get through a big number of books over the course of the year, but I pretty much only do audiobooks for genre fic that I know isn't going to have stellar prose or anything. I've even returned a couple of Audible books because I realized early on that I was missing out on good prose or being able to take the book in at my own pace. Hell, I just did that with Something Wicked This Way Comes, and I'm so glad I did, it was a much better experience reading it myself vs. listening to it IMO. Edit: just to keep this ramble going, it's worth mentioning that a lot of high school students in the US in the last couple of decades were taught a really stupid way of engaging with "littrachaw" in my opinion. I know it was drilled into me to leave no symbol unanalyzed, to leave no metaphor unpondered, and that there must be one authoritative interpretation of any given piece of literature. This is patently stupid. If you want to read a lot of good literature, just read it. Absorb it at your pace, don't worry about whether or not you're getting every layer of the book at every single moment. If you're concerned you've missed something, hell, read the book again, or take advantage of this wonderful thing that is the internet to find out what other people may make of whatever it is you've just read. There's not a single, exclusive "right way" to read great works of fiction, and I wish US schools weren't so stupid about how they teach lit. MockingQuantum fucked around with this message at 05:22 on Oct 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 05:17
|
|
|
Do you think Americans read less on average because we are taught to read in a way that makes reading a chore?
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 05:32
|
|
|
Himuro posted:Any suggestions on reading faster? I want to read more but want to read so many books. I have a very, very visual brain and imagination so when I read I end up making every book into a movie by doing tons of sub vocalization. I realize that reading faster is all about limiting that but it’s a hard habit to break. The people that tend to read 100 books a year might not be engaging with the books to the extent you are. If you're enjoying reading, and you're getting this good experience, then just keep reading. There are small things you can do to read a bit faster. I always read with a pencil in hand so I can kinda trace where I'm at on the page in case I get lost in thoughts. Then there are these "read faster faster" schemes that sound weird and may help, but if you're reading for fun, why do that? I'd love to be able to read 100 books a year, at my best I can do a little more than half of that, but I'm a slow reader. Being a slow reader lets me remember details to almost everything I've read, which I couldn't if I were just reading to read quickly. I've given up stressing about how many books I'm reading, and I'm now over trying to set a year goal and accomplishing that. It just makes me read less. Hope that helps.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 05:33
|
|
|
Thanks guys and gals. To be truthful, I’d be satisfied reading 50 a year. That in itself is an accomplishment as it’s shortly under one book a week. I read a news story about this crime story critic that reads 300-400 books a year. Stuff like that makes me feel inadequate for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 05:47
|
|
|
Himuro posted:Thanks guys and gals. Yeah, but again, there's a difference in reading 300 mystery novels and reading 300 19th century Russian novels or whatever. And if it's their job, then they're getting paid to do it, and so have to make the time for it. Just read every day and do you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 05:50
|
|
|
Franchescanado posted:The people that tend to read 100 books a year might not be engaging with the books to the extent you are. If you're enjoying reading, and you're getting this good experience, then just keep reading. I read incredibly quickly and don’t watch TV  as a teenager I once tried to read 730 books in a year but burned out at around 400 and Imo that’s the limiting factor. I listen to audiobooks a lot because they are so much slower than my own reading speed, I can blast through a book in an eavning or I can listen to it over several days and have the time to muse on it or work out who was the villain wot done it. My thing is the golden age of detective fiction, and like any genre there is a lot of utter poo poo trying to copy the few good authors, you want a fast reading speed there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 08:20
|
|
|
Himuro posted:Thanks guys and gals. I seem to have two reading speeds my brain likes to work at. Maybe three, counting non-fiction. For fiction I can read pretty dang fast but it's overall not as satisfying an experience as my slower speed. I guess you could call it reading for plot vs for the overall experience of the book and so I primarily use the faster mode for plot-oriented genre fiction (which I've more and more come to consider largely one and the same). Read at a speed that gives you the maximum amount of pleasure imo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2018 21:33
|
|
|
How would people feel about this one as a proposed book of the month? https://www.amazon.com/Nazi-Seizure-Power-Experience-1922-1945/dp/1626548722
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2018 21:13
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:How would people feel about this one as a proposed book of the month? A little too on point for November
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2018 21:26
|
|
|
If you want to be mean, do Empire of the Senseless by Kathy Acker.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2018 21:29
|
|
|
StrixNebulosa posted:A little too on point for November That's kinda why though, innit I'm more worried that it's just too expensive
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2018 21:31
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:How would people feel about this one as a proposed book of the month? I can't even begin to describe how uninterested I am in reading about the road to the Holocaust:
Man Who Sucks At Participating In The Book Of The Month Anyway
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 14:18
|
|
|
tetrapyloctomy posted:I can't even begin to describe how uninterested I am in reading about the road to the Holocaust: Y'know, good point. I've been trying to walk a balance for the past two years between sanity-balm (Herriott) and marching orders (It Can't Happen Here) as it were, but at this point I think everyone's gotten the message and we probably need more sanity restorers. Problem is I've already fired my big guns (Herriott, Jerome K. Jerome, Wodehouse). I'll see what I can dig up. Maybe Chesterton? oooh Oscar Wilde? Maybe Importance of Being Earnest or Ballad of Reading Gaol ? edit: hrm. Unbearable Lightness of Being? 2nd edit: Catch -22 ? Tom Stoppard's Arcadia? Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 15:40 on Oct 30, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 15:01
|
|
|
I've not read them, but I just got Bimbos of the Death Sun and Lady Audley's Secret on hold at the library, so that'd be super convenient personally.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 15:11
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Y'know, good point. Three that would be good and interesting that I don't think have been done: The Ballad of the Sad Cafe & Other Stories by Carson McCullers A Good Man Is Hard To Find & Other Stories by Flannery O'Connor Pnin by Vladimir Nabakov CineD always does Noirvember, maybe another hard-boiled detective novel or mystery would be fun. Hammett's Red Harvest or something.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 15:37
|
|
|
Also, in other news:quote:A scientist in a remote outpost in Antarctica plunged a kitchen knife into his colleague because he was fed up with the man telling him the endings of books, say investigators. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/worl...bKGnRftZOd08pWg
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 15:48
|
|
|
Savitsky completely in the right, there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 16:51
|
|
|
I had a friend in high school who went to every bookstore in town and scribbled something on the fourth or fifth page of every copy of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. We were going to call him out for being a big dick until we looked at the books and saw he was writing poo poo like "Dumbledore's sled is Rosebud", "Severus Snape is Keyser Soze", and "Harry's father is secretly Darth Vader".
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 17:18
|
|
|
Krankenstyle posted:Savitsky completely in the right, there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 17:36
|
|
|
people who work on antarctica are STEM lords, so I’m not surprised that they’re the type whine about spoilers
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 19:27
|
|
|
I will never ever forgive the tv show Cheers for spoiling who the murderer was in one of Agatha Christie's novels
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 19:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 11:29 |
|
|
ulvir posted:people who work on antarctica are STEM lords, so I’m not surprised that they’re the type whine about spoilers Yes, you can enjoy a story even if you know the ending, but it is a different quality of enjoyment than if you don't. The former can be experienced many times, but the latter can only be experienced once (barring brain damage, hypnosis, dementia etc). It's pretty crappy to take it away from someone.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2018 19:40
|
|