No one should ever claim that they read a book if they listened to an audio book version. The two things require different senses. If you listened to a book, and then a song, would you also say you read the song? Have you smelled any good songs lately? Have you felt of any cool music in the last week or so? Have you seen what pizza tastes like? Can you hear the color yellow? Unless you are one of these synesthesia victims, you can't 'read' a book if you only listened to it. I am not knocking audio books by the way. Audio books are perfect for that long drive or airplane ride. And they can be quite entertaining, and in some ways can challenge your brain similar to reading int hat you have to create a picture in your own mind, but nonetheless, IT AINT FUCKIN READING if you are not holding a book and using your eyes.
Along these same lines, would you say you talked to someone if you only emailed them? Technically you cannot, so I will generally specify. I guess the same holds true for all forms of instant messaging. Even though you are experiencing a communication thread, if you are not shaking your vocals chords and moving your mouth around, YOU AINT FUCKIN TALKIN! If you read out loud what you type in the thread, and then what the other persons types as well, you still are not talking to that person, you are just a fucking moron.
Ok, enough of that.
So it is vacation time again. Back to Vegas. Free room, free plane ticket, can't beat that. Only thing on the agenda other than a metric fuck ton of drinking and sports betting is going to see Norm MacDonald at the House of Blues. Other than that, I just plan to get all hopped up on various liquors, and just run around and do whatever.
CARNIE WILSON!
3 comments:
As a fan of audio books I would agree and disagree to a certain extent. If you read a book and I listened to an unabridged (which I consider required) version of the same book we would both come away from the experience with the same knowledge of the material. Obviously, individual mileage will vary. Don't get me wrong, I am a big fan of the written form, but I don't think I've ever had the counter argument with someone. Example: "Hey, did you read that new King book?" "No way, I don't think you can truly enjoy it unless you've listened to it read by William Shatner!"
Another interesting example of the multimedia experience would be that I will often have the audio and the paper version of the same book. This will get me through a long car ride, but then when I get to where I'm going I'll read for a bit. Then back in the car for a few hours and finish it off in bed some night. Experiencing the material in several forms has never really degrading the overall subject for me.
That's just me though, I could be wrong.
I agree completely. My statements are solely based on the subject of saying the word "read", when no reading took place, and not concerning the end result of either.
I'm turned on by Carnie Wilson.
And I agree with the original sentiment that audio books are audio and nothing more. It's like listening to TV on the radio, back before the digital switch. I would listen to a station out of Wichita Falls that would broadcast the audio feed of a CBS affiliate while I was driving to West Texas. Even though I could imagine what the Price is Right looked like, I wasn't watching it at the time.
Post a Comment