reading: having a book in your hands vs. online reading, audiobooks etc

[evening_read]

i really want to hear what the people on this forum think about this aspect. personally im against reading books on the computer/online, i never read one that way, audiobooks and stuff are a sacrilege... where would be the magic of having a book in your hands?

[Zee.]

I hate reading books online. Ruins it for me.

[Cat_Brenners]

I would only read one on line if that was the only access I had to it and I really wanted or needed to read it badly. Otherwise, I love hands on.
Cat

[JacobF]

Books online are great for essays and reports. I can just do a control+f to look for the keywords I want instead of flipping through the actual book. But I've never read a book online for enjoyment.

[Joreads]

I read online only when I have to.

[faithalina]

I do not enjoy reading online. It is difficult to curl up in bed with a computer...aside from that, i enjoy book covers...

[wron]

We are used to reading hardcopy books. It will take a different generation, and perhaps different software, monitor clarity, or whatever to change that. Current online reading is hard on the eyes and not as compatible to setting up the desired amount of lighting, focus, etc.

[Zee.]

Nah - I think books, real books, will never die out.

[JBI]

Text only. I read about 3-5x faster than any audio book, retain more, and have a more interesting voice in my head. I also value my eyes to much to strain them staring at a screen for extended periods of time, though the scroll bar has its merits to some extent, though I prefer flipping.

Poetry is though waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more enjoyable in print for some reason - the way it looks on a screen is so ugly - so artificial.

[Dori]

I swear I read faster online, but I still enjoy just plain ol' tangible books.

Audiobooks are very convenient though. It's hard to read and ride your bike at the same time, after all. :lol:

[wron]

I wonder if anyone clung to stone tablets or runes after printing became popular. Hmmm, maybe not . . .

[JBI]

I swear I read faster online, but I still enjoy just plain ol' tangible books.

Audiobooks are very convenient though. It's hard to read and ride your bike at the same time, after all. :lol:

I don't own a car, and go everywhere by subway, but yeah, I guess. Though really at the rate they read, it almost isn't worth it. You need to listen to several days of tape time to get through one thick novel.

[Dori]

I don't own a car, and go everywhere by subway, but yeah, I guess. Though really at the rate they read, it almost isn't worth it. You need to listen to several days of tape time to get through one thick novel.

Well I only own two audiobooks (both Christmas gifts).

I suspect I read significantly slower than you. Oh well. I'm in no rush.

[JBI]

The recordings are at around 20 pages an hour. Those are standard pages, not big small print hardcover ones, standard paper-back pages.

Most readers are faster than that, and if they aren't, they most definitely should be reading, rather than listening.

Of course, it is understandable if the person, for instance, is blind, or dyslexic. But really, I think the fad of Audiobooks is essentially a lazy person's way of pretending to read.

[Joreads]

I swear I read faster online, but I still enjoy just plain ol' tangible books.

Audiobooks are very convenient though. It's hard to read and ride your bike at the same time, after all. :lol:

That would be something to see My Friend we could start a new trend:lol:

[*Classic*Charm*]

I had a media professor last year tell me that our minds process information differently when we read from a screen than from a book. He described the difference between reading "up and down" on a screen versus reading "side to side" on paper. I wonder if research has been done...

I wouldn't give up my books for anything. It's more than just how one sees and the pressure on one's eyes. There's something about the weight of a book in your hands and tuning out everything around you. It's the full experience. And as JBI said, there's a much different voice in my head.

[Joreads]

I had a media professor last year tell me that our minds process information differently when we read from a screen than from a book. He described the difference between reading "up and down" on a screen versus reading "side to side" on paper. I wonder if research has been done...

I wouldn't give up my books for anything. It's more than just how one sees and the pressure on one's eyes. There's something about the weight of a book in your hands and tuning out everything around you. It's the full experience. And as JBI said, there's a much different voice in my head.

Thank goddnes it is only one voice:) I hate being read to out loud

[*Classic*Charm*]

Thank goddnes it is only one voice:) I hate being read to out loud

Depends who's reading. It can't possibly be as bad as being sung to. That's just awkward.

Poetry, however, needs to be read, as JBI said. Even reading it in print just isn't good enough.

[Jeremiah Jazzz]

I only read text, but am in love with audio books. I always pop one in before I fall asleep. It's great relaxation.

[Dori]

The recordings are at around 20 pages an hour. Those are standard pages, not big small print hardcover ones, standard paper-back pages.

Most readers are faster than that, and if they aren't, they most definitely should be reading, rather than listening.

Of course, it is understandable if the person, for instance, is blind, or dyslexic. But really, I think the fad of Audiobooks is essentially a lazy person's way of pretending to read.

Okay, I can read faster than that, at least. :D And you are correct. :lol:

[faithalina]

Audiobooks are very convenient though. It's hard to read and ride your bike at the same time, after all. :lol:

I agree...although, I have one rule: I won't listen to anything that I've not already read the traditional way. I feel like that's cheating and the experience isn't nearly as rich. There is much to be said (as mentioned) for the weight of a book in your hands, the smell of the paper as you turn each page. You are an active participant in what unfolds.

Lucky for me if I love a book I am more than happy to re-experience it often. Now that I think about it though, I've never actually re-listened to a book. While, as you say, 'I'm in no rush', I think the time factor is definitely a consideration.

[Seant018]

Of course, it is understandable if the person, for instance, is blind, or dyslexic. But really, I think the fad of Audiobooks is essentially a lazy person's way of pretending to read.

Yeah! Who needs a car? It is just a lazy person's way; real people walk to work, or ride a bicycle!

I'm just wondering, do you always come of as such a pretentious person? There are many examples of times when an audio book is not a lazy alternative to actually reading a book.

You probably also think ebook readers are for lazy people too, right? We are not a true reader if we do not want to lug around our favorite books!

Oh, and you probably don't retain more from audio books because your listening skill is not as strong as your reading skill.

[Joreads]

Depends who's reading. It can't possibly be as bad as being sung to. That's just awkward.



Poetry, however, needs to be read, as JBI said. Even reading it in print just isn't good enough.

Would you say that to Buble - see I remember - I like being sung to.

I don't read poetry so I am not sure about that.

But reading is something I like to do myself - weird I know

[Mopey Droney]

Germane piece in this month's Atlantic about the possible dying out of The New York Times print edition.
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200901/new-york-times

[ballb]

i really want to hear what the people on this forum think about this aspect. personally im against reading books on the computer/online, i never read one that way, audiobooks and stuff are a sacrilege... where would be the magic of having a book in your hands? I`m not against it. If people choose to read books online, that`s fine. Personally, I never feel comfortable reading anything more than articles online. For me, "proper" reading involves flopping out in a big soft armchair, fire banked up & large scotch & dry at my elbow. Hard to do when seated in front of a desk top PC monitor.

[bazarov]

You can't toss and turn with ebook, but you can with hard covered one.

[LitNetIsGreat]

I used to be able to work and listen to audio books at the same time in my old job, so I used them then. I do not use them now or would do so willingly, there is little point.

[JBI]

Yeah! Who needs a car? It is just a lazy person's way; real people walk to work, or ride a bicycle!

I'm just wondering, do you always come of as such a pretentious person? There are many examples of times when an audio book is not a lazy alternative to actually reading a book.

You probably also think ebook readers are for lazy people too, right? We are not a true reader if we do not want to lug around our favorite books!

Oh, and you probably don't retain more from audio books because your listening skill is not as strong as your reading skill.

I'll ignore the ad hominem and explain myself.

The act of looking at something, and scanning it with your eyes takes energy, and engages a part of the brain. The act of listening engages another part of the brain. To only listen doesn't deliver the same level of recognition that reading does, because ones mind is not into the words at a higher level - one cannot see, for instance, how the paragraphs are broken up, how the words are manipulated - so much is missed in written work transmitted orally.

As for the car bit, keep this in mind. When you are driving, the one thing your mind is focused on, or should be focused on, is the road, not the audio book. By that notion, you can only be half reading, or more like half-listening, as the traffic, or whatever on the road naturally takes, or should take, the majority of your focus. By that notion, I wager comprehension is drastically reduced when listening in a car, verses reading in a quiet environment.

If you want to understand the way things are transmitted as such, I recommend reading Marshal McLuhan, particularly Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man and Harold H. Innis's The Bias of Communication

Please don't insult me, without trying to understand my argument. It is not only against the rules, but also makes one seem childish.

I would also like to address, before I finish, the notion of paper-books being elitist. I think that is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. Books were written, or most anyway, to be books, not electronic transcripts. As such, they are, by intention, meant to be read as books, not to be stuck on the internet, and scrolled down over. I am positive that the way we read effects how we read, and as such, it is unnatural to read an eBook, unless on one of those highly expensive e-reader things (which try to emulate real books, keep in mind), which by the way, are far more elitist given their price than paper-books, which for the most part can be taken out of the local library, assuming you have one near you.

edit: On another note, there is also reaction based on presentation. I know of a psychologist who is currently doing research in the reaction to poetry based on form. From his findings, he has shown that people react better to the written form than a sound recording, and paper and sound recording get better reactions than a video of someone reading the poem. It was shown that the presentation of the poetry hampered the interpretation of the reader/viewer/listener, and as such, reduced the experience of engaging the poem. Think about that one - when he asked me which I thought would get the better response, he was shocked that I thought written would right away. It seems the act of reading is more about reading than we let on.

[LostPrincess13]

Text only. I read about 3-5x faster than any audio book, retain more, and have a more interesting voice in my head. I also value my eyes to much to strain them staring at a screen for extended periods of time, though the scroll bar has its merits to some extent, though I prefer flipping.

Poetry is though waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more enjoyable in print for some reason - the way it looks on a screen is so ugly - so artificial.


took the words right out of my mouth...:D

[mollie]

Paper and ink, all day long. Not because I consider ebooks or audio books lazy, or because I am a Luddite, but because I agree with those who said that reading a book pleases all of the senses. To me, reading a transcript from a PC instead of reading a book is like taking a nutritional supplement in pill form instead of eating a meal.

[Amylian]

As for me, give me an actual book with a cover or give me death.

[Joreads]

The act of looking at something, and scanning it with your eyes takes energy, and engages a part of the brain. The act of listening engages another part of the brain. To only listen doesn't deliver the same level of recognition that reading does, because ones mind is not into the words at a higher level - one cannot see, for instance, how the paragraphs are broken up, how the words are manipulated - so much is missed in written work transmitted orally.

As for the car bit, keep this in mind. When you are driving, the one thing your mind is focused on, or should be focused on, is the road, not the audio book. By that notion, you can only be half reading, or more like half-listening, as the traffic, or whatever on the road naturally takes, or should take, the majority of your focus. By that notion, I wager comprehension is drastically reduced when listening in a car, verses reading in a quiet environment.


.

I agree 100% with both of these points 100%. Only I would be more worried about people 1/2 concentrating on driving - that would be me:)

[Dori]

Another point: tangible books can be used as doorstops if you particularly dislike them. Try getting an ebook to hold open a door! :D

[Joreads]

Another point: tangible books can be used as doorstops if you particularly dislike them. Try getting an ebook to hold open a door! :D

You cannot throw an ebook at someone that is bothering you either:D

[Remarkable]

To the more practical matters:e-books DO help in maintaining the enviroment undeteriorated.Still,personally,although I consider myself a great enviromentalist,I can't bring myself to read online not even a newspaper article.For once,I'm obsessed with smells.I really am.I smeall each page separately every time I change them.I love all book smells.Freshly print ones are nice and fill one,while older books have a characteristic smell that might make one sneeze,but that holds inside a whole history.Secondly,I love covers.I know,I know,they say:"Don't judge a book by it's cover"but I just can't bring myself to read something not nicely wrapped and all that...

A friend of mine downloaded for me 35 e-books that would save me lots of money or that I can't find at all here.Still,I haven't started neither of them.And I don't know if I will...It's just tiring scrolling your mouse all down the three hundred-something pages of the book.Even when I write,I prefer pen and paper.

I'm a bed-reader.I love to just lie there,tucked under my covers,with my window open just a bit,with my night-lamp on,with my mobile showing 1.00 a.m and just...go on reading,hear the sound of pages being changed,be very careful not to damage the cover...And then,whatever the quality of an e-book is,it would never make up for not being able to read it at class during a boring-to-death lesson:p!

[MattG]

I'm not a fan of audio books. It's not because I'm a purist, I just prefer the written word.

I've read several ebooks, I like to read that way and quite often do so.

I'm also a fan of ink and paper.

I'm not picky, just bring me the words!

[Saladin]

As for me, give me an actual book with a cover or give me death.

Hehe! Kudos.