Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#42 Jun 26, 2012
cycle003 wrote:
I think it's hilarious the person who listens to audiobooks thinks it's the same as reading. By that account, I'm about to get my law degree from all the Law & Order I watched.
The main (or only) difference to me is, by reading a book, you're making a choice as to how to spend your time. You're making reading a priority.

By listening to an audiobook, you're multitasking. I listen to podcasts. Would I choose to sit and read them? No. I listen to them, because they're an enjoyable activity while I do mundane household stuff (or work out).

But to me, that's the only real difference: One requires carving out time, something not everyone is willing to do or can do (based on sleep needs + having small kids or wahtever).

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Braidwood, IL

#43 Jun 26, 2012
Saluki Rod wrote:
<quoted text>
That would make the last rule,'if this is your first night at book club, you read', correct?
"No, sir! I even drive blind-folded so I don't inadvertently read road signs!"

Man, this thing writes itself! Forget SNL, let's call Hollywood!
pde

Savage, MN

#44 Jun 26, 2012
cycle003 wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, also, I don't know if there are any movies, but when I did a lot of theater, I know many directions were "true to the language". Going to a play is NOT the same as reading Shakespeare.
Personally, I'd argue that going to a performance of Shakespeare is more true to the spirit of Shakespeare than reading him.

And I say this as someone whose undergrad English degree has a concentration in British literature. My focus was 19th century, but I took several Shakespeare courses (and several pre-Chaucer courses too).
Kuuipo

Salinas, CA

#45 Jun 26, 2012
Aisle Sitter wrote:
To each book club their own... wasn't there an episode of Malcom in teh Middle where Lois joined a book club, actually read teh book and was horrified to find out that no one told her "book club" was cover for the "mommy gets hammered and does stupid stuff club"?
The adult equivalent of telling your folks that you're going to the library to study...
pde

Savage, MN

#46 Jun 26, 2012
Kuuipo wrote:
<quoted text>
The adult equivalent of telling your folks that you're going to the library to study...
Isn't that Pampered Chef parties?
cycle003

Sun Prairie, WI

#47 Jun 26, 2012
RedheadwGlasses wrote:
<quoted text>
The main (or only) difference to me is, by reading a book, you're making a choice as to how to spend your time. You're making reading a priority.
By listening to an audiobook, you're multitasking. I listen to podcasts. Would I choose to sit and read them? No. I listen to them, because they're an enjoyable activity while I do mundane household stuff (or work out).
But to me, that's the only real difference: One requires carving out time, something not everyone is willing to do or can do (based on sleep needs + having small kids or wahtever).
Except that someone who claims to be well read is making implications about the intellectual stimulation that comes with reading. Listening to audio books does NOT provide the same mental development.
cycle003

Sun Prairie, WI

#48 Jun 26, 2012
pde wrote:
<quoted text>
Personally, I'd argue that going to a performance of Shakespeare is more true to the spirit of Shakespeare than reading him.
And I say this as someone whose undergrad English degree has a concentration in British literature. My focus was 19th century, but I took several Shakespeare courses (and several pre-Chaucer courses too).
I'm not arguing about what's good or true to the artist's intent. I'm challenging the assertion that listening or viewing is the equivalent of being well read.

“On Deck”

Since: Aug 08

French Polynesia

#49 Jun 26, 2012
I know what you mean, Cycle.
I read a page or two of Shakespeare every single day.
To me, he is the definitive source of the English language. He really makes me laugh.
King Richard III is stupendous. And I just read 'The Life and Death of King John". I'm going to read everything there is. It's just a little goal of mine.
I find that I have to study his works intently, and not just read it through osmosis.
Right now I'm reading "A Mid-Summer Night's Dream" and am having some difficulty with the plot(s). With Shakespeare I take it as a given that I often have to go back and re-read passages several times.
I like the edition that have footnotes. Penguin Books are very inexpensive at only a few dollars each that are great travel companions. But I mostly read from my hardbound editions at home.

Did you know that Felix Mendelsohnn wrote some incidental music to A Mid-Summer Nights Dream?
Check out the Scherzo sometime. I think the ever popular Wedding March comes from there too.

“I Am Mine”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#50 Jun 27, 2012
cycle003 wrote:
<quoted text>
Except that someone who claims to be well read is making implications about the intellectual stimulation that comes with reading.
they are?

“...,to wit”

Since: Jun 09

Location hidden

#51 Jun 27, 2012
loose cannon wrote:
I know what you mean, Cycle.
I read a page or two of Shakespeare every single day.
To me, he is the definitive source of the English language. He really makes me laugh.
King Richard III is stupendous. And I just read 'The Life and Death of King John". I'm going to read everything there is. It's just a little goal of mine.
I find that I have to study his works intently, and not just read it through osmosis.
Right now I'm reading "A Mid-Summer Night's Dream" and am having some difficulty with the plot(s). With Shakespeare I take it as a given that I often have to go back and re-read passages several times.
I like the edition that have footnotes. Penguin Books are very inexpensive at only a few dollars each that are great travel companions. But I mostly read from my hardbound editions at home.
Did you know that Felix Mendelsohnn wrote some incidental music to A Mid-Summer Nights Dream?
Check out the Scherzo sometime. I think the ever popular Wedding March comes from there too.
And when you are done, rent/stream the movie version with Kevin Kline and see how the words and music come together.

I don't think Shakespeare is a good example for this discussion though, because as a play the words were intended to be heard by the audience, not read.
pde

Palatine, IL

#52 Jun 27, 2012
PEllen wrote:
<quoted text>
And when you are done, rent/stream the movie version with Kevin Kline and see how the words and music come together.
I don't think Shakespeare is a good example for this discussion though, because as a play the words were intended to be heard by the audience, not read.
Shakespeare is actually a horrid example for this conversation because some of his puns and language best comes through when listened to. Many people don't hear/correctly process iambic pentameter when reading silently.

Since: Jun 09

Verona, WI

#53 Jun 27, 2012
pde wrote:
<quoted text>
Shakespeare is actually a horrid example for this conversation because some of his puns and language best comes through when listened to. Many people don't hear/correctly process iambic pentameter when reading silently.
But I do think it illustrates the challenges that come with actually reading complicated works as opposed to listening to them.

“I Am Mine”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#54 Jun 27, 2012
cycle003 wrote:
<quoted text>
But I do think it illustrates the challenges that come with actually reading complicated works as opposed to listening to them.
What challenges are you referring to? Only challenge I can think of is understanding what you are reading. I don't think you gain any greater understanding thru one method or another. If there is a term or concept you don't understand, it does not make a difference whether you read the term or it is spoken to you.

I've never given the term "well read" so much thought an analysis in my life.
pde

Palatine, IL

#55 Jun 27, 2012
cycle003 wrote:
<quoted text>
But I do think it illustrates the challenges that come with actually reading complicated works as opposed to listening to them.
So, you're saying that since Shakespeare's plays are intended to be spoken aloud, reading it is therefore extra-challenging, and thus there is some additional sort of worth in only reading it?

That's kind of a twisted argument. It doesn't really relate to being well-read or not, but a question of exactly how masochistic you are.

Since: Mar 09

Miami, FL

#56 Jun 27, 2012
Mister Tonka wrote:
<quoted text>What challenges are you referring to? Only challenge I can think of is understanding what you are reading. I don't think you gain any greater understanding thru one method or another. If there is a term or concept you don't understand, it does not make a difference whether you read the term or it is spoken to you.
I've never given the term "well read" so much thought an analysis in my life.
This is true for an instruction manual, or even a spy novel. But Shakespeare is a whole different ballgame and I understand what PEllen and cycle are saying.

Since: Mar 09

Miami, FL

#57 Jun 27, 2012
pde wrote:
<quoted text>
So, you're saying that since Shakespeare's plays are intended to be spoken aloud, reading it is therefore extra-challenging, and thus there is some additional sort of worth in only reading it?
That's kind of a twisted argument. It doesn't really relate to being well-read or not, but a question of exactly how masochistic you are.
Wow, that's a big leap.

Based on your previous post, you agree that Shakespeare was written to be heard vs. read, right? So the conclusion could be drawn that reading his works makes it more difficult to fully experience what he intended vs. attending a play, right? I think that's all cycle is saying. Masochistic? Where did that come from?
pde

Palatine, IL

#58 Jun 27, 2012
j_m_w wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow, that's a big leap.
Based on your previous post, you agree that Shakespeare was written to be heard vs. read, right? So the conclusion could be drawn that reading his works makes it more difficult to fully experience what he intended vs. attending a play, right? I think that's all cycle is saying. Masochistic? Where did that come from?
What I'm disagreeing with is that in the normal case (a book versus a play) reading is more difficult or more deserving of respect than listening to the same material. In fact in my case, listening is more difficult than reading, because I am not a aural learner.

That's why Shakespeare or any play is a bad example here. Reading a play may be more difficult than listening to it.
pde

Palatine, IL

#59 Jun 27, 2012
Basically what I'm getting from Cycle's argument is that an aural learner who chooses to listen to a book and thus gets and understands the book, is worthy of less respect/less "well-read" in that book than another aural learner who chooses to struggle through with reading it and may not get the same depth and breadth of understanding as a result. I find that screwy--it's saying that the pain of pushing through it is more important than the end result of understanding it. That's where the masochistic comment comes in.

“Where is Tonka?”

Since: Feb 09

Neda, stay with me! Charlie

#60 Jun 27, 2012
In my opinion being "well read" means the comprehension of the material, not the manner in which the data is delivered.

In fact, you would only call someone well read by listening to them speak about a variety of subjects or in depth of a specific one. But you actually have no clue how the person gained this knowledge. It could have been a book, class,cliff notes or aliens.

I have read every SK novel, am I will read (thats a lot of books you know). Of course I am, not because of reading SK novels, but because I have a very well rounded intellect, being educated not just by books, or audio cassettes, but also by life experiences, user manuals, assembly instructions and the ever popular F1 help key.
cycle003

United States

#62 Jun 27, 2012
pde wrote:
Basically what I'm getting from Cycle's argument is that an aural learner who chooses to listen to a book and thus gets and understands the book, is worthy of less respect/less "well-read" in that book than another aural learner who chooses to struggle through with reading it and may not get the same depth and breadth of understanding as a result. I find thayt screwy--it's saying that the pain of pushing through it is more important than the end result of understanding it. That's where the masochistic comment comes in.
I never said anything about worth. Words have meaning and well-read means having actually read.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 min Grey Ghost 1,509,402
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 3 min tuffet 239,506
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 5 min Raymond 63,569
Double Word Game (Dec '11) 1 hr Breezy _Soul 3,630
News Scientists say they have proved climate change ... (Dec '08) 2 hr Into The Night 8,070
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 3 hr Sublime1 105,060
Graduation in Detroit. 3 hr BHO is EVIL 4

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages