Two Reading Skirmishes

A bookish rant

Photo by Jaime Spaniol on Unsplash

I’m in a ranting mood, so this post will cover two lighthearted “culture skirmishes”, specifically, two issues regarding reading and books.

1. Reading a book and listening to an audiobook are not the same thing.

This is one argument that I find simply astonishing. Time after time I’ve begun to have a discussion with someone about a book they claim to have read. Then at some point they say, “Well, I listened to the audiobook, so…” In other words, they did not read the book. It’s a brazen act of hubris to say otherwise. Reading and listening to a book are not the same thing in the way solving a Rubik’s cube and baking a cake are not the same thing. It’s an absurd statement. I’m just going to say you are objectively wrong and lump you in with the flat earthers.

The more controversial question, and much more subjective issue, is whether reading a book is superior to listening to an audiobook. In my opinion, in general, reading the book is better for comprehension. There’s a reason I’ve had so many people cop to listening to an audiobook when discussing a novel. I’m asking them about characters, events, etc., and their recollection is bad. They eventually admit that they read nothing, but listened to the book instead. Minor plot points and characters are often lost on those who listen to a book rather than read one. It’s easy to see why. When someone “reads a book”, that’s what they do. They are reading a book. When someone “listens to a book”, however, they are usually not listening to a book. They are driving to work or cleaning the house or going on a run while the audiobook is playing. Listening to the book is not only not the sole activity a person is partaking in. It’s not even the main one. Unsurprisingly, comprehension is worse. Fine, if you’re sitting in a room and doing nothing more than staring out the window while listening to an audiobook, comprehension can be equal to reading. Otherwise, probably not.

That said, comprehension is not the only reason to read/listen to a book. There’s also enjoyment. And the enjoyment from listening to a good audiobook can be higher than reading the hardcopy version. Christopher Hitchens’ autobiography “Hitch-22”, which was narrated by Hitchens himself, is a great example. He’s one of the great conversationalists of the English language. He writes like he talks, and his autobiography was fantastic to listen to. A similar example is the Trevor Noah’s autobiography “Born a Crime”. Trevor Noah is a comedian. The book easily could have been a comedy album. My wife, a big fan of audiobooks, swears by the audiobook of Ann Patchett’s “Dutch House”, narrated by Tom Hanks, and Max Brooks’ “World War Z”, which is narrated by many different actors. I loved the audiobook of “Project Hail Mary”. It was a blast to listen to, and some of the sound effects obviously can’t be done over paper. People can enjoy what they want. Especially because you can drive a car or vacuum the carpet while listening to an audiobook, they are a great way to process information or just be entertained.

But don’t try to tell me it’s “just as good” as reading a book. Is reading the script of a play as good as watching one on stage? Is watching a movie on your phone while on an airplane as good as watching one in a packed theater? Of course not. To totally reverse things, is reading a transcript of Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech as good as listening to the real thing? No! It’s inane to suggest otherwise. That doesn’t mean watching a movie on your phone is a waste of time, just that it’s worse than watching the same movie in the theatre. And I think everyone, deep down, knows that. People know listening is inferior to reading. C.S. Lewis illustrates this point perfectly in “The Screwtape Letters”:

No man who says I’m as good as you believes it. He would not say it if he did. The St. Bernard never says it to the toy dog, nor the scholar to the dunce, nor the employable to the bum, nor the pretty woman to the plain. The claim to equality, outside the strictly political field, is made only by those who feel themselves to be in some way inferior. What it expresses is precisely the itching, smarting, writhing awareness of an inferiority which [a human being] refuses to accept.

And therefore resents. Yes, and therefore resents every kind of superiority in others; denigrates it; wishes its annihilation.

Enough said.

1. When at a book club, discuss the entire book

It’s a breathtaking act of narcissism. There are people who will join a book club, read part of the book, show up anyway, and then expect the group to not discuss the book. At least, not discuss anything past page 174 or whatever page they finished the night before because they read at the pace of a snail. What an insanely selfish mindset. Do these people go to panel discussions of movies they haven’t seen and get upset when the panelists discuss the end of the film?

The purpose of a book club is to discuss the book. That’s why it’s there. It isn’t to talk about the first half and speculate on where the author might be going. We live in a society with far more discussions on the latest TikTok trend and sporting events than any New York Times bestseller. Even the voracious reader will only attend a few book clubs a month. For the rest of us, we can only manage a single book club. That’s one hour, just one hour, where a group of people can discuss literature. Don’t allow people to gatekeep that precious hour and limit the discussion. Relish the opportunity to participate in a discussion about a book. To be introduced to a totally different interpretation of a novel, or to learn about a new theme or reference you missed. A good book club discussion is a wonderful thing. Limiting discussion to the first few chapters is like going to a Michelin-star restaurant and only trying the first three courses. Book clubs should be free to discuss the entire book. It’s the point of the book club.

I’m part of a book club right now that has a lively discussion every month. We agree, disagree, laugh, shout, and talk about our perspectives. Last month, two people (half jokingly, but only half) both stood up and started shouting at one another from across the table. It’s fantastic. A few months ago, there were at least three different interpretations of the ending of the novel “Such a Bad Influence”. I thought the ending was straightforward. Others also thought it was straightforward, but in a way I hadn’t considered. This made for a fascinating discussion I couldn’t have had anywhere else. With a hit movie or popular TV show, it’s not hard to find a group of people to discuss it with. Because there are so many books out there, and many people don’t read at all, it’s unlikely you’ll ever get to discuss one in depth with a random group of people. Book clubs provide the only opportunity. Don’t let someone else ruin it.

Exception to this rule: if your book club is really just an excuse to get together with friends and not discuss the book at all, by all means, carry on.

/rant