Klick hier für deutsche Version

The debate resurfaces with the reliability of a grumpy alarm clock: Do audiobooks count as “read books”? For some, the answer seems crystal clear. No. Only what passes through the eyes on paper or screen counts as reading. Everything else is light consumption, literature on the gentle cycle. This stance is not only simplistic but also problematic. And yes, it is ableist¹Ableism refers to the
discrimination, devaluation, and exclusion of people with disabilities or impairments by judging their abilities and value based on societal notions of “normality,” leading to barriers in education, employment, and social life. It is a system that reduces people to their disability, views them as less capable, and unconsciously or consciously creates disadvantages, similar to racism or sexism.

First, it’s worth taking a look at the concept of literature itself. In literary studies and cultural commentary, “reading books” is by no means strictly limited to the physical activity of visual reading. What is generally meant is the reception of a literary work—that is, the absorption, processing, and understanding of its content, language, structure, characters, themes, and context.

Historically, this is even obvious: For centuries, literature was primarily oral. Epics were performed, stories were told, poems were recited. No one would have dreamed of claiming that a listener of the Iliad hadn’t “really read” Homer. Today’s narrow focus on the eye is a recent cultural and technological development, not a literary necessity.

So, when someone says audiobooks aren’t “real” books, they’re confusing the medium with the work itself. It’s like claiming a concert is less musical because you didn’t sight-read the music yourself.

Books are content. Language. Meaning. Not a visual test.

The ableist core of this attitude becomes clear when you consider people who, for a variety of reasons, cannot read or can only read to a limited extent: people with visual impairments, dyslexia, ADHD, chronic fatigue, neurological disorders, or simply different cognitive abilities. For many, audiobooks aren’t a luxury, but their primary access to literature.

Anyone who devalues ​​this access implicitly declares this form of reception inferior. This isn’t intellectual rigor; it’s exclusion disguised as academic jargon.

Another frequently used argument is that listening is easier than reading. This, too, doesn’t stand up to closer scrutiny. Cognitive science shows that reading and listening place different demands on the brain. When reading, we control the pace ourselves. We can go back, pause, and reread sentences.

When listening, however, the flow of information is continuous. If your mind wanders, you lose track. This requires a different kind of attention, often even greater sustained attention.

Studies on language processing show that spoken language is processed more sequentially. Working memory is more challenged because information isn’t visually retained. Especially with complex texts, long sentences, or abstract arguments, listening can be more demanding than reading.

Reading, in turn, requires more visual decoding and orthographic processing. Which is “easier” therefore depends heavily on the individual, the type of text, and the situation.

Interestingly, text comprehension often differs less between reading and listening than previously thought. Many studies conclude that content comprehension is comparable as long as the conditions are right: a quiet environment, an appropriate pace, and sufficient attention.

Anyone who claims that listening is automatically more superficial is arguing more from a gut feeling than from a scientific basis.

There’s also an often overlooked aspect: audiobooks bring an additional layer of interpretation. Emphasis, rhythm, pauses, tone of voice. A good reading can reveal nuances that are missed when reading silently. This isn’t a flaw, but a different aesthetic experience.

Not better, not worse. Just different.

Ultimately, the question shouldn’t be whether audiobooks “count.” It should be why we want to count them at all. Literature isn’t a competitive sport or a status symbol. Those who read or listen to books enter into a dialogue with texts, ideas, and worlds. The medium is a means to an end, not the measure of value.

Perhaps it’s time to put the gatekeeping back on the shelf and return to what it’s really all about: stories, thoughts, and the many ways they can reach us. 📚🎧

Feel free to leave a 👍🏼Like if you enjoyed the post.

Please leave this field empty

Newsletter
abonnieren

This field is required.

Ich sende keinen Spam! Erfahre mehr in meiner Datenschutzerklärung.

Thank you 🙂

• 1
  Ableism refers to the
  discrimination, devaluation, and exclusion of people with disabilities or impairments by judging their abilities and value based on societal notions of “normality,” leading to barriers in education, employment, and social life. It is a system that reduces people to their disability, views them as less capable, and unconsciously or consciously creates disadvantages, similar to racism or sexism