Log in
Avatar

deadbird

@deadbirdlife / deadbirdlife.tumblr.com

I have a Patreon and an Art Store. Art, animals, fashion; cw for nudity, blood, violence. I'm Grey. They/them/theirs. my art // my face // taglist
Posts
deadbirdlife
b0chelly
Avatar
umbweon

every furry support post made by a non furry is like “i respect furries because they hold the world up by being IT workers and work for NASA and are suspiciously wealthy all the time hsuwvsvebsbs” and its like most of the furries including myself i know are poor as shit or trying to get by. like im dumb as hell i dont work for any special computer shit i make like at best 2k a year by drawing cock

Avatar
actualized-animal
#yeah. i've done furry art commissions and while yes there are eager commissioners#it's not like...an easy money grab bag full of outlandishly wealthy patrons
deadbirdlife
spontaneousmusicalnumber
Avatar
steponthegras

Settle a debate with me and my partner

I define reading as taking in a story, that means visualizing the story and using imagination just like you would if you had a book in front of you

Also plz reblog to spread this around

Avatar
dreams-in-daylight

Help I keep explaining bae is listening to the reader and therefore not literally reading 🥲

Avatar
naamahdarling

Reading and listening are different acts, but "I read/listened to that book" are not different in any meaningful way, and I always say "I read". Otherwise there is a small but exhausting group of people who like to jump in and say the silliest things, and I hate engaging with them. So I refuse to draw the distinction as it only gives book purists an excuse to try to explain that audiobooks aren't really reading, that you have not truly and properly consumed a book unless you have read it with your eyes passing over words, preferably on paper, that audio is an inferior means of consuming media and isn't what reading is really about, it's about books which aren't narratives but objects you have to engage with correctly or it somehow does not count, the story is less important than the somehow innately ennobling act of holding pressed, dried wood pulp in your hand and squinting at it. Which, hold still and let me crush your feet with my hooves please.

Avatar
deadbirdlife

This is goofy. It's not The Same. Listening to an audiobook, I can't organically pause and ponder and re-read turns of phrase. The reader's tone and accent supersedes character choices I would have made, their intonation forecloses on possibilities of meaning/intent that I personally might have read into the words, and so on. The opposite is true, too - in reading a book myself, I am limited to the scope of accents, speaking mannerisms, etc, that I've experienced enough to generate within my head. They aren't "the same" by any stretch of the imagination, and each will lead you to different experiences of the book in question. That doesn't make listening to audiobooks inferior, or mean you haven't effectively read the book if you listen to it - you have! But it's also bizarre to me that people feel a strong need to elide the distinctions to feel better about the ways they consume media. It's all good, but it's not The Exact Same. It's entirely fine and reasonable to say you read a book after listening to it, because you've effectively consumed and digested the narrative! But they are not The Exact Same.