I finally picked up a copy of Al Gore’s new opus The Assault on Reason, and I’m looking forward to devouring every word. I chose to get the unabridged audio version on 9 CDs, which I will import into my iTunes library and listen to on my iPod heading back and forth to work over the course of about a week or two.

So my question is why the fact that I’m listening to the audiobook on the subway rather than reading the hardcover version at home in my easy chair should elicit snickers everywhere I go, as though I’m somehow cheating or that I shouldn’t get credit for “reading” the book.

First of all, let’s clear this up right now. I’m not in school. I don’t need credit for reading the book. I’m genuinely interested in what the man has to say, and if I can do that more efficiently through my headphones, I don’t see why anyone should have a problem with that.

It’s an issue familiar to any Shakespeare teacher. But is this really the equivalent of renting the movie when you have a book report due? Is it different if you’re watching a full-text version of a Shakespeare play (like the BBC versions) instead of reading it? What if you’re reading a comic book version of Shakespeare in the original language? What if you get together with a group of friends and read the complete text out loud? Does a spoonful of sugar necessarily ruin the gas tank?

Personally, I like to read. And these days I usually have one book running on my iPod while another is sitting on my night table. But with my schedule so crazy around this time of year, it’s usually the same book sitting on my night table for a while (I still haven’t finished The Blank Slate) while I’m able to burn my way through many more audiobooks on a variety of topics. I don’t feel that I’m missing anything by experiencing them this way, and as an auditory learner, it might even be a better way for me.

So why do audiobooks get such a bad rap?