I can't tell from this post if you have ever actually listened to one or not. More than one, preferably, before you make some sort of judgment on the entire format.

As someone who never felt the need to try audiobooks then got a job driving for hours every day...audiobooks are definitely comparable to reading, in that - once you adjust to them (and of course, there will be people who just can't get used to them) - the story goes into your brain, just as it would from a book. I often would listen in the car and then get home and continue reading on paper (or ebook). Once I finished the book, I could not tell you which parts I listened to and which I read with my eyeballs.

Is it a slightly different interpretation? Maybe, but my interpretation of any story, however I receive it, will be different from yours. It can even be different depending on what mood I'm in, how old I am, whether I've seen a movie adaptation first, or heard it talked about.

Was I influenced by the narrator when it comes to inflections or emotions? Maybe. But that doesn't mean the narrator's interpretation was wrong, or that it was different from what I would have come up with myself. And I've even disagreed with the reading of a line or scene - which means I'm still absorbing the story and coming to my own conclusions.

Reading a book is receiving a story (or non-fiction) from the author. Reading fiction is storytelling from one person to another, with a system that allows for many, many people to receive it rather than having to be told face-to-face - the original form of storytelling was verbal.

Listening to a story may be slightly different, but it's no less valid. A person who has listened to a book has every right to discuss the contents/message they found in it with people who read the book with their eyes. There is already a sub for audiobooks - mostly people use it to discuss narrators, versions, delivery methods, etc.

If people want to discuss a book, this sub should welcome them no matter how the contents were uploaded into their brains.

Is it weird for women to enjoy any other genre of books "catered" to...the general public (meaning for the most part - men)? Sorry, but this is one of those questions that are just...weird.

Your self-esteem or self-identity should be strong enough to admit you enjoy what you enjoy and your gender or sexuality has nothing to do with it. Why let other people dictate your preferences based on something so vague? Anyway, who is going to know? The clerk at the bookstore? Does their opinion matter?

Read whatever the hell you want to read. Good for you, recognizing that what you enjoy might not feed into the narrative of "men only like hyper-masculine main characters and are too narrowminded to relate to a character who is, first and foremost, meant to represent a human being".

Women shouldn't be inherently unreliable to men. If more men exposed themselves to stories written about and by women, they'd know we're not all that different inside, or in the challenges we face as people.

The Color Purple

The Three Musketeers

A Clockwork Orange

Slaugherhouse-Five

Dangerous Liasons

It's just more of a mess, lol, though I'm pretty sure Cathy ends up..."victorious" in the end. Like, she finally puts it all behind her, gets all the money, survives the rest of them. The youngest girl is okay - she goes off to do her thing and isn't really an important character that I can remember.

Hmm, Cathy and Christ act like a married couple for a while? But he's a drunk or something and they break up or she leaves him or he dies. Their mom dies and Cathy ends up married to her mom's ex-husband, B-something (Bart?)? And he's a jerk? And Grandma finally dies and there's some issue with the inheritance? Maybe B-dude wants the money so that's why he hooks up with Cathy? I think they have a kid? Damn, it's been like 30+ years since I last read these, lol.

Oh, and it turns out (there is a prequel book) that Cathy's mom didn't marry her cousin/half-uncle/...sort of close relative (which is what we thought Grandma thought was so bad about the parents' relationship being incestuous or whatever and why Cathy's mom was disinherited originally). Cathy's dad was actually her mom's half-brother because Gramps had a thing for that other lady before he had to marry Grandma in an arranged marriage because money/power. Something messed up like that.

If you're writing a story set in your area and you want your readers to feel like they can really relate, then you want to be both vague and detailed. You want your readers to be thinking, "Ooh, I know where this is!" (even though they're wrong because you are making it up) and also, "God, I know someone exactly like that! I wonder if the author actually knows them and used them as inspiration for the character?"

It grounds a story in reality without making it so specific that readers lose that feeling of connection. A lot of English classics are written in this way, meant to feel familiar and relatable without involving any real-life people or places or causing the inhabitants of those places to feel maligned or made fun of. Especially when the setting is some small town or village where everyone really knows each other - you can't go around turning your neighbors into fictional idiots and cheaters and criminals. But you can imply that there are idiots, cheaters, and criminals in a small village...just a few miles away or in the next county or over there in Sussex/Yorkshire/Wales/etc. and all the readers will nod their heads and think, "Ha! Nice try but I know you are describing Lady B---ton and her ridiculous son, Lord J--r B---ton! They are a menace! W--shire is just chock full of reprobates and rogues!"

It's all so deliciously gossipy and scandalous! (without actually slandering real people)

On a $10 paperback? Why not? If I wanted to do something artsy with them, I'd slap on the paint, glitter, stickers, whatever. Acrylic paint is probably the easiest.

It depends. If the real person can prove that you included private, secret, personal information that you should not be airing to the public and you are only "disguising" it under the umbrella as fiction, then you are breaching their rights to privacy, you may be slandering (libeling?) I forget which is which) them.

Usually, when fiction includes a real person and facts about their life, the author has to include sources, either as a general bibliography or also with footnotes. If you're just making stuff up and happen to get it right...that's accidental and not your problem, as long as you can show that you had no prior knowledge about the facts/truth.

Start with some easy, fun books. I'm not saying you need YA-level books (not that there is anything wrong with reading YA when you're an adult) but there are plenty of very good stories out there with an easy, breezy writing style.

And try not to focus on page numbers or word counts. If you want a schedule, make it time-based - 20 minutes a day or whatever works well for the rest of your daily life. Whether that means you read 20 pages or 5 pages, you should like what you're reading and be eager for the next installment. Enjoy that time, enjoy the story.

You should watch the movie - it's really good (and you'll probably recognize a lot of the actors who are hugely popular/famous now but in the movie they are very young).

This is one of those situations where there is no right answer. My go-to response would be - if the girl showed interest in reading them, then give her one and see how she likes it. If it's too "adult" in tone - not graphic sex and violence, just adults "adulting" - then she might find it incredibly boring or dense. Be open to discussing the book with her, if she has questions.

But, since you and your sister are not this girl's parents...you're risking a big mess, sadly. Whether the girl likes the books or not, if her parents disapprove then you just broke a big family rule and you won't have any say in how they interact with their child.

If you know the parents well enough to talk with them about it, then you can say, "Look, I think she'd like these books but I can't be sure. As far as I know, there is nothing overly shocking, traumatic, upsetting, disturbing, or graphic in them. As far as I know, after doing a little research online - haven't read them myself. I think curiosity should be encouraged and I think reading is a safe way to explore and learn about the world. But you are her parents, so you know her better than I do. Also, you are the ones who will deal with the consequences - whether that means discussing topics you are uncomfortable with or your wallet takes a hit because she wants to buy all 20 books this author has written to date."

Would you have been able to feel that deep connection to some element of the story if the author didn't write it well or choose to include it in their story? I think what people often mean when they speak about an author's "genius" is not that the author was directly trying to invoke a particular idea or emotion or opinion but rather, to write their story in such a way that they tap into some level of Truth or Humanity that resonates through the words and into your heart or mind.

It comes through them and is passed on to you, the reader. They are like a conduit, they channel something deep, and then they manage to use written language to effectively allow readers to relate to those things. How you relate or which parts you relate to isn't as important as the fact that you were affected at all.

They don't know you (the general "you") because you are just one of the millions of possible readers they could have in mind when they wrote the story. Or maybe they wrote their stories only for themselves. That doesn't matter in the end. What they were trying to accomplish personally doesn't even matter. All that matters is people connect to those stories to a level beyond casual entertainment.

Two families who are neighbors and then intermarried - the Earnshaws and the Lintons. It's all a mess and the story is going to flashback so you can see how it all played out and why it's such a mess. Joseph is a servant.

You met Cathy Linton, the daughter of Catherine Earnshaw. Heathcliff >!loved Catherine but didn't marry her. She married Edgar Linton and Heathcliff married Isabell Linton, Edgar's sister. So his son's first name is the mother's last name ("Linton Heathcliff" is a terrible name, lol.!< Bronte made it so complicated).

Yeah, but most people who like SF are into the more space opera stuff, or the hard-SF exploration, or extremely far-future, or want aliens/robots. She keeps the SF elements minimal, mostly just time travel, so I can see why many wouldn't give her books a try or would find them...not really very SF.

Some people love her (me!), and some people don't. While I think many people who have been reading SF for a while know of her even if they haven't read any of her books, SF in general is a niche genre and she's kind of niche within that niche. The way she mixes history and SF is what makes me love her books (I love reading historical fiction as well as SF and fantasy).