Ask Lemmy

I don't have aphantasia and I don't particularly fancy any medium over the other, but what I often miss is sound. Music is a whole different language to either visual or conceptual as conveyed by words, whereas imagery to me feels the most direct and laziest, music can convey feelings there are neither words nor imagery for, and so often I like adaptations of written works for injecting some fitting music, and will listen to fitting music as I read books.

Time spend on video medium is like 1000x more than reading.

I rarely read books, by rarely I mean I just skim all school reading materials, and only pick up random books lying around at home (that were given out for free by the public library) to read when my electronics were broken/consfiscated by parents.

I read a lot of news and wikipedia aricles tho, those are somehow just more fun than a book.

There are some adapted works that I've seen the adaptation of, but still haven't read the source materials yet. I kinda just read the wikis to check any differences between the 2 mediums... 🤷‍♂️

Recently, I came across some interesting works of fiction that didn't have an adaptation in a video medium, so I reluctantly started reading. Recursion was a fun read with the audiobook playing in background at 1.2x speed.

When I read, I usually use the sterotypical portrayal of that character's archetype from other visual mediums to like fill in the character model and use similar scenes from visual media to paint the room and atmosphere.

I have like a "level 3" on the aphantasia scale, so like I could just barely paint the scenary.

If I do my own worldbuilding and my own story, I can sort of see the world slightly mroe clearly, like a "level 2" on the apantasia scale.

Kinda echoing other comments in here, to say that lengthy segments where the author is describing the appearance of something can be rather annoying to me. I can't see it. No matter how many flowery words you use, I can't see it. I know what it is that you're describing, I already got a good-enough understanding with the first few sentences. But I can't see it. Please, please just move on to the actual story.

I really wanted to get into Stephen King's Dark Tower series. I made it to the point in the first book where two characters spend an extended amount of time in a pitch black tunnel. Oh. My. Fucking. God. I can only take so many pages of "Boy it sure is dark in here" before I lose my patience. I've started that book at least 5 times, and could never manage to make it past that section because it's just so infuriating to read. It's almost like the book is mocking me, as if to say "Hah hah, get a load of this goober, can't even see the darkness!"

I don't blame authors for this, though. It's not their responsibility to cater their art to my neurodivergence. It's just a minor frustration I've learned to live with. But it's also part of the reason why I don't read much for leisure. I think this is why I'm generally more tolerant of films that aren't as good as the books they're adapted from, because the alternative is that I'll likely otherwise never experience the story at all, so I'll take what I can get.

Details in books and written media as a list, not a series of images. Loved reading as a kid, dropped off when I spent more time doing other things, like cpmouter gaming.

The upside is that witthout a mental picture of characters any close enough visual take on the character will work for me. I also have ADHD so small details are likely forgotten and only the prominent ones that the character is defined by are going to be weird if mkssed.

For example when I heard Idris Elba was going to be cast as Roland in The Dark Tower it was a big positive because he seemed like someone that would be able to oull off the personality of the character and I was only concerned about whether they would do a good job with the missing fingers or drop it entirely as missing fingers was a big part of Roland's character for me. Yeah I know there was something involving race in the books, but that plotline was something that didn't seem to be necessary to carry over into a movie.

Of course the movie ended up being a pile of trash, but is a good example of how I focus more on how the character acts than how they look.

Same with a lot of science, swords, and other objects where I really don't have a mental image so a lot of sets work as long as they have the things or the general feel.

I really enjoy reading, but I can't picture a scene, or what characters look like. It can be a bit confusing at times, but doesn't usually take away from the enjoyment.

As an example, my favourite sci fi author Randolph Lalonde (great independent author, buy his books 👍) had a scene in a recent book where some characters had a shootout in a warehouse that held several spaceships. The ships were all at least a few metres long, so the warehouse was huge. In my head, everything was centred on a small area around the characters, and I could sort of picture them being within a few feet of each other.

I couldn't picture any details, it was as if he had written that 'the man stood near the woman, and pointed the gun towards the crates', even though the scene was well written with good descriptions. My brain couldn't translate the description into a layout in my head.

I still really enjoyed the scene, but every now and then it was as if my brain realised that things should be further apart, or one character should be taller than another, for example.

Didn’t have it for most of my life, but briefly had it, along with some memory issues. It made understanding what I was reading nigh on impossible. Any lengthy descriptions fell through my memory near instantly, as I had no practice in maintaining a purely conceptual memory of a piece of writing. On reflection, I’m terribly impressed with those who manage to deal with the absence of an audiovisual imagination to compress information.

Itt, people that can visualise but think that not constantly visualising everything they read means they have the superpower to "feel words as concepts"