How does it affect your ability to enjoy books? Or type of books you’d enjoy?
Do you tend to prefer more visual medium like video(movies, tv), or comic books?
For those of us who don’t know what it means: “is the inability to voluntarily visualize mental images”
Basically if someone said “think of a nice round juicy red apple” people with the condition wouldn’t be able to imagine it in their mind.
I’m in my 40s and learned about this just a few years ago. Never affected my reading of different genres. I guess I didn’t know any different! It did help me understand why I don’t have the great memories of childhood things like my close-in-age sister does. I have always relied on her for details.
I hadn’t followed this when apparently it became a topic of interest on Reddit.
Apparently people sit on a spectrum, where they can envision less color and detail, where people with aphantasia cannot envision anything.
Also, interestingly-enough, this is apparently not tied to the ability to envision things in dreams.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Aphantasia/comments/g69hc0/dreams_in_color/
I dream very vividly, in full colour, but am a total aphant.
That’s fascinating. I can envision things voluntarily, if perhaps not as vividly as in real life—it’s not on par with looking at a fully-detailed scene, but I can certainly do color. On the other hand, my dreams have always been on the border with being unable to visualize at all. Maybe there’s a hint of color, but everything is normally desaturated, and things are transient and vague.
Huh.
I know what the condition is but the condition is still fascinating to me.
I have aphantasia but love reading, even really descriptive passages. I don’t ‘see’ but I “feel” words, I think, if that makes any sense. Like, if I read a description of a steaming mug of coffee, I’ll feel the rising steam on my face, feel how it smells, feel the heaviness of the mug in my hand, etc. It’s a lot more vivid in a way than when I watch tv since that’s all visual and auditory.
Yknow somehow I had a great time reading. Written word is the most reliable way to stabilize visuals in my mind, which is why I’ve taken to writing as a creative outlet as well.
Its been so long since I’ve genuinely read anything but I think thats the closest I ever got to actually visualizing something. Described well enough and my mind can really conjure up an image for once.
Its why I tend to like slow and detailed scenes. I can spend a lot of time writing a scene that only lasts eight minutes
I’ve always been a huge reader, and a fast one. Í wonder if visualizing what you read slows people down.
I also have trouble recognizing faces (mild/moderate prosopagnosia), and it’s easier to recognize a name in a book than a face in a movie.
Í wonder if visualizing what you read slows people down.
Not really, I can read very fast too and also visualize it at the same time, like full blown movie. I think it’s more indicative of information processing abilities in general: I can generally keep up watching lectures at 3x speed and notice things on screen almost instantly too.
I’m super efficient at filtering information too: I’ll look at a paragraph in some documentation and immediately see “If you’re in X special case, then…” at the 5th sentence in the middle of the paragraph when skimming through documentation. Or of course skipping details I don’t care about.
I wonder if visualizing what you read slows people down.
Yes, especially when the author probably got their inspiration during an LSD trip.
I have exactly this problem. It’s also very difficult when watching a movie adaptation of a book I’ve read, to associate the character from the book with the actor in the movie. When I read, they’re just a name.
I hate descriptions, and I have a really hard time when there’s more than a paragraph focusing on descriptions of what things look like.
Other than that it’s fine, though I sometimes have to trace back because I often skip parts that look description-y and some authors like to slip in some piece of crucial information.
This is me too. I will read descriptions, but don’t pay as much attention. Sometimes, if after the description, there is a que that a description had something important in it, I will have to go back over a description to check what I missed.
I don’t have aphantasia but I still skip over descriptions. It just doesn’t really add anything for me. Much more interested in dialogue and actions
Does it not bother you that you don’t catch what things look like as you read? If you’re skipping description, of say, a lake, do you just… Assume it looks like a lake you’ve seen in the past? What if the description plays heavy into the plot, like the water is, idk, yellow and boiling. That doesn’t matter to you?
I scan over the descriptions to check for irregularities or significant identifiers. So your yellow lake would be noteworthy to me or if a person is described with long hair. I don’t mentally imagine a long hair person, but I try to remember it, so if later somebody sees a long haired person in the distance I know which character is referenced.
And yes if I don’t recognise anything noteworthy, I don’t make a mental note, it’s just a normal lake, nothing important to remember.
But that isn’t always working out for me. In Neverwhere the Marquis de Carabas is described as being pitch black. Which I fully didn’t get and so was wondering why all the fan art made him so black that you can’t recognise features. Because that was how he was described and I missed that important fact.
I sometimes have to trace back because I often skip parts that look description-y and some authors like to slip in some piece of crucial informatio
Ugh, me too! I kinda hate when that happens
I don’t actively hate descriptions, but I used to just skim them. Now I sometimes slow down for descriptions if I think they might bring additional meaning or context. But then sometimes when it gets to be too much work, I’ll go back to just skipping over them again lol
You’re asking the wrong question. How do you guys without aphantasia manage to read when there’s pictures whizzing around your head all the time??
Mechanically, whenever I read about someone’s or someplace’s introduction and it describes their appearance, I’ll just skip that section. If it’s more than a sentence-long description I’ll often unconsciously just move on to the next paragraph - it’s literally meaningless to me.
I read a lot when I’m not stressed. This week, I’ve read the whole of the Robots series by Isaac Asimov (four books, around 1500 pages total). Several times, I’ve read entire books in one sitting without even moving.
I can’t really tell you if it affects my ability to enjoy books, because I don’t know how I’m “supposed” to enjoy a book. So instead I’ll just talk about why I like to read.
- Emotion Being able to feel something that really doesn’t happen to me in my daily life. I feel much stronger emotions through reading (and films or TV as well, to a lesser extent) than I ever can about myself and the real people in my world. For example,
Robots and Empire spoiler
When Daniel and Giskard decide to be friends and shake hands, symbolically becoming people rather than just machines, made me cry. It’s so meaningful.
-
World-building This is something that I think Alastair Reynolds is really good at. He writes science fiction books that are grounded in reality, and being able to see what he imagines. Another good example is old science fiction where there’s the dichotomy between humanity having conquered space thousands of years ago and yet the cutting edge of technology developed a few years ago is recieving the news on a paper ticker tape! Seeing what what the authors imagined vs things we take for granted today but was so advanced it never even occurred to them, like the Internet.
-
Mystery / plot There’s a certain beauty to seeing the web that’s been built up over the course of a story all coming together at the end. A good example would be Adrian Tchaikovsky’s Children of Time where all the threads come together and the resolution at the end wasn’t what I expected but, in hindsight, nothing else would have done it justice.
-
Character growth Gravity Dreams by LE Modesitt is my favourite book and I don’t know why. I think it’s just that the journey the main character goes through really speaks to me and gets me thinking about my own philosophy and life.
In summary, I’ll say that you don’t have to see something to comprehend what is happening and to be touched emotionally. As for your other question, I also watch film and TV but I definitely prefer animated over live. I can get easily confused between different actors which doesn’t happen with animation for me. I find that TV or film takes less effort to enjoy, but also that I don’t enjoy it as much as a book.
How do you guys without aphantasia manage to read when there’s pictures whizzing around your head all the time??
For me, the book and my surroundings completely disappear, the whole thing turns into a dream-like movie experience. I don’t see letters or words at all, it becomes an unconscious process that keeps feeding the dream and it looks similar to fuzzy AI videos.
Sometimes the process of getting pulled out into reality again can be brutal: suddenly it’s 3h later and I have to look around and take a moment to settle back. If you dream while you sleep, it’s like when you suddenly wake up while you were in an intense dream, takes a moment to process. I’m really completely gone in another world the whole time.
You both seem nuts to me. I can conceptually imagine, but obviously cannot see things in my head because I’m not schizo, my surroundings don’t disappear but it doesn’t mean I don’t appreciate descriptions and conjure concepts from them, just not imagery.
I think all this aphantasia stuff is just trappings of the English language and having “imagine” have the word “image” as a root, which is wrong, because imagination is more about concepts, it’s a unique data structure that’s not related to jpegs or photons and doesn’t involve them. But some people conflate the two because their language doesn’t allow them to think otherwise so they assume concepts are literal images in their head, and others with enough self-awareness to know they don’t actually “see” anything in their head assume they have an issue/divergence. It’s so bizarre to watch.
Hate to be the bearer of bad news but if you can’t relate to mental images existing in a visual sense you probably have some degree of aphantasia.
Some research indicates that it may be a spectrum from complete lack of imagery to full five-sense detail, which might be why it’s hard to relate to either extreme. At any rate most people fall in the category of seeing an image, to the point that hyperphantasia is even more common than aphantasia.
I have it*, but not as severe as others. Imagining an apple starts as a very abstract concept, I can’t visualize it without concentrated effort. Other people might be able go on to describe the stem, the leaves, the shade of red, the glossy wax exterior, etc… I can’t automatically build to any of that, even if I subconsciously default to a red apple the “image” may just as well be green.
*edit: checked the vviq test and discovered the label is hypophantasic
I’m not going along with this tiktok diagnosis shit when the way I see it I have extremely fundamental problems with the plausibility of the entire concept.
That’s what I’ve heard other people say, and it just sounds insane. You’re in a world of fantasy literally seeing things that aren’t there and somehow that’s normal behaviour. Crazy!
But I guess it seems weird to you how I can do anything without seeing things. I’ve had someone online get very angry with me for saying I have no visual imagination, because how can I even read and recognise letters if I can’t see them in my head?
Humans are very weird sometimes! It’s nice that there are so many different ways to exist :)
I think I’m kind of on the other extreme, I day dream a lot. It’s like I can experience anything I’ve experienced before on demand and replay it. Sometimes it’s annoying, it’s like someone left 3 TVs and 2 radios on in my head and I can’t turn it off.
I didn’t know that was a thing until today, but also totally unsurprised, the brain is super weird.
I don’t struggle to picture it though, that only works for me if the book is interesting. When it’s boring (ie. forced to read it and there’s a test), I think my brain falls back to how you read books.
A great deal, I’d
imagine.I can conceptualize.I have Total Aphantasia, and zero sense memory at all. I do have an “inner monologue” of sorts. I can’t “hear” it in my head, but I understand all the same. I don’t know how to explain with words and I don’t know how I work either, really. My outer and inner voice are the same thing to me and I have full control over it., often transitioning back and forth when I’m alone. As in, no racing thoughts. One of the ideas behind meditation where you try to silence your mind? I don’t have to try. It’s not something that takes effort for me. I bring this up because this is how I’m reading books, with that silent inner voice. One of my friends is like me with Total Aphantasia, but he has no inner monologue either. Which is bonkers to me. I don’t get it, neither does he! Haha. Many different kinds of human minds out there, it’s not so simple.
Hard to miss what I’ve never experienced, I still enjoy thinking about these fictional worlds even if I can’t conjure up a representation of what is written in my mind.
I read every genre. It’s actually specific writing styles I lean towards. If the author is really detailed with describing environment constantly, I appreciate that. I can’t really “fill in the blanks” so to speak. I also really like it heavy on the internal monologue side of things with main characters. I think that’s why I liked Ender’s Game so much when I was a kid.
I do prefer any visual media. I save all my book and research reading for when I’m at work these days, which is a lot of time actually. One of them hurry up and wait jobs. Books are far better when it comes to potentially constant interruptions.
Quoting my partner that has it: “Comic books are cool for that. I love books. I tend to gloss over heavy descriptions of place settings, I don’t spend a lot of time trying to picture it so I prefer books with dialogue. Watching a show before reading the books does help though. (Like we did with The Expanse.)”
They also mentioned that Red Rising action scenes are ridiculously descriptive and they typically skim those sections to find out who hits whom.
I remember this poster in a library with a well, and the surface is an empty field of grass, and that part of the poster said “movies”. The bottom of the well was like a hideout, with all sorts of whimsical detail, which said “books”.
Needless to say, I did not get it.
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 lpng ss they have the things or the general feel.
It was different for me, King mentioned his blue eyes so many times that I couldn’t imagine Idris as playing him.
Itt, people that can visualise but think that not constantly visualising everything they read means they have the superpower to “feel words as concepts”
Mildly aphantastic.
Love reading, don’t know or have any different experience to compare it to.
I don’t visualise, but feel words and concepts as worda/concepts. I like descriptions as I can build up a concept with the words.
This. I also have it to a certain degree. Perfect description of how I read books. Never bothered me. Never even realized some people have a vivid visual imagination until it became a recurring reddit topic a few years ago.
999 was the realisation it was a thing for me, and then found a diagnostic questionnaire online and got the “mild aphantastia” result.
Similar experience here. Aphantastic and prefer books to shows/movies.
I actually prefer books and really can’t enjoy tv. It’s simply not my medium. I don’t think aphantasia has any influence on these tbh. It’s not like I can compare but I don’t see how not visualizing what is happening in a book should have any influence on the enjoyment. The information still gets parsed in your head just fine.
It probably depends on the person. I know for me, reading books is only entertaining if I can visualize what is happening like scenes from a movie. Sometimes I even “cast” real-world actors in this imagined movie because it makes it easier for me to keep characters consistent.
Reading just for information retention, on the other hand, sometimes takes me a few passes because I will end up zoning out if it’s not something I can visualize.
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.
I prefer books that don’t waste too many sentences describing things that have no relevance, but I can still enjoy a good story.
