WARNING: Long, LONG post! Apologies in advance.
Quester said:
Listening IS a good thing...I won't argue with that, but there are times when it would add a lot to the learning process IF we were able to get the book out to either look up information quickly for verification or just to intensify what we listened to.
Not to pick on Quester, but since several people on this thread have expressed a preference for printed over audio material, I simply chose the above quote to lead off my 2-cents' worth on the issue.
There is much empirical evidence to support the assertion that different people absorb information and learn at different levels of effectiveness via different media / delivery methods. It is certainly an intensely individual thing.
(Side note: as I've grown older, I've become increasingly adverse to stating assertions like the one above as fact, without providing at least a little supporting documentation. So for one example, you can check out the abstract of this article, which studies the effectiveness of a particular information delivery method, and how there were found to be statistically significant differences between American and Australian students in comprehension/retention, depending on the method.)
That said, I also think there are potential shortfalls in applying broad principles to every circumstance. While I understand and empathize with those who are placing their vote for "hardcopy" material (and I know I sure like to go back and flip through books to find sections of interest for further study or review), I have to say that in this case, I can't imagine that accessing the information in
The Process in book form would be of anywhere near as much benefit as it's potential in the audio form. Here's why:
Having had the privilege of knowing Dan since a relatively early stage of the development of
The Process, I can report from first-hand observation that the manuscript was originally developed under the assumption that if it made its way into the hands of the public, it would do so in print form. I would posit there must be very few writers who say to themselves, "I have this great idea for an audiobook...". Audio books generally seem to be considered a side market -- a delivery method marketed to the sight-impaired, or to folks who'd rather spend time being read to while driving instead of listening to broadcast radio. (I concede there are plenty of other reasons that people buy audio books; I'm only saying it seems, to me, that writers and publishers generally look at the market that way.)
So, written it was. Submitted to publishers it was. And turned down it was. Again... and again... and again. And again. Dan reports that he's got a whole wall of his home office plastered with rejection ships. Never once did Dan imply or suggest that the book was intended to be presented in audio form. At that stage, I suspect it hadn't even occurred to even him.
Somewhere in the middle of all this, Dan gave me a copy of the manuscript for review. So I gave it a look. And it was almost immediately clear to me why he was hearing a constant chorus of "no, thank yous"...
It wasn't because he couldn't write. The writing was clear; everything was properly spelled, punctuated, and grammatically correct.
(Side note: you might think the above goes without saying, but having run in social circles that include a number of people who do editing work for publishers and publications, I've been told that a very high percentage of unsolicited manuscripts that are submitted are largely or completely devoid of any coherent use of the written English language.)
It wasn't because the material wasn't novel. This was no rehash of things seen over and over and over again in tarot literature today.
It wasn't because it didn't have the potential to be useful. Those of you who have heard the audiobook can back me on that assertion, I'm sure.
And, in most cases, it wasn't because the genre wasn't in line with one or more of the markets that the publishers served.
So, what, then? Is it because the print market is saturated with books on tarot at the moment? Maybe, though doubtful, considering the number of tarot books that continue to see print these days.
Is it because the publishers just didn't "get it"? Again, maybe. For specialized material such as
The Process, the writer has to rely a bit on the assumption that the people reviewing your work for acceptance have at least some clue about your subject matter. But that isn't necessarily the case.
Is it because the material isn't "dumbed down" enough to attract a large, mass market audience? Depending on how cynical you are, I suppose you could mark this one as a definite possibility. I'm not quite
that cynical (yet) -- but I don't know if I could argue too hard against this proposition, either.
Nonetheless, I propose a different reason for all those rejections, and it is this:
The book is written in the second person.
(I'll pause here for a moment, to allow the collective "huh?"s to pass.)
.....
(OK, onward...)
Think about it. When was the last time you read a book on tarot that was written in the second person? Have you
ever read a book on tarot written in the second person? In fact, how many published books have you read at all that were written in the second person? Not too many, I'd be willing to bet.
Writing in the second person is considered a total no-no in some quarters. I would hazard a guess that even among people in the publishing industry who concede its potential effectiveness in the right circumstances, most are probably still skittish about publishing a book written that way. Few readers out there have been exposed to much of that type of writing, and different is, well... risky.
(Yet another side note: If you're interested in a nice, and relatively brief and useful, analysis of second-person writing, you might check out
this post that I found on the website
www.writing.com.)
So, then -- why not rewrite the manuscript in the more traditional third-person voice? Because -- and here I'm making an assertion here that reflects my own opinion; I'm not actually trying to speak for Dan -- doing so would destroy a large part of the the essence that makes
The Process such a brilliant work. One of the core points of the book is that work with the tarot should be an intensely personal experience. To underscore that idea, Dan uses the second person voice to establish a student (reader)/teacher (writer) relationship that is more intensely personal than you generally get from books using the more traditional (and therefore arguably more detached and sterile) third person.
(The above is my own analysis; I don't know if Dan did what he did deliberately, or if it was just intuitive brilliance. If I had to guess, I'd say it was the latter.)
So -- back to the issue of audio vs. print. While we're not used to
reading material in the second person, we
are accustomed to communicating verbally in that fashion. We do it all the time. When Leisa decided that
The Process needed to be published, incredibly smart lady that she is, I think she must have consciously or unconsciously recognized that the writing style itself was better suited to an audio format. She could well have published as it as a hardcopy book; it's not as if she hasn't produced material in printed form before. But IMO -- and presumably in hers -- the very nature of this work almost
demanded to be relayed as an audio presentation.
Not convinced? Here's a little more "food for thought." The flavor of the narrative reminds me a little of that movie
The Karate Kid. Remember that one? The one where Pat Morita ostensibly teaches Ralph Macchio karate, but is really imparting a life philosophy that transcends its expression as a martial art? Now, imagine if, instead of telling/showing Daniel (Macchio) "Wax on, wax off", Miyagi (Morita) handed him a book and said "Here's a fine treatise on Zen; read this, and you'll understand what I'm getting at." The fact that it would have been less effective filmmaking aside, I think it's a very supportable assertion that certain information, certain lessons, and certain ideas are better suited on the whole to certain methods of delivery, regardless of the "normal" channels that generally work best for a given student.
Perhaps it's because we're addressing something that is trying to speak to the heart and soul as opposed to the intellect. Perhaps it's because Dan believes that even when not face-to-face, teachers and students work best when there's a personal connection. I dunno. All I'm saying is that, in my personal opinion, you can't experience
The Process strictly in printed form without much of the impact and significance becoming lost. I can perhaps accept an argument for having a print copy available as a supplement -- to refer to only
after the audio version has been experienced, and the lessons have begun the process of becoming truly integrated into the learner's psyche. But for me, it's difficult to me to imagine working through
The Process without embracing the immediate and intimate medium of the audio format as we begin (or continue) our journeys into personal and spiritual growth with the tarot. To do otherwise would be an antithesis to the very ideas that
The Process is all about.
-- Jeannette
The Tarot Garden
