BookTalk.org

Which is better for children, audio books or the ordinary reading books? Which one is more advantageous?

Both. Even better if books are read aloud to children by a parent, but audio books will allow a child to listen to language at a level above what they are reading at. This can continue right into the teenage years.

I responded to your other audiobook post, and I think that answers this question too. I'd like to point out one thing here. The quality of an audiobook stems from two sources; the original text and the reader. I have listened to books that themselves were good, but the reader was definitely trying to over-dramatize even the simplest sentences. That can be annoying.

As far as children's books, I have only listened to two in the recent years. The Harry Potter series, and the Percy Jackson series. The reader for the Percy Jackson books does an adequate job, but it is a series that is clearly written for a target audience of youngsters, hoping to get them interested in history through modern storytelling.

On the other hand, we have the Harry Potter stories read by Jim Dale, (sorry Mr. Fry, but you came in second in this contest). Scour the world's population and you won't find a better reader. He was good from the start, but by the third book he perfected his astonishing range of vocals for each character. He breathes incredible life into JK Rowling's world that always takes listeners by surprise. He does live readings in bookstores, and the children always come up to him after and say, "Wow! You sound EXACTLY like the characters!"

If your child is a Potter fan, you truly owe it to them to let them listen. The readings are SO much better than the movies at bringing the Potter world into your head. Check your local library. Every one in the country has multiple copies of Jim Dale's audio reading of this series.