Work · one recording

The Word for World Is Forest

It tells a story. Hardcover files this book as fiction, and its readers there call it reflective, sad and dark. Facts, not factors: neither plays any part in our call.

Either. Don't overthink it

Thin evidence · 151 ratings of this reading, short of the 250 we trust. So the call is made without the recording’s half of the case. Why we hold that line

Every book we have judged on how far the recording outruns the page: 201 of them, the page's answer at the left-hand end and the recording's at the right. Marked for scale: All the Light We Cannot See, To Kill a Mockingbird and Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone. This one sits in the top 33% of our shelf of books for how far the recording outruns the page. −0.40, where we start backing the page; 0.40, where we start backing the recording.The Word for World Is Forest

Audio is the easier way into this one, and it is easier in audio than most books we hold (in the bottom 27% of our shelf of books for extra work in audio), but that is a fact about the book rather than a recommendation of any particular reading. Only 151 people have rated the reading, so it is not part of this call either way, and 250 is where we start letting a judgement about a reading move a verdict. With nothing we can say about the reading, and nothing about the book itself worth protecting the page for, it genuinely does not matter much. Pick whichever you will actually finish.

Length does not decide this

4h 44m to listen, at 1×3h 47m to listen, at 1.25×3h 09m to listen, at 1.5×2h 42m to listen, at 1.75×2h 22m to listen, at 2×about 5 hours to readabout 4 hours to readabout 3 hours to readabout 2½ hours to readabout 2 hours to read

The runtime is Audible’s own, shown at the speed beside it. The reading time is our estimate: 160 pages at 30 pages an hour, the pace you told us. Ours is 50, about 300 words a page, read at 250 a minute.The runtime is Audible’s own, shown at the speed beside it. The reading time is our estimate: 160 pages at 40 pages an hour, the pace you told us. Ours is 50, about 300 words a page, read at 250 a minute.The runtime is Audible’s own, shown at the speed beside it. The reading time is our estimate: 160 pages at 50 pages an hour, which is about 300 words a page, read at 250 a minute.The runtime is Audible’s own, shown at the speed beside it. The reading time is our estimate: 160 pages at 65 pages an hour, the pace you told us. Ours is 50, about 300 words a page, read at 250 a minute.The runtime is Audible’s own, shown at the speed beside it. The reading time is our estimate: 160 pages at 80 pages an hour, the pace you told us. Ours is 50, about 300 words a page, read at 250 a minute.

Slot → commute-safe

About as demanding in audio as Slaughterhouse-Five.

All the books we hold · 222

Easier to hear than 74% of the books we hold.

Fiction · 176

Easier to hear than 71% of the fiction we hold.

Short books · 57

About as much work in audio as most of the short books we hold.

Reading load against listening load

Every book we hold placed by how much work it asks on the page, left to right, against how much it asks in your ears, bottom to top: 222 of them. Easy both ways is the bottom left corner, hard both ways the top right; above the dashed line the ears work harder, below it the page does. Marked for scale: Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, To Kill a Mockingbird and The Diary of a Young Girl. This one is in the middle 40% of our shelf of books for effort on the page and in the middle 40% of our shelf of books for effort in your ears.
The dashed line is where a book would be same effort either way. This one sits below that line (the page asks more of you here than audio does), in the bottom 27% of our shelf of books for extra work in audio.
On the page0.01
In your ears−0.26
Audio disadvantage−0.61

Where that puts this one among the books we hold: in the middle 40% of our shelf of books on both counts (effort on the page and effort in your ears). The middle of the scale is not the middle of the shelf (most books sit below the average on both), so a book at 0.00 is already in the top 43% for effort on the page. Each of the three is measured against the whole shelf separately, so the bottom figure is not the top two subtracted. It is this book’s own distance from the middle.

What the audio disadvantage is made of. Two things and no others: how fast readers say this one moves, and how demanding the reviews we read found it. There is no third: the structural one has no data source, so it contributes nothing rather than being guessed at. Both directions are declared priors we have never fitted against a real verdict, which is the weakest-evidenced part of the whole model.

Every book we could measure both features on placed by pace, fast to slow, against how demanding the reviews we read found it, plain to demanding: 166 of them. The easiest listens are the bottom left corner and the hardest the top right, which is the shaded one. Marked for scale: Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, To Kill a Mockingbird and The Diary of a Young Girl. This one reads at about the pace of most books we hold and about as demanding as most, which is what leaves the format leaning towards the recording.
This one reads at about the pace of most books we hold and about as demanding as most, which is what leaves the format leaning towards the recording.

How the call was made

Where a bar carries ticks, the grey one is the middle of our shelf and a coloured one is a line we publish, cool where we start backing the page, warm where we start backing the recording. The evidence squares at the foot are a different thing: how far each of our four sources went, hatched where there was nothing to measure at all.

The audio case
0.61With the reading left out, this figure is the format alone: it is easier in audio than most books we hold (in the bottom 27% of our shelf of books for extra work in audio). Past the line where we start backing the recording. But that line is a claim about a recording, and only 151 people have rated this one, so we did not make it.
Narration payoff
0.00The reading took no part in this call. It scored 0.08 above the middle of our shelf of books (the second mark on the bar), but only 151 people have rated it, short of the 250 at which we let a judgement about a reading move a verdict, so it is recorded at 0.00 and the call rests on the book and the format. No line is drawn on this row, because none was applied.
What is at stake
0.04It sits between the bottom 27% and the top 33% of our shelf of books for how well the print crowds think of a book: middling regard, so this barely moves the call either way. Blended across 49,517 Goodreads ratings and 286 on Hardcover, each scored inside its own population first, and never added together.

For the page

  • The crowds’ regard did not reach the line where we protect a first read, this reason did not apply

For the recording

  • Too few listeners have rated this reading, so we left the voice out of the call, this reason did not apply
  • An easy listen anyway
  • Only 151 listeners have rated this reading, under the 250 we ask for, this reason did not apply

Neither column won it: the two came out level, which is the answer above.

A bigger dot counted for more: the voice and the ear are sized by their share of the sum above, the other two by how much stands behind them. A hatched square is a reason that did not apply here, which is not the same as one that counted for little.

Evidence
0.93How much of the picture we actually have, out of 1.00: four questions, each answered as far as the source could answer it, less anything taken off for reading fewer reviews than we aim to.The reading151 people have rated this reading: enough to lean onThe second sourceHardcover knows this book, with 286 readers there: as good as it getsThe matchHow sure we are that the recording we scored is this book: as good as it getsThe reviewsWe read 300 reviews to judge how demanding it is: as good as it gets

What each crowd complains about

We would need 40 reviews from each crowd before setting the two side by side, and only 19 of the reviews we read said they listened to it. So we are not drawing this one.

What the two crowds said

Showing the stars as each shop prints them. The two crowds are not measured from the same place: on our shelf Audible’s listeners average 0.35 of a star above Goodreads’ readers, so a recording that is ordinary for Audible can still out-star a book that is genuinely well liked for Goodreads. Switch the toggle to take that difference off.Showing each figure as its distance from its own crowd’s middle on our shelf, in standard deviations, so 0 is a typical book for that crowd. Listeners start 0.35 of a star up, partly because anyone who finishes a twenty-five-hour recording chose it deliberately, and this takes that off. It is not a claim that audio is better, the story figure is still Audible’s own (people rating a story they heard), and none of it moves the verdict above.

151 ratings of this readingstar chartstoo few to draw beside the book’s, and 250 is where we start trusting the shape
4.68·Audible
overall
Audible
overall, pooled by the shop, so we hold no ruler for it
75%5 stars: 75 per cent, 129 ratings
19%4 stars: 19 per cent, 32 ratings
5%3 stars: 5 per cent, 8 ratings
1%2 stars: 1 per cent, 2 ratings
0%1 stars: 0 per cent, 0 ratings

171 ratings · performance and story, as the shop pools them

4.74+0.48 sdAudible
the performance
Audible
the performance, against Audible’s own crowd
79%5 stars: 79 per cent, 120 ratings
16%4 stars: 16 per cent, 24 ratings
3%3 stars: 3 per cent, 5 ratings
1%2 stars: 1 per cent, 2 ratings
0%1 stars: 0 per cent, 0 ratings

151 ratings

4.70+0.66 sdAudible
the story, as heard
Audible
the story, as heard, against Audible’s own crowd
77%5 stars: 77 per cent, 116 ratings
18%4 stars: 18 per cent, 27 ratings
4%3 stars: 4 per cent, 6 ratings
1%2 stars: 1 per cent, 2 ratings
0%1 stars: 0 per cent, 0 ratings

151 ratings

4.08−0.45 sdGoodreads
the book itself
Goodreads
the book itself, against Goodreads’ own crowd
35%5 stars: 35 per cent, 17,125 ratings
43%4 stars: 43 per cent, 21,508 ratings
18%3 stars: 18 per cent, 8,906 ratings
3%2 stars: 3 per cent, 1,579 ratings
1%1 stars: 1 per cent, 399 ratings

49,517 ratings

The series

Hainish Cycle

The reading changes hands

9 works by Goodreads’ own count: its list numbers none of them, so this is their figure and not ours.

The reading changes hands across the 5 volumes Audible names in our records: Nathaniel Priestley reads books 1 and 2, George Guidall book 4, Roddy Doyle and Tim Treloar book 5, John Skelley book 6.

From Goodreads’ own series index, checked on 11 September 2026.

Next in the run, and we hold it: The Dispossessed: An Ambiguous Utopia

Every reading we hold

One complete reading of this book, and it is the reading every audio figure above is measured on. If there is another, we have not found it. The shelf grows in reviewed batches, never because somebody searched for a book.

  • John Skelleythe one we measured4h 44m3h 47m3h 09m2h 42m2h 22m · One voice · Audible UK and US

    Only 151 people have rated this reading, short of our published bar of 250, so we name it and print no scores for it.

    Hear it · Audible’s clip, its length read from them on load

The recording these numbers came from

Runtime
4h 44m at 1×
Read by
John Skelley
Kind
One voice
ASIN
B0CMZ5R1CQ · Audible UK
Rated in
Audible UK and US · 34 + 117 ratings of the performance
Judged on
151 ratings of the narration
Published
Recorded Books · 2024

Too few people have rated this reading for us to call it our pick (our published bar is 250), so these are its details rather than a recommendation, and Audible sorts a search by newest, so check before you buy. The runtime is the check: if the one in front of you says 4h 44m, that is the reading these numbers describe. “Judged on” is the crowd behind every judgement we make about this reading: the smaller of the performance and story counts, which is why it is a little under the two shop counts added. We do not link out to a shop, and we take nothing if you buy there.