A Natural History of Seeing: The Art and Science of Vision

"A Natural History of Seeing" is not a textbook in optics nor a 'history of science' in the usual sense. Simon Ings is not an ophthalmologist or an academic scientist. He's a writer. But he's also a superbly diligent researcher; the closest comparison would be, I think, to John McPhee, and this densely interesting book reminds me of McPhee's enormous book on the tectonic geology of North America. Ings does report on recent research into the physiology of eyes, human and non-human, but his chief concern is with the semiotics (forgive me that ugly word just once, please) of vision, that is, the role sight plays in intelligence, consciousness, society, history, and evolution. His style is free-ranging, discursive, parenthetical... and highly amusing. Hence the reference to Isaak Walton, though Montaigne might also come to mind. I'd hate to have to use this book as a study trot for an exam, but I haven't read a science-centered essay with such pleasure in a long time.Although tracing the evolution of the eye - meaning inevitably the human eye - is not Ing's chief purpose, his chapters on evolution will be the most provocative for many readers. Provocative of thought, I hope, rather than emotion. Most readers are aware that the 'perfection' of the eye has been wielded as evidence of "Intelligent Design". How could such a complex organ have evolved by random tiny increments, the argument goes, and what selective advantage would a half-finished eye afford? Darwin himself contributed to this fracas by murmuring in his writings that the evolution of the eye presented him with headaches. But in fact the evolutionary progress of the eye from mere swatches of light-sensitive pigment, to light-sensing skin patches, to various sorts of eyes of diverse capabilities has been fairly well established by now, and offers, if anything, quite strong evidence of the incremental power of biological evolution - conservative, opportunistic, inevitable. What's fascinating in Ing's account is his reversal of the usual question. Instead of asking "how could evolution produce vision?", Ing proposes that we should ask "how has vision affected/effected evolution?" Ing speculates, with plenty of evidence and with appropriate reservations, that vision was one of the prime stimuli for the Cambrian Explosion of animal species, the 'saltation' that produced virtually all of the 'body plans' of the animal kingdom within a few million years. In other words, vision formed "us" before "we" needed eyes.But Ing ranges farther than a study of origins. He also takes on the subtle balance of vision and self-awareness and the chicken/egg problem of vision or communication. And he doesn't shy away from the age-old philosophical issues of epistemology, that is, of the subjective nature of vision and the dilemma of how we can know that what we see is really what is.This is a book that requires close reading and concentration. It will exercise your short-term memory, to keep the strands of Ing's discourse woven together. It's the sort of book that gets better the better you require yourself to be as a reader. If you like that level of challenge, it's a wonderful book indeed.

An enjoyable readable romp around the subject of eyes and vision. It's a serious science book (fully referenced) that reads like a fun article. The passion and the excitement the author has for his subject is clear, which means we get to effortlessly learn about this fascinating subject as we bounce around from insect eyes to octopus eyes to color perception and the Mars Pathfinder. The `natural' in the title correctly foreshadows the ecological and biological slant (not much for computational or constructionist fans here), and the `history' part is also covered in a depth not seen in textbooks (that must cover what is known not how we got here).Highly recommended for general readers interested in how they (and the rest of the world) get to see letters on pages, as well as for graduate psychology students like me looking to broaden/deepen their sensation/perception knowledge.

Beautifully written. Abundance of information. Glad to have it. Expertly crafted book, within the first 10 pages I had more "oh my goodness, I understand!" moments then I have ever had in a course.

This is an important book for more than just understanding the nature of eyes. I get the book from the local Library $1 book shelf because it did not get enough circulation. There are many accurate and useful sections. This is NOT a structured text book. More like random observations. The One chapter that made me read it was "#3 Reading each other". He sites a reader Henry Miller letter in New Scientist August 1991 story of taking blind children to the London Zoo to see baby chimps. The short version of the trip is the Chimps were very upset by the blind children with non-responsive eyes. The told my why I really dislike posed photos or people with shaded-sunglasses on. Dogs understand people through their. Etc. This book will not help you with medical issues. But is useful for understanding many aspects of eyes in general.

A NATURAL HISTORY OF SEEING is just that, traversing precepts, concepts and anatomy of the eye as figured out through time. And it's packed with information: not pages and pages of useless anatomy, but quick-look anatomical diagrams that anyone can remember, optical illusions that prove the discussed items, and other nice surprises, including an interesting couple photos of Margaret Thatcher and a few pages of color plates. Highly recommended... - lc

As a biology student, I read a lot of science books. While not quite as technical as some, this book is delightfully entertaining, informative, and addicting. I couldn't put it down.It's well-written, clear and easy reading for a non-scientist, and yet still intriguing for the more science-minded. Technical discussions of the mechanisms, evolution, and development of vision are well-explained. Entertaining optical illusions are presented, along with underlying theory. There are also many fascinating factoids about the vision of many different species of animals.I'm confused by the earlier reviewer's complaint that notes permeated the text. In my copy (first American edition) the notes are, in fact, lumped into an appendix in the back. They certainly don't clutter the reading.It has been a while since I was so enamored with a science book, and I highly recommend this to anyone remotely interested in the subject of vision.

Great book ! Came just shortly after expected date though