Perception
and Illusion: Historical Perspectives
by Nicholas J. Wade
Springer, NY, NY, 2005
250pp. Trade, US$ 69.95 / £46,00 / 59,95
€
ISBN: 0-387-227229.
Reviewed by Amy Ione
The Diatrope Institute
ione@diatrope.com
Recently, with the introduction of Visual
Culture Studies into the academic curricula
of many universities, the art, science
and technology agenda has received greater
exposure. Seeing the proliferation of
images within contemporary culture, scholars
within this broad academic field took
on as their mission an investigation of
the production, form, and reception of
images past and present. As a result,
visual culture studies have re-defined
some of the basic tenets of art history,
re-configuring the text-driven approach
put in place through the efforts of men
like Alberti and Vasari. Most noticeably,
visual culture scholars have probed the
long and contested history of word/image
relations. Some have developed a keen
awareness of visual phenomena in all of
their gradations. Others have shown that
practitioners were apt to integrate, borrow,
and push-to-the-limit the technologies
that aided research, as is evident in
examination of nineteenth-century entertainment
(e.g. the fascination with pinhole cameras
and stereoscopes) and in the many digitally-based
presentations of today. Visual culture
theorists have also worked with sight
in all of its permutations, examining
hypotheses related to vision, and a number
of historical figures whose influence
stretches far beyond the parameters of
any single field. Visual culture literature
demonstrates this sweep well. In it, we
find abundant reference to Plato, the
Ut Pictura Poesis tradition, perspective
theory, Lessing, Kant, stereoscopic experimentation,
and so forth. It is also clear that the
field has raised several questions. These
include: What is visual history? How did
the philosophical legacies of earlier
thinkers influence our thoughts about
images? To what extent are the contributions
of historical eras relevant to our work
today? How do art, science, and the humanities
integrate their evolving schemata within
the cultural framework?
What has been missing, however, is a comprehensive
scientifically grounded study to aid the
field in developing an understanding of
the history of the scientific investigations
of the eye, the brain, how we see, what
we see, and why our ability to see raises
so many fascinating questions about sight,
vision, and illusion generally. Nicholas
J. Wades Perception and Illusion:
Historical Perspectives fulfills this
need. His overview, which is focused empirical
advancements rather than the more elusive
humanistic concerns of visual culture
theorists, is the first volume in the
Library of the History of Psychological
Theories Series (edited by Robert
W. Reiber). Wade treats perception, and
principally vision, as an observational
discipline. He clarifies the vagaries
of visual experience and why they compel
our studies. As he explains, the emphasis
on errors of perception might appear to
be a narrow approach but, in fact, it
encompasses virtually all perceptual research
from the ancients until the present. Moreover,
as this volume illuminates, the constancies
of perception have been taken for granted
whereas departures from constancies have
fostered fascination. Wade also demonstrates
that perceptual research includes threshold
measurement and experiment.
Generally, this far-reaching, authoritative,
and insightful survey examines the variable
nature of our perceptual experiences from
a number of angles. The author introduces
particular aspects of seeing (e.g., the
way colors can be modified by their surroundings
and that motion aftereffects can make
us believe that objects are moving despite
our knowledge that they are motionless),
and outlines historical tensions between
theoretical and experimental methods.
Surveying over two millennia of research,
Wade, a Professor of Psychology at the
University of Dundee, brings a firm footing
to earlier research into the human fascination
with perception and presents a broad picture
of how the urge to know more has influenced
the cultural milieu. Moreover, he has
a knack for capturing the importance of
incremental discoveries in the overall
scheme of investigations and for threading
the large and small questions into a unified
framework. Thus, he conveys that science
involves recording and interpreting natural
phenomena.
One exceptional aspect of the survey is
the authors remarkable sensitivity
to the interface of science and philosophy.
This perspective comes through as he traces
the history of sight and how visual phenomena
raised questions that address the close
relationship between vision, light, and
sight. The volume captures these threads,
which wind through the historical story,
and brings to the fore issues that are
re-framed from era to era. We also see
that at times new questions emerge. For
example, as Wade explains, the distinction
between light and sight was not seriously
entertained until Kepler described the
optical properties of the eye, early in
the seventeenth century. Indeed, Keplers
work is one touchstone throughout the
volume (because his formulated the problem
that generations of students of vision
have attempted to resolve: how do we perceive
the world as three-dimensional on the
basis of a two-dimensional retinal image?).
Reading through the text, I was particularly
taken with the historical sweep of the
volume. Theories of light, sight and illusion
are described, from early naturalistic
observations to the sophisticated contemporary
experiments, so frequently intertwined
with art commentary today. The careful
clarification of the experimental as compared
to the philosophical arguments we can
identify within various time framesand
across thembrings to mind that natural
philosophy was an approach that included
science and philosophy under one umbrella
prior to the nineteenth century. Moreover,
Wades ability to balance the parameters
of historical and contemporary perspectives
allows the reader to see that optics,
physiology and ophthalmology emerged from
tradition and dogma. It also becomes clear
that laboratory research continues to
expand our knowledge of vision, how the
eye works, views of the brain, perceptual
anomalies, etc. One plus is Wades
extensive integration of quotations from
the primary documents of all periods.
This captures the mind-space of historical
episodes that were quite unlike our own.
Wade also makes it clear that certain
visual problems were under examination
throughout several centuries, whereas
others were addressed for the first time
during a particular time-period. The sum
total brings together a comprehensive
cast of characters that includes (among
others) Plato, Euclid, Alhazen, Descartes,
Kant, Young, Bell, Wheatstone, Brewster,
Müller, Helmholtz, Gibson, Julesz,
and Marr.
Finally, and ironically, the omission
of images in this study brings to mind
that the tension between words and images,
so evident historically, is often sustained
in contemporary publications. Indeed,
one of the themes within visual culture
studies today is that the elevation of
text was largely due to the word-based
communication in earlier eras. While I
did not feel that Perception and Illusion
suffered from the lack of visual documentation,
I was aware of the omission, particularly
in light of the many reproductions found
in other Wade publications. Still, as
it stands, this work adds a great deal
to recent literature in the history of
science related to vision (e.g. David
Lindbergs Theories of Vision
from Al-Kindi to Kepler and Catherine
Wilsons The Invisible World).
A short review can hardly begin to touch
the breadth of research within this volume.
Suffice to say, I will visit this book
again in the future. During my initial
reading, I concentrated on areas of particular
interest to my own research. I was impressed
with Wades attention to the instrumental
devices and philosophical toys of the
nineteenth century, his overview of the
foundation of psychophysics, and the references
to visual illusions. Indeed, given Wades
ability to convey visual research, I am
certain to refer to the book on many occasions
when pursuing future projects. I also
recommend this volume to scientists, humanists,
and those in the arts who are working
with vision. Moreover, I would especially
urge those in the humanities to read it
closely. Too many visual culture theorists
have settled into a boilerplate story
that would benefit immensely from the
details included in Wades in-depth
approach.
References:
Lindberg, D. C. (1976). Theories of
Vision: From Al-Kindi to Kepler. Chicago
and London: The University of Chicago
Press.
Wilson, C. (1995). The Invisible World:
Early Modern Philosophy and the Invention
of the Microscope. Princeton: Princeton
University Press.