Object Stares Back

I'm fascinated by this book since it tackles art and subject from several important perspectives -- aesthetic, philosophical, anthropological. The figure-field reversal is not often treated in such detail or with such interesting illustrations. The first image of a eunuch is extremely haunting and well placed to begin the discussion of our objectifying the world and often forgetting the humanity of those who we picture or study. I asked Elkins if I could borrow his title for a solo art show (this was several years ago) and he was gracious to allow me to do so. I mention this because I found Elkins to be one of those aware adventurers in the quest for who we are (and who we think we are) as defined by those objects in the world that stare back upon us.

Elkins' thoughts on sight and seeing is a multifaceted deconstruction on how we view and are viewed by objects we encounter. It's a subject that we take for granted and draw large assumptions about. Elkins proposes seeing as a metaphor for the life cycle: we awake groggy-eyed like a newborn, go through our day with vigor and energy observing and absorbing, and return to darkness in sleep like blindness and death. Tied together with many personal anecdotes with flowing use of language, the book is an insight for those interested in post-structuralist analysis of idea, communication, and sight.

I remember reading SOMEWHERE-- a textbook on psychology, perhaps??-- that humans absorb about 70% of their world through their eyes. After reading this work, I am convinced it is paradoxically that the real percentage is BOTH less *AND* more than this figure. LESS because we are so often "blind" or unaware of what we see and the very NATURE of what we see and how we see at all. MORE, because so much rests on our ability to see AT ALL, especially in the late 20th century, and especially in our culture, which places such high value on sight (though, perhaps, less value on HOW we see or WHAT is seen). But, again, LESS, because we really don't THINK about what we see or *how* we see... Mr. Elkins, an art historian-- someone TRAINED to see, if you will-- has done much thinking on the topic and theory of sight and what it REALLY means to see. I admit, when I first got this book, I was afraid it would be the sort of dry, academic drivel that one would need to plow through with a dictionary at one's side, coming to the end almost gasping for breath, "there!! I finished it!!" Not so at all. Mr. Elkins has written an extremely entertaining, thought provoking book on something we all do every day, often for every SECOND of the day (and isn't dreaming a form of seeing, after all, in it's own fashion??), and done it without heavy emphasis on academia, abstract or unknown concepts, or the general feeling-- that I have had in other arenas-- that he clearly wishes us to believe that he is SMARTER than the average reader, and needs to prove it through the use of highly technical jargon or impenetrable metaphor. Again, I say, "not at all." This is a very engaging, thought provoking work that I would heartily recommend to anyone even REMOTELY interested in the ideas behind sight and what is (and is NOT) seen. We do it all the time, every day, from birth to death, in most cases. The least we can do is to listen to a fine thinker like Mr. Elkins and hear HIS thoughts on this complicated, fascinating subject.

This book offers a thoughtful and disconcerting view of visual perception that runs counter to the usual modernist view that we all perceive alike, which many of us grew up with. As a graphic designer and educator, I appreciated Elkins' point of view, his approachable writing style, and even the disturbing images he uses to make his point. I recommend this book to other designers and visual communicators.

Elkins succeeds in making the reader rethink what it means to see, to be seen, to be blind. He argues that vision is a dynamic interaction between the observer and the observed that invariably transforms both parties--even when one is inanimate. He's an art historian, but marches confidently through animal behavior, philosophy, sociology and other subjects in persuit of the meaning of vision. The resulting meditations are provocative, and usually quite rigorous, but remain clear and personal in tone and studiously avoid learned jargon. While I felt moved by the book, quite powerfully at places, I'm not sure that I actually went anywhere. Elkins avoids all mechanistic discussion of vision--even though there is much in the physiology of seeing and the quantum physics of observation which support his thesis. Consequently, the overall discussion lacks a certain fiber even though it's fully persuasive in parts. Still, if you care about vision and imagery, you can't go wrong by reading this eloquent, passionate book. It's guaranteed to make you think before you look.