What do you think?
Glasses
Object Lessons is a series of short, beautifully designed books about the hidden lives of ordinary things.
Glasses are among the oldest and most commonplace prosthetics we have invented. But what does it mean to wear glasses? There is more to the answer than correcting vision. Glasses alter, enhance, and shield the way that we view the world, and the way the world sees us.
Everyone has encounters with glasses, passively or actively, from reading glasses to sunglasses. At times they are the main identifiers in a face (think John Lennon), and they signify extremes from nerdy and brainy to cool and sleazy. They are alternately the most mundane of things on our bodies and potentially the most glamorous.
Adam Geczy explores this most pervasive and accessible accessory and shows that it is both a conduit to and a barrier between ourselves and the world outside.
Glasses are among the oldest and most commonplace prosthetics we have invented. But what does it mean to wear glasses? There is more to the answer than correcting vision. Glasses alter, enhance, and shield the way that we view the world, and the way the world sees us.
Everyone has encounters with glasses, passively or actively, from reading glasses to sunglasses. At times they are the main identifiers in a face (think John Lennon), and they signify extremes from nerdy and brainy to cool and sleazy. They are alternately the most mundane of things on our bodies and potentially the most glamorous.
Adam Geczy explores this most pervasive and accessible accessory and shows that it is both a conduit to and a barrier between ourselves and the world outside.
152 pages, Paperback
Published July 9, 2026
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
July 16, 2026
This short non-fiction book is in the Object Lessons series that focuses on a single object. I love the concept of these books, read quite a few and have many more to go.
As someone who needs glasses to see beyond the page I was interested to see what Geczy had to say. There is a lot about culture and how people are perceived. There are some possible hiccups with his text, as the exposition on how children are viewed with glasses by their peers. That felt more personal than universal. In discussing various people in pop culture that wear glasses it felt like Geczy was trying to be all encompassing, yet doubt that was the case, missing many examples that could be included.
The last chapter looks towards the future with augmented glasses that have been developed and those planned in the near future. Glasses that give you an overly of additional information, or record all that you see. Let alone other futuristic improvements that may be directly embedded in contact lenses or your eye.
Not much in the way of history other than the most basic. Nothing about how glasses are made, other than now they are part of fashion and all fashion lines must now have branded glasses on offer. However, there were musings and random moments about glasses that held my interest, which is why I keep coming back to this series.
Thanks to Bloomsbury Academic and NetGalley for an uncorrected electronic advance review copy of this book.
As someone who needs glasses to see beyond the page I was interested to see what Geczy had to say. There is a lot about culture and how people are perceived. There are some possible hiccups with his text, as the exposition on how children are viewed with glasses by their peers. That felt more personal than universal. In discussing various people in pop culture that wear glasses it felt like Geczy was trying to be all encompassing, yet doubt that was the case, missing many examples that could be included.
The last chapter looks towards the future with augmented glasses that have been developed and those planned in the near future. Glasses that give you an overly of additional information, or record all that you see. Let alone other futuristic improvements that may be directly embedded in contact lenses or your eye.
Not much in the way of history other than the most basic. Nothing about how glasses are made, other than now they are part of fashion and all fashion lines must now have branded glasses on offer. However, there were musings and random moments about glasses that held my interest, which is why I keep coming back to this series.
Thanks to Bloomsbury Academic and NetGalley for an uncorrected electronic advance review copy of this book.
April 29, 2026
Back to my favorite nonfiction series! This Object Lesson is about (you guessed it) glasses, an object that I know both quite well and not as well as I ought to. Did reading this inspire me to figure out where my poor neglected spectacles are and tote them with me to an evening class? Yes. Did they help? Arguably. Did I then immediately put them aside and go back to my glasses-less life? Yes.*
But I digress. In Glasses, Geczy traces the phenomenon of four-eyed life, delving a bit into the physical history of glasses (which, all things considered, haven't been around that long) and quite a bit more into the cultural history—who has historically worn glasses in TV shows and movies, what the implications are for character development, etc. It will probably surprise nobody to hear that glasses are often a stand-in for nerdiness or undesirability, though Geczy also discusses the role of sunglasses as symbols of mystery and privacy.
A couple of missed opportunities here. Geczy says that, looking at Pixar films, he can find only two uses of glasses, in "Inside Out" and "Turning Red." But...what about "The Incredibles"? Edna wears glasses, and the entire family wears masks at various points (not glasses but might be an interesting discussion point). I haven't seen most Pixar movies, so I took a quick scan of a Wikipedia list and immediately turned up "Up" and "Soul" as well; there might be others. Now, the inclusion of Edna would not weaken Geczy's broader point about the portrayal of characters with glasses, and I'm guessing that neither would the inclusion of the characters in "Up" and "Soul" and whoever else a more detailed look at Pixar movies turned up. That said, I tend to want more research than vibe in this series, and when I can so easily refute something the author says, I'm disappointed. (I also hoped for significantly more about glasses and the Khmer Rouge—it's something that Geczy brings up late in the book, but only in passing, which is too bad when it's something that makes such a strong point about the assumption that people with glasses have an intellectual bent.)
Although this isn't memoir, Geczy also tends to extend his own (unhappy) experience of wearing glasses as a child to what he assumes glasses-wearing is like for all children. I don't know that there's anywhere where more kids are impressed than unimpressed by glasses, but as someone who was very excited to get her first glasses at the age of eight (and for whom they were, socially, a nonevent), I think there's more nuance there, probably tied to location and gender and generation, among other things. I'm resisting (valiantly) the urge to poll my college alumnae about their experiences wearing glasses (or not) as children, and I'm only hanging on to that resistance because it would be an extremely unscientific poll (mine always are), but...this might have been a good opportunity for a more scientific poll.
More pressingly: Geczy makes several comments about eyewear sometimes being used to hide deformities or facial oddities, not just for the sake of the wearer but for the sake of the viewer. His comments about this are generally tangential (he doesn't go into this in any depth), or perhaps just flippant, but the implication throughout is that it's a good thing for people to not have to see people's disabilities or differences, and...well, it did not sit well. It reminds me of ugly laws, and surely we have come beyond those? It's a small part of the book but brought the whole thing down for me.
All told them, some interesting points and a lively voice, but since these are short books maybe not enough room to go into depth on all the things I would have liked to see. Not my favorite of the series so far, but I'm excited to see what else the series brings.
Thanks to the author and publisher for providing a review copy through NetGalley.
* The eye doctor told me that they were my driving glasses. I don't drive, I said. Then they're your not-reading glasses, he said. But that's never, I said. He thought I was joking, so I still don't really know when I'm meant to wear them.
But I digress. In Glasses, Geczy traces the phenomenon of four-eyed life, delving a bit into the physical history of glasses (which, all things considered, haven't been around that long) and quite a bit more into the cultural history—who has historically worn glasses in TV shows and movies, what the implications are for character development, etc. It will probably surprise nobody to hear that glasses are often a stand-in for nerdiness or undesirability, though Geczy also discusses the role of sunglasses as symbols of mystery and privacy.
A couple of missed opportunities here. Geczy says that, looking at Pixar films, he can find only two uses of glasses, in "Inside Out" and "Turning Red." But...what about "The Incredibles"? Edna wears glasses, and the entire family wears masks at various points (not glasses but might be an interesting discussion point). I haven't seen most Pixar movies, so I took a quick scan of a Wikipedia list and immediately turned up "Up" and "Soul" as well; there might be others. Now, the inclusion of Edna would not weaken Geczy's broader point about the portrayal of characters with glasses, and I'm guessing that neither would the inclusion of the characters in "Up" and "Soul" and whoever else a more detailed look at Pixar movies turned up. That said, I tend to want more research than vibe in this series, and when I can so easily refute something the author says, I'm disappointed. (I also hoped for significantly more about glasses and the Khmer Rouge—it's something that Geczy brings up late in the book, but only in passing, which is too bad when it's something that makes such a strong point about the assumption that people with glasses have an intellectual bent.)
Although this isn't memoir, Geczy also tends to extend his own (unhappy) experience of wearing glasses as a child to what he assumes glasses-wearing is like for all children. I don't know that there's anywhere where more kids are impressed than unimpressed by glasses, but as someone who was very excited to get her first glasses at the age of eight (and for whom they were, socially, a nonevent), I think there's more nuance there, probably tied to location and gender and generation, among other things. I'm resisting (valiantly) the urge to poll my college alumnae about their experiences wearing glasses (or not) as children, and I'm only hanging on to that resistance because it would be an extremely unscientific poll (mine always are), but...this might have been a good opportunity for a more scientific poll.
More pressingly: Geczy makes several comments about eyewear sometimes being used to hide deformities or facial oddities, not just for the sake of the wearer but for the sake of the viewer. His comments about this are generally tangential (he doesn't go into this in any depth), or perhaps just flippant, but the implication throughout is that it's a good thing for people to not have to see people's disabilities or differences, and...well, it did not sit well. It reminds me of ugly laws, and surely we have come beyond those? It's a small part of the book but brought the whole thing down for me.
All told them, some interesting points and a lively voice, but since these are short books maybe not enough room to go into depth on all the things I would have liked to see. Not my favorite of the series so far, but I'm excited to see what else the series brings.
Thanks to the author and publisher for providing a review copy through NetGalley.
* The eye doctor told me that they were my driving glasses. I don't drive, I said. Then they're your not-reading glasses, he said. But that's never, I said. He thought I was joking, so I still don't really know when I'm meant to wear them.
Read
July 30, 2026love this series, but this specific book was just… gross.
(or, as a person that wears glasses, am I just “blind” to not experiencing people having that 80s/90s movies trope of “omg she took her glasses off & ONLY NOW can we see her beauty‽” / the general negative focus on women in particular in glasses (it’s truly disgusting the whole time, & here’s just one example: he says if a woman favors cat-eye style glasses, she is probably “CHUBBY” not for any other reason, y’all… but an adjective I’ve never used to describe anyone nor been called at all, tho have rocked some cat-eye inspired specs & men still somehow make passes… weird. ;)
oh, & no gender is safe really, as I can’t even type out the * real reason * Monroe & others were / are with men in glasses… it’s truly offensive.
so so so much cool & scary & weird stuff could’ve been covered in this book!! but instead it’s someone maybe bitter about his childhood & his own personal rejections later… which I doubt only have to do with him wearing glasses.
the audiobook ends with a repeated call to “take them off” but I’d rather have the Portlandia song re: The Dream of the 90s stuck in my head, & just continue to believe that “all the hot girls wear glasses, yeah” 🤓
lastly: how does someone NOT mention Buddy Holly & other real-life famous frames‽ but instead a big focus on Pixar movies & comics??
anyhow: do not recommend.
(or, as a person that wears glasses, am I just “blind” to not experiencing people having that 80s/90s movies trope of “omg she took her glasses off & ONLY NOW can we see her beauty‽” / the general negative focus on women in particular in glasses (it’s truly disgusting the whole time, & here’s just one example: he says if a woman favors cat-eye style glasses, she is probably “CHUBBY” not for any other reason, y’all… but an adjective I’ve never used to describe anyone nor been called at all, tho have rocked some cat-eye inspired specs & men still somehow make passes… weird. ;)
oh, & no gender is safe really, as I can’t even type out the * real reason * Monroe & others were / are with men in glasses… it’s truly offensive.
so so so much cool & scary & weird stuff could’ve been covered in this book!! but instead it’s someone maybe bitter about his childhood & his own personal rejections later… which I doubt only have to do with him wearing glasses.
the audiobook ends with a repeated call to “take them off” but I’d rather have the Portlandia song re: The Dream of the 90s stuck in my head, & just continue to believe that “all the hot girls wear glasses, yeah” 🤓
lastly: how does someone NOT mention Buddy Holly & other real-life famous frames‽ but instead a big focus on Pixar movies & comics??
anyhow: do not recommend.
August 30, 2026
Slender, even for this series, this is a look at the titular eyewear. We start with the position that glasses make the wearer look smarter, or the potential opposite, that being smart (ie bookish and insular and thoughtful) forces you to wear glasses, before jumping into sunglasses, and Hollywood's on- and off-screen approach to their shadowing, darkening effect. Other pages meander to dark glasses being worn by the poker player, and by the hard-of-sight, and we cover some of the current thinking about the smartglasses ready to film your life in five-minute fits and starts.
But to me there seemed a lot more that could have been covered. It's my thinking that in fact real men DO make passes at girls who wear glasses, but this really doesn't cover any psychological research into the proof or otherwise of that. Most of the females here are users of sunglasses and not clear lenses. In my limited experience there seems to be a different outcome for being be-spectacled in the world of porn – an attempt to make the wearing female much younger and not smarter; certainly I would suggest porn stars wear glasses (at least at the start) for having sex a lot more than the average person, whether or not a specific climactic result is sought. And I can see a world where the whole physique of the human changes (as per mobile thumb, tablet neck or whatever such afflictions might be) if battery and file life lasts a lot longer in smartglasses; I can see some people changing their whole way of standing and moving to get more cinematic footage.
What I'd also do, given a psychology department, is try and see (no pun intended) if the very act of wearing glasses is something that makes you bionic – when I first wore them I could only wonder if they had not corrected my sight but made my vision better than ever, making me something I never was. (I mean, some of these glasses really do allow for great vision and insight – just take the ones of this author that allow him to talk here about "Riddick 4" months before it's even got a release date.)
No, this fit the series pretty well, in covering some of the semiotics and cultural meaning of the topic. The autobiography is thankfully minimal; this never once stuffs itself with the woke verbiage of the bulk of academe. But if humble ol' me can think of areas this never touches that might have filled the picture, it kind of gives the impression more could have been made of the subject. I'm not saying a better book would have resulted, but the rest of this mahoosive series very seldom left me seeing shortfalls. Perhaps then this is too slender.
But to me there seemed a lot more that could have been covered. It's my thinking that in fact real men DO make passes at girls who wear glasses, but this really doesn't cover any psychological research into the proof or otherwise of that. Most of the females here are users of sunglasses and not clear lenses. In my limited experience there seems to be a different outcome for being be-spectacled in the world of porn – an attempt to make the wearing female much younger and not smarter; certainly I would suggest porn stars wear glasses (at least at the start) for having sex a lot more than the average person, whether or not a specific climactic result is sought. And I can see a world where the whole physique of the human changes (as per mobile thumb, tablet neck or whatever such afflictions might be) if battery and file life lasts a lot longer in smartglasses; I can see some people changing their whole way of standing and moving to get more cinematic footage.
What I'd also do, given a psychology department, is try and see (no pun intended) if the very act of wearing glasses is something that makes you bionic – when I first wore them I could only wonder if they had not corrected my sight but made my vision better than ever, making me something I never was. (I mean, some of these glasses really do allow for great vision and insight – just take the ones of this author that allow him to talk here about "Riddick 4" months before it's even got a release date.)
No, this fit the series pretty well, in covering some of the semiotics and cultural meaning of the topic. The autobiography is thankfully minimal; this never once stuffs itself with the woke verbiage of the bulk of academe. But if humble ol' me can think of areas this never touches that might have filled the picture, it kind of gives the impression more could have been made of the subject. I'm not saying a better book would have resulted, but the rest of this mahoosive series very seldom left me seeing shortfalls. Perhaps then this is too slender.
Review of advance copy received from NetGalley
Read c/ NetGalley.
Firstly, I know this is an ARC but I really hope that the publishers deal with the editing issues. Eyes described as "shouldering blue"? There are a few points with very silly typos, and a couple of sections where sentences have clearly been rewritten but the original not removed.
Overall I enjoyed this book, if not quite as much as others in the series. The history of lenses used to either improve eyesight or shade the eyes from bright light is genuinely fascinating - I had no idea about the use of emeralds and green-tinted glass by Venetian nobles, nor the use of visors by artists. I was a little perturbed by the discussion of how kids with glasses are viewed: not the repeating of stereotypes so much as that it didn't feel like there was enough reminder of the fact that these ARE stereotypes. There's also a weird tendency across the book to suggest that in some cases the assumption of genius in the glasses-wearer is born out by some individuals, which feels like making assumptions about cause and effect - and individuals don't make stereotypes real - etc etc. There's also a discussion about the aesthetics of facial shape and what glasses work with what shape, which also honestly just felt weird, when there was no "or you just pick the glasses you like!"
I liked that the book included exploration of sunglasses and their use by celebrities - and also what wearing corrective glasses does for celebrities, and that this included extended discussion of Clark Kent. The section on sunglasses included mention of blind people like Stevie Wonder and Ray Charles, which was great - but the omission of Roy Orbison felt egregious, given how his use of sunglasses was counter to basically every example provided in the book.
All up, an interesting overview, but not as insightful or engaging as others.
Firstly, I know this is an ARC but I really hope that the publishers deal with the editing issues. Eyes described as "shouldering blue"? There are a few points with very silly typos, and a couple of sections where sentences have clearly been rewritten but the original not removed.
Overall I enjoyed this book, if not quite as much as others in the series. The history of lenses used to either improve eyesight or shade the eyes from bright light is genuinely fascinating - I had no idea about the use of emeralds and green-tinted glass by Venetian nobles, nor the use of visors by artists. I was a little perturbed by the discussion of how kids with glasses are viewed: not the repeating of stereotypes so much as that it didn't feel like there was enough reminder of the fact that these ARE stereotypes. There's also a weird tendency across the book to suggest that in some cases the assumption of genius in the glasses-wearer is born out by some individuals, which feels like making assumptions about cause and effect - and individuals don't make stereotypes real - etc etc. There's also a discussion about the aesthetics of facial shape and what glasses work with what shape, which also honestly just felt weird, when there was no "or you just pick the glasses you like!"
I liked that the book included exploration of sunglasses and their use by celebrities - and also what wearing corrective glasses does for celebrities, and that this included extended discussion of Clark Kent. The section on sunglasses included mention of blind people like Stevie Wonder and Ray Charles, which was great - but the omission of Roy Orbison felt egregious, given how his use of sunglasses was counter to basically every example provided in the book.
All up, an interesting overview, but not as insightful or engaging as others.
Review of advance copy received from Netgalley
Welp. That is a book I have read. TLDR - you know in highschool when you have to write persuasive essays, but they also have to have a certain word count so you just add random shit? That's what this is for me.
This book RAMBLES. Like, it never stays on topic. Talk about glasses one minute, then explains the entire plot of something else only slightly connected the next. Repeatedly. There's chapters but God knows why, cause they don't really seem to be connected by much either. There's no breaks through the chapters, and they're boring.
When I say this seems like a persuasive essay, it's because everything is written as fact, not objectively. Like the purpose behind glasses. And how people feel about their glasses. And as someone with glasses, I genuinely sat there going the heck for 90% of it. Like, if you want to hate glasses, this is for you.
And finally, I genuinely did not enjoy a second of this book. I found none of it to be redeeming, all the points were so scattered I didn't even care. This is a 100 page book and it probably is the book that has taken me the longest to read this year. Maybe this is a bit mean, but seriously, I only finished this cause it was a Net Galley book, I debated DNFing at least 5 times.
This book RAMBLES. Like, it never stays on topic. Talk about glasses one minute, then explains the entire plot of something else only slightly connected the next. Repeatedly. There's chapters but God knows why, cause they don't really seem to be connected by much either. There's no breaks through the chapters, and they're boring.
When I say this seems like a persuasive essay, it's because everything is written as fact, not objectively. Like the purpose behind glasses. And how people feel about their glasses. And as someone with glasses, I genuinely sat there going the heck for 90% of it. Like, if you want to hate glasses, this is for you.
And finally, I genuinely did not enjoy a second of this book. I found none of it to be redeeming, all the points were so scattered I didn't even care. This is a 100 page book and it probably is the book that has taken me the longest to read this year. Maybe this is a bit mean, but seriously, I only finished this cause it was a Net Galley book, I debated DNFing at least 5 times.
April 3, 2026
When they are used, we see them without thinking about it, but they serve to either make the world visible, or two help shield us from it. Adam Geczy's Glasses, an entry in the Object Lesson series, offers such musings as this on the common vision tool exploring both their history and pop culture aspects.
Through a narrative divided in to 6 chapters, they all start on the theme of 'Looking.' Looking smart, looking inward, looking good, etc... As these are an object that both helps the user as well as can be perceived by others, there are lots of factors at play. Geczy does detail their invention and popularization. They also talk through the perceptions of the wearer, role of fashion and the near future (or already present) hybridization of artificial intelligence enhanced glasses or even contacts.
Recommended to readers of the object lessons series, short books about every day things or one who wears glasses.
I received a free digital version of this book via NetGalley thanks to the publisher.
Through a narrative divided in to 6 chapters, they all start on the theme of 'Looking.' Looking smart, looking inward, looking good, etc... As these are an object that both helps the user as well as can be perceived by others, there are lots of factors at play. Geczy does detail their invention and popularization. They also talk through the perceptions of the wearer, role of fashion and the near future (or already present) hybridization of artificial intelligence enhanced glasses or even contacts.
Recommended to readers of the object lessons series, short books about every day things or one who wears glasses.
I received a free digital version of this book via NetGalley thanks to the publisher.
Review of advance copy received from NetGalley
Many of us wear glasses from necessity, others wear them as fashion statements or for protection from the sun. Still others wear them to lend the stereotypical air of intelligence or mystique (including some Hollywood actors and singers). They are also worn as disguises (think Clark Kent). As the author says, those who need them for vision treat them as extensions of ourselves and we would do almost anything to retrieve them from danger, as he did.
The history of glasses detailed from the earliest confirmed glasses from Italy in about 1290 to the present relation to screens to sunglasses to what is expected in future smartglasses.
The Bloomsbury Object Lessons series is brilliant and educational and makes learning more about our world enjoyable and exciting. However, Glasses lacked a bit of the oomph I have come to crave. Still, as a glasses wearer myself, I greedily absorbed interesting historical aspects.
My sincere thank you to Bloomsbury Academic and NetGalley for providing me with a digital copy of this educational book.
The history of glasses detailed from the earliest confirmed glasses from Italy in about 1290 to the present relation to screens to sunglasses to what is expected in future smartglasses.
The Bloomsbury Object Lessons series is brilliant and educational and makes learning more about our world enjoyable and exciting. However, Glasses lacked a bit of the oomph I have come to crave. Still, as a glasses wearer myself, I greedily absorbed interesting historical aspects.
My sincere thank you to Bloomsbury Academic and NetGalley for providing me with a digital copy of this educational book.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews