A Natural History of Color: The Science Behind What We See and How We See it

by Rob DeSalle

Is color a phenomenon of science or a thing of art? Over the years, color has dazzled, enhanced, and clarified the world we see, embraced through the experimental palettes of painting, the advent of the color photograph, Technicolor pictures, color printing, on and on, a vivid and vibrant celebrated continuum. These turns to represent reality in “living color” echo our evolutionary reliance on and indeed privileging of color as a complex and vital form of consumption, classification, and creation. It’s everywhere we look, yet do we really know much of anything about it?


Finding color in stars and light, examining the system of classification that determines survival through natural selection, studying the arrival of color in our universe and as a fulcrum for philosophy, DeSalle’s brilliant A Natural History of Color establishes that an understanding of color on many different levels is at the heart of learning about nature, neurobiology, individualism, even a philosophy of existence. Color and a fine tuned understanding of it is vital to understanding ourselves and our consciousness.

Genres: Nonfiction, Science, Audiobook, Nature, Art, Evolution

304 pages, Hardcover

First published July 7, 2020

About the author

Rob DeSalle is curator of entomology in the Sackler Institute for Comparative Genomics at the American Museum of Natural History, New York City. He is author or coauthor of dozens of books, several based upon exhibitions at the AMNH, including The Brain: Big Bangs, Behaviors, and Beliefs and A Natural History of Wine, coauthored with Ian Tattersall and published by Yale University Press. He lives in New York City.

Reviews

[Jim]

Not what I expected from the blurb. It delves deeper into the how we perceive color than I expected. Sure, I wanted to know the mechanics, but not the names of the many genes that give them to a biological structure. That was too much & just confused the issue for me. The explanations of the differences between RGB & CMYK were more technical & confusing than they needed to be, too. The variability in color vision in animals wasn't explored very well, either. I knew a bit more in some cases from other reading & was hoping to learn more, but this often stopped well short.

Well narrated, but I almost quit a few times due to lack of interest. I can't recommend this to anyone, not because it was bad. It's not, but it's awkward. Doesn't really fit into an interest niche that I can think of. It's too detailed for the layman & not enough for the professional.

[Jac]

Very disappointing.

Very disappointing. After reading Color: The Natural History of the Palette...this was not enjoyable at all. I do not recommend reading this book.

[Steve]

This sounded like a great idea for a book, but I was disappointed. The writing is not great, in fact it’s downright awkward in many spots. And it was aggravating that they spent so much time in a cosmological history of the entire universe: yeah, sure, if there had been no Big Bang there would be no photons and hence no light and hence no color, but it was absurd to spend so much time on it. Every single book about any subject could justify this as well, a book about Norwegian shoes could also start with the Big Bang. Similarly, way too much ink was used explaining evolution via natural selection.

Despite my gripes, there -was- a lot of interesting stuff about color in the book. Shame to have to wade through so much other stuff to see it, and a shame the writing wasn’t better. (I admit I can’t write, myself, but I think I know good science writing when I see it, and this is substandard. )

Sadly, this book was scheduled to be released with an American Museum of Natural History (NYC) exhibit about color that opened in March - talk about bad timing.

[Debbie Gale]

Written by a museum curator, was an interesting mix of natural history/genetics/evolution and cultural history. I learned a lot.

written for a more technical audience.

[Lisa]

I tried, I really tried; but, I gather from other reviews, the content I was interested in didn't start until chapter 6? I felt tricked into learning about Big Bang theory (yet again!) and fruit flies (!) and I was skipping so much material, I decided my time is better spent finding and reading the book I *thought* I was getting.

[Amanda]

This book had a lot of fascinating content and doesn’t deserve so many critical reviews. That said, it wasn’t quite what I thought it would be. I went into it expecting to learn about a lot of case studies that demonstrate insights about color in our natural world but it’s more of a big-picture view, containing more detail than you may care to learn—and then not quite enough about many parts that most intrigued me. I am glad I read it and recommend to anyone really interested in the topic, as long as you know what you’re getting into. They should rewrite the book description to better reflect what the book actually is.

[Barrita]

Aunque he visto que algunas personas se quejan de que es demasiado específico o técnico en los primeros capítulos, siempre me ha fascinado como un mismo tema se puede abordar desde diferentes perspectivas y disciplinas.

[Anna Scheunemann]

This book goes through many topics relating to the science of color. It starts with a review of concepts about the physics of light, light perception in microorganisms, and light perception in humans that most readers are probably somewhat familiar with from high school level biology and physics. He then goes on to describe how color perception evolved and the psychology of color. Throughout these sections, DeSalle describes the work of famous scientists including Carl Woese, Charles Darwin, and Gregor Mendel. The examples DeSalle chose would be familiar to most science majors, but may be new and interesting to people from different fields. He does describe some rarely mentioned information about certain widely-referenced studies such as the study of natural selection in peppered moths. Overall, their were some intriguing facts in each section of the book, but because so many topics were covered, DeSalle only could give a broad overview of most. There was not enough new information to keep me wanting more, and I felt I was slogging through slogging through certain sections.

[Carlos]

A thorough and exacting look at the physics of light and biology of color perception, with a particular focus on the biochemical pathways that actually carry out the job of detection and recognition. While some acronym-filled discussions can become hard to follow, the authors do largely manage to make themselves understood and to explain without oversimplifying. While certainly interesting the level of scientific information in the book is probably more exacting than the casual reader would appreciate.

[Joan]

a new favorite author! i'm on chapter 4...
like many reviews, i must say it is not what i expected; unlike those reviews, i say it exceeded my expectations.
so happy to see that there are more books by lasalle...
done!
the final chapter threw me for a loop. not my cup of tea, but it says a lot about the author that he felt compelled to add it. i googled and wikied the main concepts that he covered so glibly. i assume that is the best that he could hope for from a majority of his readers.

[Marie Mimosa]

I skimmed through a lot of it tbvh, because this is a book that is too scientific for my taste. But I did read a little bit of each chapter, as well as some chapters entirely. (Chapter 8 is my favorite) i would recommend but only if you can bear the scientific parts.

[Taylor Flowe]

The first several chapters are an evolutionary history of eyes and light.
Chapter six is where it gets into the sociological and cultural implications and uses of color, which is what I was most interested in.

[Dylan]

DNF

It’s a disservice to the author that this was marketed as popular non-fiction. As an academic text goes, it’s pretty accessible but it’s a hard sell for a popular audience. I’m a quarter through and we’ve only just arrived at the dawn of eukaryotic life. Not what I was looking for.

[Matthew Storrs]

You may enjoy "A Natural History of Color: The Science Behind What We See and How We See it." Not as insightful as I would have liked but still very interesting in parts. You'll learn some things, but you'll feel like a lot is left to seek out.

[Amy L. Campbell]

Science of color, kinda cool, useful as an artist. How do bugs even see?

[Medini✨]

For a book about colour, 90% of this book is in black and white.

The beautiful cover and exactly 9 pictures from the American Natural history museum are the only colourful things here.

[Paul]

Very light. Doesn't really go into detail on any one subject. Gets briefly interesting when talking about subjective experiences of colour and then suddenly ends always mid-sentence.

[Sally Robinson]

This had more to do with genetics and natural selection than color itself. It was informative but rather dry reading.

[Chantal]

Interesting topic, but could not finish

[Schwarzer_Elch]

Todo lo que dicen es muy interesante, pero tenía la idea de que se trataba de un texto más lúdico y entretenido. Los últimos capítulos me los leí de un tirón.

[Tania]

Not at all about color. Every scientific thought vaguely related instead. No connections of interest and no focus on what had been promised with the title, color. Disappointing.

[Shana Yates]

3.5 stars

[Eva]

Dull, repetitive, uninformative, and casually claims Czechoslovakia was around in Gregor Mendel's times.

[g]

Going on the DNF shelf bc I can't bring myself to care about anything at the molecular level. Read 42% before throwing in the towel.

[Violet]

More technical than I was expecting (complimentary)

[Todd]

Interesting concepts, especially regarding the ways in which biology uses light (and thus color) for sight (or other sight-like navigation), sexual selection, safety, etc. However, for all the fantastic topics, the book is largely written too much like a textbook at long stretches, dense, and hard to read with any real wonder. Perhaps those passages could be better enjoyed by actual biologists -- though it would seem strange to write this for those that have likely already studied such things.

[are we there yet]

More science than art. Basically, because evolution.

[Alice]

Vivid. A little thin in points.