What do you think?
Rate this book
Las manchas de tinta: Hermann Rorschach, su test y el poder de la visión
En 1917, en un remoto asilo de Suiza en el que trabajaba solo, el psiquiatra Hermann Rorschach desarrolló un experimento para poner a prueba la mente humana: un conjunto de diez manchas de tinta de colores, cuidadosamente diseñadas. Durante años, Rorschach luchó con las teorías de Freud y Jung, al mismo tiempo que absorbía los movimientos estéticos de su época, desde el futurismo al dadaísmo. Él mismo artista visual, llegó a creer que quiénes somos tiene menos que ver con lo que decimos –como pensaba Freud–, que con lo que vemos.
Luego de una muerte temprana, el test de Rorschach rápidamente llegó a Estados Unidos, donde adquirió vida propia. Adoptado por los militares luego del ataque a Pearl Harbor, resultó fundamental en los juicios de Nuremberg y en las junglas de Vietnam. Se volvió un sine qua non de la publicidad, un cliché en Hollywood y el periodismo, una inspiración para todos, desde Andy Warhol a Jay Z. También tomaron el test millones de personas a lo largo y ancho del planeta, desde delincuentes hasta aspirantes a distintos puestos de trabajo, padres en batallas legales por la custodia de sus hijos y gente con trastornos mentales o simplemente con la esperanza de entenderse mejor. Todavía hoy se sigue usando en todo el mundo en etapas de diagnóstico.
En esta biografía, la primera sobre Hermann Rorschach, Damion Searls indaga en cartas inéditas y diarios personales, en entrevistas con su familia, amigos y colegas hasta hoy desconocidas, para contar la inesperada historia de la creación del icónico test, su controvertida reinvención y su notable permanencia en el tiempo, todo lo cual revela la potencia de la percepción. Elegante y original, Las manchas de tinta brilla con luz propia como una síntesis extraordinaria de arte y ciencia.
“Impresionante por donde se lo mire… parte biografía de Hermann Rorschach, súper detective psicoanalítico, y parte crónica de la sobrevida de su test en la práctica clínica y la imaginación popular… Searls es un escritor con tantos matices como rigurosidad académica… en verdad fascinante.” —New York Times Book Review
500 pages, Kindle Edition
First published April 2, 2015
231 people are currently reading
5043 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 232 reviews
June 19, 2025
In principle, then, the Rorschach test rests on one basic premise: Seeing is an act not just of the eye but of the mind, and not just of the visual cortex or some other isolated part of the brain but of the whole person. If this is true, a visual task that calls upon enough of our perceptual powers will reveal the mind at work.
Card #1 - image from Listverse
The word Rorschach will conjure for most of us images of the famous ink blots. The word has entered common parlance, aligned with the word test, to indicate that the subject, any subject under discussion, can be seen by diverse people to have diverse meaning. Of course, that is an oversimplification.
Card #2 - image from wikimedia
The book is comprised of two more or less equal parts, symmetrically, suggesting balance, beauty, but the content of each is decidedly different, moving in different directions, at times rich with color that grabs one’s attention and at others settling back in muted tones. It reminds me of a bat, a fruit bat, I think, although it might be more like an enormous Japanese moth.
Card #3 - image from wikimedia
Rorschach, Hermann Rorschach was a brilliant doctor, interested in researching madness and trying to heal souls. Unlike many researchers he was eager to work, hands-on, with those most in need, and secured himself a post at a noted madhouse. Another characteristic that set him apart was his talent as an artist. His father had been an art teacher, and junior had professional level skills.
Descended from artists on both sides of his family, Hermann Rorschach had a lifelong belief in perception as the point of intersection between mind, body, and world. He wanted to understand how different people see, and at the most fundamental level, seeing is, as the painter Cezanne said of color, “the place where our brain and the universe meet.”
Card #4 - image from wikimedia
Searls offers a fascinating portrait of the era. The late 19th/early 20th century was a time of great excitement in the study of the brain. Freud was all the rage. The less known Eugene Bleuler, one of Rorschach’s main teachers, was a noted psychiatrist. His assistant, Carl Jung, is portrayed as brilliant, and hugely popular, with a following that included what we might call groupies today. But he is also depicted as a back-stabbing weasel.
Card #5 - image from Wikimedia
There were two general camps in the study of the brain, most of that work being centered in Zurich. The psychiatric approach wanted to figure out the inner workings of the brain. (How do you feel about that? What does that make you think of?) The psychology-oriented approach was, surprisingly, more interested in the physical mechanisms at work. (Let’s make slices out of brains and analyze the biology.) Searls shows how Rorschach, influenced by the advances of the time, and learning first-hand in the mental health trenches, (or should that be folds?) made an important breakthrough.
Alone among the pioneers of psychology, Rorschach was a visual person and created a visual psychology. This is the great path not taken in mainstream psychology, even though most of us today, even the talkiest and most bookish, live in a predominantly visual world of images on surfaces and screens. We evolved to be visual. Our brains are in large part devoted to visual processing—estimates run as high at 85 percent—and scientists are beginning to take that fact seriously; advertisers in quest of “eyeballs on the page” started to take it seriously a long time ago. Seeing runs deeper than talking.
Card #6 - image from wikimedia
It took years of testing, refinement, and study for Rorschach to devise the cards we know today. Or think we know. The blots are actually standard. You can’t just upend an inkwell on absorbent paper, fold it over and voila! We tend to think of the inkblots as monochromatic. In fact, as you can see in the images reproduced here, Rorschach used color. We tend to think of the blots as great clumps of whatever, but Rorschach was an artist as well as a creative psychiatric genius, and his ink blots were carefully designed tools of craft as well as works of art.
Damion Searls - image from the Boston Globe
Rorschach was well on his way to becoming top-tier famous in his world, a fellow to Freud and Jung, as his designs and their application became known and were increasingly put to use. Just one problem. In 1922, Rorschach meets an untimely demise at age 37, burst appendix.
Card #8 - image from Wikimedia
The life story piece done, Searls uses the latter part of the book to look at how the Rorschach test has been employed, interpreted and modified in the years since. It has gained favor and fallen by the wayside more than once. It has been used for diverse purposes, including differentiating between different but similar forms of mental illness, to evaluate the fitness of candidates for military service and other, less lethal jobs, to ferret out spies, to evaluate human behavior and feelings across cultures. The test was used to evaluate the Nuremberg prisoners after World War II. Attempts have been made to systematize interpretations of the test-taker’s responses. In fact, a major concern about the test was that some saw it more as art than science, and thought it might be too reliant on the talent of the evaluator.
Card #9 - image from Wikimedia
In the late twentieth century, the Rorschach images themselves began to find a place in popular culture. The movie Dark Mirror about an evil twin opens with credits rolling over inkblots. Blots appeared in noir, perfume ads, even a parlor game. The most famous pop-culture representation has been of the Rorschach character in graphic novel Watchmen.
Rorschach - from the film of Watchmen
It is easy to forget that there is actual science behind the creation and use of the Rorschach’s inkblots.
I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve heard, after describing this book to someone: “It’s like the Rorschach test is a Rorschach test~ It can mean anything!” I want to say No, it isn’t. However tempting it may be to “present both sides” and leave it at that, the inkblot test is something real, with a particular history, actual uses, and objective visual qualities. The blots look a certain way; the test either works in a given way or it doesn’t. The facts do matter more than our opinions of them.
Hermann Rorschach - image from WikiMedia
Whether one sees the Rorschach test as a wonderfully clever way to get past our well honed language fortifications, or as an embarrassing vestige of pseudo-scientific approaches to psychology, The Inkblots is a fascinating, thought-provoking look at the man who devised it, a look at how it works, its history, both clinically and commercially, and its benefits and weaknesses. It is brain candy of the first order. Of course, I expect I expect that what you get from the book will depend on what you see in it.
Card #10 - image from Wikimedia
=============================EXTRA STUFF
Links to the author’s personal, Twitter and FB pages
NPR interview with the author - How Hermann Rorschach's 'Inkblots' Took On A Life Of Their Own
September 2017 - National Geographic – The Rorschach Test Is More Accurate Than You Think - by Nina Strochlic
An online Inkblot test – uses very dumbed down versions of the actual blots – with multiple choice answers
This one missed the call for inclusion in the review -
Card #7 - image from Wikimedia
December 9, 2016
The Rorschach Test is an open-ended test used to explore how one's mind works. It consists of 10 inkblots, some black and white, others in color. By utilizing his talents as a psychiatrist and amateur artist, Hermann Rorschach created 10 symmetrical suggestive images that might provide a window into a subject's personality.
Rorschach considered a teaching career but felt he wanted to "read people" in lieu of reading books. He believed every person had a story to tell. He studied at the School of Psychiatric Medicine in Zurich and upon completion worked in psychiatric clinics with schizophrenics and dementia patients. Originally conducting experiments using freshly drawn inkblots, Hermann would ask "what might this be?"
The Rorschach Test was introduced in 1921 as a companion to other forms of psychological testing. It has been used in court proceedings and was administered to Nazi was criminals at the Nuremberg Trials to get a glimpse of their perceptions of the world.
"The Inkblots: Hermann Rorschach, His Iconic Test, and The Power of Seeing" by Damion Searls is a very well researched biography. Searls discusses how Rorschach created and refined his inkblots and his struggle for acceptance among psychiatrists of renown including Freud, Jung and Bleuler. Despite much opposition, the Rorschach Test has stood the test of time. Kudos to Damion Searls.
Thank you Crown Publishing and Net Galley for the opportunity to read and review "The Inkblots".
Rorschach considered a teaching career but felt he wanted to "read people" in lieu of reading books. He believed every person had a story to tell. He studied at the School of Psychiatric Medicine in Zurich and upon completion worked in psychiatric clinics with schizophrenics and dementia patients. Originally conducting experiments using freshly drawn inkblots, Hermann would ask "what might this be?"
The Rorschach Test was introduced in 1921 as a companion to other forms of psychological testing. It has been used in court proceedings and was administered to Nazi was criminals at the Nuremberg Trials to get a glimpse of their perceptions of the world.
"The Inkblots: Hermann Rorschach, His Iconic Test, and The Power of Seeing" by Damion Searls is a very well researched biography. Searls discusses how Rorschach created and refined his inkblots and his struggle for acceptance among psychiatrists of renown including Freud, Jung and Bleuler. Despite much opposition, the Rorschach Test has stood the test of time. Kudos to Damion Searls.
Thank you Crown Publishing and Net Galley for the opportunity to read and review "The Inkblots".
May 21, 2019
The 3rd test of the Rorschach test
What might this be?
A. Two men
B. A mermaid with a crab and a princess holding a glass slipper, preparing to kiss a prince
C.. A prom queen with a bucket of blood over her head with a grinning Jack Nicholson face in the center
D. Something else
(See your test results at end of review)
The Inkblots: Hermann Rorschach, His Iconic Test, and the Power of Seeing is a fascinating look at the life of Hermann Rorschach (who else? His name is in the title). How did he come to create the iconic Rorschach inkblot test that is still in use in many countries today? A contemporary of Carl Jung, Rorschach was a psychiatrist who deeply wanted to understand the human psyche. He was also a visual artist and believed that the way people saw things reflected much about their personalities. This book depicts his life and the experiences and insights that led him to develop the inkblot tests.
After his death, Rorschach's tests spread throughout the world. Many psychiatrists held them in high regard and regularly used them whilst others were skeptical. They were used to try to figure out the Nazis before the Nuremberg trials and they were used by the US military to get a better understanding of the Vietnamese during the Vietnam War. They remain in use today and are even used to determine child custody rights in the United States. This book shows the evolution of the tests and their meanings, and how they are viewed today. I found it interesting and very well researched, though I'm still not convinced of their validity. It seems to me rather arbitrary, the meaning of the answers left largely to the discretion of the tester. However, there are also compelling stories told of how they accurately described people when other psychiatric tests did not. Do they work? Or are they the historical equal of personality tests anyone can take (and make) on Facebook today? Read this book, and you decide.
Your test results:
A. You are so bloody normal that the psychiatrist is going to fall asleep during your test.
B. Disney has highly affected your perception of the world.
C. You read far too many Stephen King novels.
D. How the hell should I know? I'm pretending to be a psychiatrist, not a fricking psychic. I can't read your mind to know what you think you see. However, I can predict that a psychiatrist will probably find your answers more interesting than those of Person who Selected Number One.
September 20, 2017
This book is part biography, part history. The first half of this book is a biography of Hermann Rorschach a Swiss psychiatrist who developed the "Rorschach test" that utilizes a standardized set of inkblots for psychoanalytical purposes. Just as his test was beginning to come to the attention of others he unexpectedly died at the young age of thirty-seven in 1922.
The second half of the book follows the history of the Rorschach test after Hermann's death as others continued to test its validity and make improvements. The test's popularity has varied over subsequent years and has caused polarization between its defenders and its critics.
I was surprised to find the man Hermann Roschach to be a likable person from the biography portion of the book. Why surprised? Well, I guess I anticipated that a Swiss psychiatrist from the early twentieth century would be a stiff personality filled with old fashioned ideals. But instead I found him described as a congenial sort with whom I could comfortably identify. In particular he was an advocate for women's rights and showed his appreciation of intelligent women by marrying a Swiss educate physician from Russia. This and other facts about him confirmed in my mind that Hermann Roschach was a progressive person for his era.
Hermann Rorschach was a talented artist which one would expect from the nature of the test he developed. Use of the word "inkblot" does not provide a fair description of the nature of the graphics utilized in his test. Each of the blots prepared by Rorschach was meticulously designed to be as ambiguous and "conflicted" as possible. There are ten official inkblots, each printed on a separate white card, approximately 18 by 24 cm (7 by 9.5 inches) in size. Each of the blots has near perfect bilateral symmetry. Five inkblots are of black ink, two are of black and red ink and three are multicolored, on a white background.
Each blot is suggestive of both form and movement. What you see in the blots counts less toward your result than the technicalities of how you perceive form and movement. These standard ten blots have remained unchanged all these years since Rorschach. All changes and improvements made since its first development have been in the area of scoring and interpretation.
I was sorry, even shocked, when suddenly the book informed me that Hermann Rorschach died in the prime of life at middle age. As the book continues to follow the fortunes of his test after his death I couldn't help but wonder how things may have been different had he lived a longer. He developed his test primarily as a tool for the diagnosis of schizophrenia after he noticed differing responses to graphic shapes. He experimented some with the test as a personality test, but showed caution of its use in that manner. It was other people who later championed the test as a general personality test.
The later part of the book ends up being a history of twentieth century psychology as the various schools of psychology seemed to be fighting for dominance. As portrayed in this book the Rorschach test demonstrated merit because various personality types showed differing patterns of inkblot perception. Problems with the Rorschach come from developing meaningful conclusions from its scoring. Efforts to improve the test's accuracy has resulted in tedious procedures for scoring its results.
An example is given in the book where a mistake in scoring resulted in untrue conclusions that led to an improper decision in a divorce custody battle. But similar mistakes can be found with other types of psychological tests as well. It makes sense to me that the Rorschach might have an advantage in situations where there are differences in culture and language that would make using verbal or written tests difficult to administer.
The book includes one chapter that covers the use of the Rorschach test on the defendants in the Nazi leadership group prior to the first Nuremberg trials.
The test's popularity is currently at a low ebb in most countries. I noticed that the Wikipedia article on the Rorschach test indicates that its popularity remains high in Japan.
The book contains an Appendix in which the author includes a touching tribute to Hermann Rorschach written by his wife many years after his death. The Appendix also contains an interesting story about how the author was able to obtain documentation about Rorschach's life.
The second half of the book follows the history of the Rorschach test after Hermann's death as others continued to test its validity and make improvements. The test's popularity has varied over subsequent years and has caused polarization between its defenders and its critics.
I was surprised to find the man Hermann Roschach to be a likable person from the biography portion of the book. Why surprised? Well, I guess I anticipated that a Swiss psychiatrist from the early twentieth century would be a stiff personality filled with old fashioned ideals. But instead I found him described as a congenial sort with whom I could comfortably identify. In particular he was an advocate for women's rights and showed his appreciation of intelligent women by marrying a Swiss educate physician from Russia. This and other facts about him confirmed in my mind that Hermann Roschach was a progressive person for his era.
Hermann Rorschach was a talented artist which one would expect from the nature of the test he developed. Use of the word "inkblot" does not provide a fair description of the nature of the graphics utilized in his test. Each of the blots prepared by Rorschach was meticulously designed to be as ambiguous and "conflicted" as possible. There are ten official inkblots, each printed on a separate white card, approximately 18 by 24 cm (7 by 9.5 inches) in size. Each of the blots has near perfect bilateral symmetry. Five inkblots are of black ink, two are of black and red ink and three are multicolored, on a white background.
Each blot is suggestive of both form and movement. What you see in the blots counts less toward your result than the technicalities of how you perceive form and movement. These standard ten blots have remained unchanged all these years since Rorschach. All changes and improvements made since its first development have been in the area of scoring and interpretation.
I was sorry, even shocked, when suddenly the book informed me that Hermann Rorschach died in the prime of life at middle age. As the book continues to follow the fortunes of his test after his death I couldn't help but wonder how things may have been different had he lived a longer. He developed his test primarily as a tool for the diagnosis of schizophrenia after he noticed differing responses to graphic shapes. He experimented some with the test as a personality test, but showed caution of its use in that manner. It was other people who later championed the test as a general personality test.
The later part of the book ends up being a history of twentieth century psychology as the various schools of psychology seemed to be fighting for dominance. As portrayed in this book the Rorschach test demonstrated merit because various personality types showed differing patterns of inkblot perception. Problems with the Rorschach come from developing meaningful conclusions from its scoring. Efforts to improve the test's accuracy has resulted in tedious procedures for scoring its results.
An example is given in the book where a mistake in scoring resulted in untrue conclusions that led to an improper decision in a divorce custody battle. But similar mistakes can be found with other types of psychological tests as well. It makes sense to me that the Rorschach might have an advantage in situations where there are differences in culture and language that would make using verbal or written tests difficult to administer.
The book includes one chapter that covers the use of the Rorschach test on the defendants in the Nazi leadership group prior to the first Nuremberg trials.
The test's popularity is currently at a low ebb in most countries. I noticed that the Wikipedia article on the Rorschach test indicates that its popularity remains high in Japan.
The book contains an Appendix in which the author includes a touching tribute to Hermann Rorschach written by his wife many years after his death. The Appendix also contains an interesting story about how the author was able to obtain documentation about Rorschach's life.
May 23, 2017
The Inkblots: Hermann Rorschach, His Iconic Test, and the Power of Seeing was a powerful book. It allowed you into the heart and mind of the creator of the famed inkblot tests and it also shed light on the various ways it has been used and misused. I found the personality of Hermann Rorschach to be just beautiful. He endured so much in his younger years, all the while he was far more intelligent than the normal person his age.
The way that the government used the inkblots was pretty unsettling to me and I worried about the powerful use in a way that was not quite intended by Rorschach. Just a wonderful piece of history with a lot of photographs and human moments.
This book is why I love Historical Non-Fiction. It is extremely well documented and there are so many little facts that show the beauty of this man. He was an artist with a great gift and he put his talents into helping schizophrenics get an accurate diagnosis. Although the testing of people by the government is distasteful, there is still an active population that continues to ascribe to the inkblot test.
I received the hardback copy from Blogging for Books. This review as are all my reviews my honest opinion.
The way that the government used the inkblots was pretty unsettling to me and I worried about the powerful use in a way that was not quite intended by Rorschach. Just a wonderful piece of history with a lot of photographs and human moments.
This book is why I love Historical Non-Fiction. It is extremely well documented and there are so many little facts that show the beauty of this man. He was an artist with a great gift and he put his talents into helping schizophrenics get an accurate diagnosis. Although the testing of people by the government is distasteful, there is still an active population that continues to ascribe to the inkblot test.
I received the hardback copy from Blogging for Books. This review as are all my reviews my honest opinion.
February 24, 2026
Let me introduce you to Hermann Rorschach, pioneering psychologist and winner of the 1919 Central European Brad Pitt Lookalike Contest:
Couple these smouldering good looks with a sensitive demeanour, a tragic early death, and a commitment to social justice (‘equality must exist between men and women. Not in political tussles but in the domestic sphere, and above all in sex life’) and it’s easy to get attached to this gentle and fascinating thinker.
Studying at the famous Burghölzli asylum in Zurich, under the same professor as CG Jung, Rorschach was caught up in the frenzy of excitement over those early discoveries of psychoanalysis – Freudian dream analysis, Jung’s word association tests, hypnotic regression. But unlike many of his peers (whose techniques are characterised here as ‘psychology by the word people, for the word people’), Rorschach was always more interested in visual pathways to the mind.
His inkblots were a kind of art, painstakingly refined to be just suggestive enough to be revealing, but abstract enough to demand interpretation from the subject. The bilateral symmetry was crucial, reflecting patterns of nature; the use of colour in some cards but not others was very deliberate.
‘What might this be?’ was the question he asked. Pop culture has made it easy to satirise the implications of how you answer (‘a happy butterfly in a meadow is good, an ax murderer is bad’), but actually that kind of ‘content analysis’ was rarely the point. Instead, Rorschach was looking at a variety of different elements in the responses: did you predominantly see human figures, or inanimate shapes? Did you see movement? Did you respond more to form, or to colour? Did you find a story for the whole image, or just identify details? These were the kind of things that proved to be remarkably revealing, and in ways that often seemed to bypass traditional diagnostics.
Rorschach’s system was published in 1921; the following year, he dropped dead of appendicitis. Without him there as a guiding spirit, the test was taken up in all kinds of unexpected ways – especially in the US, where it became wildly popular, hitting a peak in the 1960s when it was being administered to hundreds of thousands of people – in criminal cases, to screen job applicants, to check your suitability for military service. It was given to the defendants at Nuremberg, in the hope of identifying some special Nazi psychology (unfortunately they all turned out to be psychologically normal – or at least ‘abnormal in typical ways’ – at which point the experiment was quietly dropped).
The Rorschach test has suffered from a lot of pushback since then. Many came to see it as ‘a symbol for everything people didn’t like about psychotherapy: too much unprovable influence, too much room for bias, not enough hard science’. There are, apparently, still psychologists who use it, but it’s become a bit hipster: one devotee in here describes it as ‘sort of like vinyl: you only use it if you really want the music to be good’.
This book, then, is one of two halves, the first telling the story of Rorschach, and the second of his test’s afterlife. I was more interested in the first than the second, but Damion Searls does both very well, and in a calm, authoritative, witty prose style. An experienced translator from German, he was in a good position to read all the primary research – much of which, indeed, he had to uncover himself, since no one has written a biography of Rorschach in English before. It’s a fascinating dive into the intellectual world of early-twentieth-century Europe, and a great primer on a test that – depending on who’s looking at it – is either ‘a marvellously sensitive and accurate tool’ or ‘an embarrassing vestige of pseudoscience’.
Couple these smouldering good looks with a sensitive demeanour, a tragic early death, and a commitment to social justice (‘equality must exist between men and women. Not in political tussles but in the domestic sphere, and above all in sex life’) and it’s easy to get attached to this gentle and fascinating thinker.
Studying at the famous Burghölzli asylum in Zurich, under the same professor as CG Jung, Rorschach was caught up in the frenzy of excitement over those early discoveries of psychoanalysis – Freudian dream analysis, Jung’s word association tests, hypnotic regression. But unlike many of his peers (whose techniques are characterised here as ‘psychology by the word people, for the word people’), Rorschach was always more interested in visual pathways to the mind.
His inkblots were a kind of art, painstakingly refined to be just suggestive enough to be revealing, but abstract enough to demand interpretation from the subject. The bilateral symmetry was crucial, reflecting patterns of nature; the use of colour in some cards but not others was very deliberate.
‘What might this be?’ was the question he asked. Pop culture has made it easy to satirise the implications of how you answer (‘a happy butterfly in a meadow is good, an ax murderer is bad’), but actually that kind of ‘content analysis’ was rarely the point. Instead, Rorschach was looking at a variety of different elements in the responses: did you predominantly see human figures, or inanimate shapes? Did you see movement? Did you respond more to form, or to colour? Did you find a story for the whole image, or just identify details? These were the kind of things that proved to be remarkably revealing, and in ways that often seemed to bypass traditional diagnostics.
Rorschach’s system was published in 1921; the following year, he dropped dead of appendicitis. Without him there as a guiding spirit, the test was taken up in all kinds of unexpected ways – especially in the US, where it became wildly popular, hitting a peak in the 1960s when it was being administered to hundreds of thousands of people – in criminal cases, to screen job applicants, to check your suitability for military service. It was given to the defendants at Nuremberg, in the hope of identifying some special Nazi psychology (unfortunately they all turned out to be psychologically normal – or at least ‘abnormal in typical ways’ – at which point the experiment was quietly dropped).
The Rorschach test has suffered from a lot of pushback since then. Many came to see it as ‘a symbol for everything people didn’t like about psychotherapy: too much unprovable influence, too much room for bias, not enough hard science’. There are, apparently, still psychologists who use it, but it’s become a bit hipster: one devotee in here describes it as ‘sort of like vinyl: you only use it if you really want the music to be good’.
This book, then, is one of two halves, the first telling the story of Rorschach, and the second of his test’s afterlife. I was more interested in the first than the second, but Damion Searls does both very well, and in a calm, authoritative, witty prose style. An experienced translator from German, he was in a good position to read all the primary research – much of which, indeed, he had to uncover himself, since no one has written a biography of Rorschach in English before. It’s a fascinating dive into the intellectual world of early-twentieth-century Europe, and a great primer on a test that – depending on who’s looking at it – is either ‘a marvellously sensitive and accurate tool’ or ‘an embarrassing vestige of pseudoscience’.
August 29, 2018
Review soon.
March 7, 2017
A great thank you to Crown Publishing, Damion Searls, and netgalley for sharing a copy of this book for an unbiased review.
It's imperative to note that the Rorschach test is the one psychological test one cannot fail because there are no right or wrong answers, just interpretations. It simply shows the testing entity how one's mind works, how one may perceive what is seen. Its inspiration was a children's game he played growing up in Zurich. Easily seen as a parlor trick, the author reminds us that any guesses outside of therapy do not necessarily lead to unhealthy lifestyles.
The farther along I get, the more compassionate I realize Rorschach was. What a trailblazer! Deriving his training from the talents of Jung, Freud, and Bleurer, Rorschach set out to develop the optimal diagnostic test, a test that leads to lasting therapeutic results. He strove to evaluate his results and publish his results while overseeing the mental health of as many as 320 patients at his hospital. A hard worker, he was also a family man, first supporting his younger brother, sisters and stepmother, then his wife and two children. He was also an accomplished draftsman and woodworker who made most of his children's toys and his apartment's furniture.
His death, oh his death! The author played that perfectly. Although I knew it happened (obviously; he was born in the late 1800s) I was in no way prepared, and the shock of losing such a modest, loving man and gifted scientist and doctor felt as fresh as it may have if I had known him.
Like a starving artist, the eponymous test reached its popularity after his death. It was introduced in Japan, Russia, England. Australia, and, probably to its greatest fame, the United States. I say great fame, but I could also say controversy. But what about mental health and psychoanalysis isn't controversial? Basically it boiled down to quality vs. quantity and how to test the test. There was nothing else out there like it.
The ink blots were used around the world to evaluate not only the neurotic or schizophrenic but also: riflemen; African missionaries; job applicants; children; teachers; delinquents. Really anyone was because results could always be used as a baseline.
Test-crazy America was on the cusp of evolving from the cult of personality to one of character. Citizens sought direction through this test and its results. This was the dawning age of advertising, and the perfect environment for the Rorschach with its subjective reactions and projections. When I took my psychology and special education courses in college it was ingrained in me to be certain my results were measurable. This was the test's advantage; it had quantifiable
data. And-it could be used by the newest scientists on the block-the anthropologists, opening up to multiple cultures.
As the century progressed, the Rorschach inspired pop culture. From movies and parlor games to magazine spreads and cartoons, the ink blots were a ubiquitous symbol of creativity.
The book ends with a focus on the revisions made to the original test through the decades as well as its uses and effect on social mores. The only issue I had was each chapter for about 5 read as if it was the last. So I was unnerved to turn the page only to find another chapter.
Overall Searls did an amazing job of introducing Hermann Rorschach to the world. It was a personal reselling of his life, and I felt like the author truly cared about his subject. I could also tell he took his time researching the various editions of the test, the many groups evaluated, and the results generated. Great job!
2017 Lenten Buddy Reading Challenge book #13
It's imperative to note that the Rorschach test is the one psychological test one cannot fail because there are no right or wrong answers, just interpretations. It simply shows the testing entity how one's mind works, how one may perceive what is seen. Its inspiration was a children's game he played growing up in Zurich. Easily seen as a parlor trick, the author reminds us that any guesses outside of therapy do not necessarily lead to unhealthy lifestyles.
The farther along I get, the more compassionate I realize Rorschach was. What a trailblazer! Deriving his training from the talents of Jung, Freud, and Bleurer, Rorschach set out to develop the optimal diagnostic test, a test that leads to lasting therapeutic results. He strove to evaluate his results and publish his results while overseeing the mental health of as many as 320 patients at his hospital. A hard worker, he was also a family man, first supporting his younger brother, sisters and stepmother, then his wife and two children. He was also an accomplished draftsman and woodworker who made most of his children's toys and his apartment's furniture.
His death, oh his death! The author played that perfectly. Although I knew it happened (obviously; he was born in the late 1800s) I was in no way prepared, and the shock of losing such a modest, loving man and gifted scientist and doctor felt as fresh as it may have if I had known him.
Like a starving artist, the eponymous test reached its popularity after his death. It was introduced in Japan, Russia, England. Australia, and, probably to its greatest fame, the United States. I say great fame, but I could also say controversy. But what about mental health and psychoanalysis isn't controversial? Basically it boiled down to quality vs. quantity and how to test the test. There was nothing else out there like it.
The ink blots were used around the world to evaluate not only the neurotic or schizophrenic but also: riflemen; African missionaries; job applicants; children; teachers; delinquents. Really anyone was because results could always be used as a baseline.
Test-crazy America was on the cusp of evolving from the cult of personality to one of character. Citizens sought direction through this test and its results. This was the dawning age of advertising, and the perfect environment for the Rorschach with its subjective reactions and projections. When I took my psychology and special education courses in college it was ingrained in me to be certain my results were measurable. This was the test's advantage; it had quantifiable
data. And-it could be used by the newest scientists on the block-the anthropologists, opening up to multiple cultures.
As the century progressed, the Rorschach inspired pop culture. From movies and parlor games to magazine spreads and cartoons, the ink blots were a ubiquitous symbol of creativity.
The book ends with a focus on the revisions made to the original test through the decades as well as its uses and effect on social mores. The only issue I had was each chapter for about 5 read as if it was the last. So I was unnerved to turn the page only to find another chapter.
Overall Searls did an amazing job of introducing Hermann Rorschach to the world. It was a personal reselling of his life, and I felt like the author truly cared about his subject. I could also tell he took his time researching the various editions of the test, the many groups evaluated, and the results generated. Great job!
2017 Lenten Buddy Reading Challenge book #13
December 17, 2016
It wasn't too long ago that I almost exclusively read only fiction, and as a new steady reader of the genre, I can be hard to please. While anything but a well researched book won't do, I loathe the stuffiness of a book that seems more like a text book. The Inkblots: Hermann Rorschach, His Iconic Test, and The Power of Seeing by Damion Searls is the perfect blend of a well researched, absolute factual book, and writing that makes you almost forget that you are exercising your brain.
The Inkblots is more about Rorschach's Inkblot Test than it is about Hermann Rorschach, which makes this book historical in part, but also relevant today as the test is still being used today, although sometimes with a great deal of controversy. I don't think that there is a person alive who isn't aware of the test on some level or another, but this book opens the readers eyes to just how much the tests have influenced everything from science, to art, and to fashion.
I particularly enjoyed the samplings of actual case work. Nothing says how effective or sometimes ineffective, this odd method can be like reading examples of it's actual development and usage.
When it comes to books like this, I find that the writing is as equally, if not more important, than the subject, and I found The Inkblots to deliver on both accounts.
The Inkblots is more about Rorschach's Inkblot Test than it is about Hermann Rorschach, which makes this book historical in part, but also relevant today as the test is still being used today, although sometimes with a great deal of controversy. I don't think that there is a person alive who isn't aware of the test on some level or another, but this book opens the readers eyes to just how much the tests have influenced everything from science, to art, and to fashion.
I particularly enjoyed the samplings of actual case work. Nothing says how effective or sometimes ineffective, this odd method can be like reading examples of it's actual development and usage.
When it comes to books like this, I find that the writing is as equally, if not more important, than the subject, and I found The Inkblots to deliver on both accounts.
March 19, 2017
Read all my reviews on http://urlphantomhive.booklikes.com
This title immediately interested me, even though I've always been skeptical about the Rorschach test. I've however never taken one, and I hold a degree in neither psychiatry nor psychology. But I'm a scientist, so the parts where Rorschach is optimizing his test (stating he needs many more subjects both healthy and diseases, blind interpretation of tests and a standardized form of scoring good and bad answers) were among my favorites, as it seemed quite far ahead of his time.
The book however, is more of a dual biography of Rorschach but especially his test. I liked the first part (also see above) which focused on Rorschach as he's developing his test. After his untimely death in the 1920s (which is only halfway through the book) the focus changes to what happened to the test afterwards.
This latter part had great trouble to hold my interest. It seemed to contain a series of always new people quarreling about who is the new Rorschach. It is here that the test starts to falter in the hands of people who all want to prove themselves (some trying to standardize it but resulting in over diagnosis of most everyone), although I was quite shocked to find out it can be used as evidence in court (since it is not an unquestioned test). This part is also filled with quite a lot of other test and terms from personality testing, not all of it is explained well enough that it is not confusing.
All in all, I really enjoyed the biography of Rorschach, I didn't quite like the one about his test as much.
Thanks to Blogging for Books and Edelweiss for providing me with a free copy of this book in exchange for an honest review!
This title immediately interested me, even though I've always been skeptical about the Rorschach test. I've however never taken one, and I hold a degree in neither psychiatry nor psychology. But I'm a scientist, so the parts where Rorschach is optimizing his test (stating he needs many more subjects both healthy and diseases, blind interpretation of tests and a standardized form of scoring good and bad answers) were among my favorites, as it seemed quite far ahead of his time.
The book however, is more of a dual biography of Rorschach but especially his test. I liked the first part (also see above) which focused on Rorschach as he's developing his test. After his untimely death in the 1920s (which is only halfway through the book) the focus changes to what happened to the test afterwards.
This latter part had great trouble to hold my interest. It seemed to contain a series of always new people quarreling about who is the new Rorschach. It is here that the test starts to falter in the hands of people who all want to prove themselves (some trying to standardize it but resulting in over diagnosis of most everyone), although I was quite shocked to find out it can be used as evidence in court (since it is not an unquestioned test). This part is also filled with quite a lot of other test and terms from personality testing, not all of it is explained well enough that it is not confusing.
All in all, I really enjoyed the biography of Rorschach, I didn't quite like the one about his test as much.
Thanks to Blogging for Books and Edelweiss for providing me with a free copy of this book in exchange for an honest review!
September 7, 2019
I have always been very skeptical about Rorschach tests and wondered if it was merely junk science and a parlor trick that garnered way too much attention for its uniqueness. How can someone interpret your personality based on how you read ten blots? Furthermore, how do you ensure consistency from practitioner to practitioner and patient to patient. Is this a quantitative or a qualitative test? What is the margin of error and is subjectivity factored in? The most important question being: IS IT RELIABLE?
My answer to that last question is - NO.
I do not think Rorschach tests should be used for clinical purposes. It has real world ramifications, as is shown by the examples in the book. A mother losing a custody battle over her son to her abusive husband, and patriots being disqualified from serving in the military are one of many that come to mind. Despite the lack of standardization, these tests have been administered to criminals of Nuremberg trial, to personalize academia curriculums, to all personnels of US Army in World War I to assess emotional/mental damage. To this date some courts will still accept psychological analysis using the blots. I am glad that they aren't being as frequently used anymore.
I am not completely disqualifying Hermann Rorschach's work. He belonged to an age where Carl Jung and Sigmund Freud were still characterizing mental disorders and when there was a serious lack of tools (tests, assays, medications) to assess and treat mental disorders. "Inkblots" was supposed to be one of those tools, but the problem being Rorschach died well before his work was complete. Blot readings are broken into three components - Form, Movement, Color. These results and response time are coded and a score is produced. A diagnosis is made. Rorschach was adept at it, having worked on the kinks and knowing just what information to be used and discarded. That level of discernment cannot be transferred without mentorship and training. Psychiatrists and psychoanalysts everywhere impressed by initial results of the test, would take it onto themselves to make their diagnosis adding their own modifications. And that's possibly where I think it all goes wrong. I am not quite convinced about the scoring system but if all past data can be compiled and re-analysed using deep learning tools, helping devise uniform protocol and software programs, rigorous testing...then maybe it can hold credibility.
I must admit they are beautiful to look at.
My answer to that last question is - NO.
I do not think Rorschach tests should be used for clinical purposes. It has real world ramifications, as is shown by the examples in the book. A mother losing a custody battle over her son to her abusive husband, and patriots being disqualified from serving in the military are one of many that come to mind. Despite the lack of standardization, these tests have been administered to criminals of Nuremberg trial, to personalize academia curriculums, to all personnels of US Army in World War I to assess emotional/mental damage. To this date some courts will still accept psychological analysis using the blots. I am glad that they aren't being as frequently used anymore.
I am not completely disqualifying Hermann Rorschach's work. He belonged to an age where Carl Jung and Sigmund Freud were still characterizing mental disorders and when there was a serious lack of tools (tests, assays, medications) to assess and treat mental disorders. "Inkblots" was supposed to be one of those tools, but the problem being Rorschach died well before his work was complete. Blot readings are broken into three components - Form, Movement, Color. These results and response time are coded and a score is produced. A diagnosis is made. Rorschach was adept at it, having worked on the kinks and knowing just what information to be used and discarded. That level of discernment cannot be transferred without mentorship and training. Psychiatrists and psychoanalysts everywhere impressed by initial results of the test, would take it onto themselves to make their diagnosis adding their own modifications. And that's possibly where I think it all goes wrong. I am not quite convinced about the scoring system but if all past data can be compiled and re-analysed using deep learning tools, helping devise uniform protocol and software programs, rigorous testing...then maybe it can hold credibility.
I must admit they are beautiful to look at.
May 1, 2017
This book was just way more information than I possibly could have ever wanted. Spoiler alert for history, Rorschach dies really early in his life, and therefore quite early in this book. So a lot of the first part is a lot of justifying how great Rorshach would have been if he hadn't died, then the rest of the book is about how the test went into very random places because he wasn't there to provide any feedback on its use. The book itself can be rather unfocused at times, and felt more like the author wanted to talk a lot about many different parts of psychology, and would shoehorn this test into the discussion when applicable, but would go on long tangents about other things when it wasn't. There are a few solid chapters around chapters 8-10ish, where it really explains how the test was meant to be used, why it was developed, and puts it in context of where the field of psychology was at during that time period. Unfortunately, this fell into the trap that non-fiction can hit for me, where I would have really preferred reading a very long magazine article about this subject, but not necessarily all 400 pages of the book.
March 15, 2018
This is so much more than I anticipated, more intense, in depth. I was not aware that there are “officially” only 10 inkblots used in Rorschach’s tests and that “most of the Rorschach blots we see in everyday life are imitations or remakes,” that “even in academic articles or museum exhibitions , the blots are usually reproduced in outline, blurred, or modified to reveal something about the images but not everything. “ So secretive, sacred were these cards before their copyright expired and the internet took hold. Now, they are as main stream as an emoji. (There are 7 included in this book, along with photos of the dashing Rorschach, his family and some of his other later paintings.)
The belief that “you can manage what you want to say but you can’t manage what you want to see” has negated many an applicants attempt for employment after acing every test but the blots. Fascinating! But what I found most interesting is how such tests can still be referred to everyday life, as in our media reports. You see what YOU see and that is your truth.
And so we go into his early years, his birth in 1884 and events alongside. His father was a painter, his mother, a doting, fun-filled woman with both combined to make their children’s lives enjoyable and successful to adulthood. And we follow him, in great visual and dialogue through to such. His schooling, his early practice, his many successes and earned accolades, some of his cases/patients. This book has so much information, so many elements, that it would take me a book itself to highlight them. Suffice it to say that this is an exceptional biography, spanning (it feels) every day in the life of Rorschach.
When it got into the psychology of the cards, I did get lost a time or two, not knowing the lingo, but none of the book was written in a “scholarly” fashion, more so that anyone could read, enjoy and learn from its contents. We DO have the internet, after all, so look up the “Zipf curve” and read on!
Bravo, Searls. This is a book I will read again and again.
February 25, 2017
More reviews are available on my blog:
http://reviewsofbooksonmynightstand.b...
I really thought that this book would be right up my alley. I have a degree in psychology and have studied Rorschach's inkblots. I've actually even taken an inkblot test and have seen how they are scored. What I was looking for in this book was evidence that I am wrong- that the Rorschach test is a great measure of someone's psychological well-being and shouldn't go the way of phrenology. I didn't find it. What I found instead was more evidence that the interpretation of this test is just as subjective as the inkblots, themselves. What a patient sees in the inkblot and how they explain it can vary depending upon the mood of the tester or the patient, the time of day or even what the patient ate for breakfast that morning. Not to mention, when it is given in a clinical setting, it will be much different than a patient who may not feel threatened about what the test might reveal or be on psychotropic medications that could alter the test results because they are not patients. This fact, alone, will cause a difference between the patient that takes the test and the control group, making the empirical support for the test questionable. Sometimes, a patient will see what they believe the tester wants them to see and may be limited by their age, education or culture. For example, if you were from a country with more bats than butterflies, you will naturally see more bats in the inkblots. The answers that I will give, having studied the testing method, will be much different than that of someone who a middle school education. The test does not account for these differing life experiences. The fact that I am not a huge fan inkblot tests is not why I am giving this two stars, though. I am giving this book two stars because it is incredibly dull and it didn't contain the information that I hoped that it would. The textbooks that I read on the inkblot tests were far more interesting than how this book is written. I couldn't even finish this. I have about 50 more pages to go and I can't bring myself to read more than a few pages at a time. I feel really bad about not finishing the book, as there may be something incredibly exciting at some point in the last 50 pages, but I just doubt it. The only reason why I gave this two stars instead of one is because the book is incredibly well-researched and there is a lot of information that I didn't know about Hermann Rorschach, his family and the struggles to get his work published (in an age when scientists receive grants to force a shrimp to run on a treadmill until it gets sick, it is amazing to me). I just wish that there was more information on the inkblot tests, the criticism the tests have received (it isn't just me, trust me) and the use and misuse of the tests. I believe that this information, and a different writing style, would have made this book more interesting to me.
I want to thank Goodreads and Crown Publishing for a giveaway for this book for review purposes and I really wish that my reading of it had gone better and I could have given it a glowing review. Just because I didn't enjoy this book doesn't mean you won't but I just couldn't get into it.
http://reviewsofbooksonmynightstand.b...
I really thought that this book would be right up my alley. I have a degree in psychology and have studied Rorschach's inkblots. I've actually even taken an inkblot test and have seen how they are scored. What I was looking for in this book was evidence that I am wrong- that the Rorschach test is a great measure of someone's psychological well-being and shouldn't go the way of phrenology. I didn't find it. What I found instead was more evidence that the interpretation of this test is just as subjective as the inkblots, themselves. What a patient sees in the inkblot and how they explain it can vary depending upon the mood of the tester or the patient, the time of day or even what the patient ate for breakfast that morning. Not to mention, when it is given in a clinical setting, it will be much different than a patient who may not feel threatened about what the test might reveal or be on psychotropic medications that could alter the test results because they are not patients. This fact, alone, will cause a difference between the patient that takes the test and the control group, making the empirical support for the test questionable. Sometimes, a patient will see what they believe the tester wants them to see and may be limited by their age, education or culture. For example, if you were from a country with more bats than butterflies, you will naturally see more bats in the inkblots. The answers that I will give, having studied the testing method, will be much different than that of someone who a middle school education. The test does not account for these differing life experiences. The fact that I am not a huge fan inkblot tests is not why I am giving this two stars, though. I am giving this book two stars because it is incredibly dull and it didn't contain the information that I hoped that it would. The textbooks that I read on the inkblot tests were far more interesting than how this book is written. I couldn't even finish this. I have about 50 more pages to go and I can't bring myself to read more than a few pages at a time. I feel really bad about not finishing the book, as there may be something incredibly exciting at some point in the last 50 pages, but I just doubt it. The only reason why I gave this two stars instead of one is because the book is incredibly well-researched and there is a lot of information that I didn't know about Hermann Rorschach, his family and the struggles to get his work published (in an age when scientists receive grants to force a shrimp to run on a treadmill until it gets sick, it is amazing to me). I just wish that there was more information on the inkblot tests, the criticism the tests have received (it isn't just me, trust me) and the use and misuse of the tests. I believe that this information, and a different writing style, would have made this book more interesting to me.
I want to thank Goodreads and Crown Publishing for a giveaway for this book for review purposes and I really wish that my reading of it had gone better and I could have given it a glowing review. Just because I didn't enjoy this book doesn't mean you won't but I just couldn't get into it.
February 26, 2017
Interesting, sometimes even fascinating dual biographies about Dr. Hermann Rorschach, Swiss psychiatrist and developer of the eponymous inkblot test and also about the test itself: its creation and later trajectory [after his early death at 37] at how the "experiment" has been used and misused until present-day. The overuse of psychiatric/psychological names and theories were, to me, dense and confusing at best. Rorschach was a multitalented man, an artist. The inkblot rose from humble beginning as a child's parlor game through predecessors to Rorschach's final version--a series of ten inkblots: some black-and-white, some with touches of red; and others multicolored. Rorschach wanted to delve into human personality and married feeling and seeing. The test has had its champions and detractors over the years. I liked best the section on a Dr. Finn, psychiatrist, who would give the test then elicit from his patients the reasons for their visualizations so he would get at the heart of their neuroses, working in tandem with the patient. I liked the section on cultural biases of distinctive cultural groups, such as Ojibwa Native Americans and of Samoans. Frau Rorschach's assessment of her husband, in the Appendix was valuable. All in all, this book kept my interest despite its sometimes disjointedness.
Thanks to LibraryThing for sending an ARC in return for my honest review.
Thanks to LibraryThing for sending an ARC in return for my honest review.
February 2, 2018
I learned a great deal with this book. About convergences and their penumbras. Darwin and Haeckel. Freud and Jung. Kandinsky and van Gogh. Tolstoy and Blok. All poured like emotional paint into the infamous Rorschach ink blots. Movement, color (emotion), and interpretation (words); in his view all interlinked and to be viewed through an empathetic lens. Learning both through closeness and through distance. Rorschach, a Swiss psychiatrist, died young (age 37) in 1922 and never saw realized his full "vision." Yet his artful blots took on nine lives in the following decades, touching such diverse spheres as psychology/psychiatry, education, the military (including the Nazi war trials), the science of visual perception, advertising, art, literature, law, cinema, and pop culture. His legacy continues to evolve and has been, at times, both controversial and misunderstood. Schisms in the field over the ink blots have generally broken down into the qualitative/holistic vs the quantitative (as so many other aspects of our society). The author suggests that most recently a return to Rorschach's humanistic roots has been the trend. And I read that conclusion as for the better. No one test. No one answer.
January 9, 2019
This book was a fascinating look at the man who created the iconic Inkblots and the life they took on after its inventor's demise. He didn't live to see their iconic status. He didn't live long enough to even know they would be something well-known. He put them out into the world and then disappeared like Lao Tzu after putting those verses down.
I'm so tickled that someone like him existed. I knew very little about Rorschach before picking up this book. He was fascinating and wonderful and deserves to be known as much as Freud and Einstein and he probably would be if he hadn't died so young. The first chapter that tells of him growing up was so rich. Without even knowing what was to come, his first 18 years would make an interesting novel. It was riveting and lovely and tragic.
The fact that these Inkblots are so pervasive in pop culture is why the author digs in. To get to the heart of what they are, he tells us who their creator was. I mean seriously, who was this guy and how and why and yes, I'm curious why these specific ten designs . And how do people that are poised and able to pass every other test with flying colors trip up when the Inkblots come out? Why does a pedophile or a sociopath so easily spill it when seeing those inkblots? The answer is fascinating.
How he came up with the inkblots was so interesting. One comes away knowing that no one else but him could have come up with those ten inkblots. One comes away from this book understanding the genius of the inkblots as well as the creator's genius. But like all genius, it's a product of time and environment. Rorschach's father was a deep thinker that wrote about light and form in art and in the world. It's no wonder he came up with Inkblots with his father planting the seeds early on. His father even wrote about psychology and consciousness. The inkblot game he played as a child was the impetus, but his ultimate creation was more complicated than child's play. The thought and detail that went into them is staggering and the reason they work better than any other inkblots.
And who knew, Rorschach was kind of hot. He is one of those guys you see in old photos sometimes that could be walking around today and wouldn't look out of place. He might even be a heartthrob. Apparently he was back then too, as it was reported his patients tended to fall for him.
The times he grew up in and what and who he was exposed to is part of the story and it was really interesting. Modernity was erupting all around him. There was so much going on, it's mind blowing actually.
In Switzerland alone, during Rorschach's career there, Albert Einstein invented modern physics and Vladimir Lenin invented modern communism while working with the labor organizers in Swiss watch factories. Lenin's next door neighbor's in Zurich, the Dadaists, invented modern art, Le Corbusier modern architecture, Rudolf Steiner created Waldorf schools, and an artist named Johannes Itten invented seasonal colors (are you a spring or a winter?). In psychiatry, Carl Jung created the modern psychological test. Jung's and Sigmund Freud's explorations of the unconscious mind were battling for dominance, both among wealthy neurotic clientele and in the real world of Swiss hospitals filled past capacity. All of these revolutions crossed paths in Rorschach's life and career.
His view on Russians (he loved them) was interesting. This was pre-Stalin and all that we know now. The Russian Revolution held so much hope for so many. The excitement was akin to what the new world, the United States, felt at the time it declared freedom from royal rule. It inspired some like Rorschach at the time, but like most revolutions, the promised land was never reached.
As the story hit the midway point, I ached a bit knowing that all the discoveries Rorschach knew were to come would happen without him as he didn't have much longer. This is always true for all of us, but seemed especially poignant when it comes to an explorer and discoverer like Rorschach.
The discussion of the coinciding emergences of the concept of empathy and abstract art was absolutely fascinating. It was equally fascinating reading about the shift from perceiving character as the thing to personality being the thing. This explains pop culture so much. It also explains how generations of men with character would be replaced with cults of personality with little substance but nonetheless revered.
I would have liked to see a little more biography on those that took the Inkblots forward in the decades after Rorschach's death.
So darkly fascinating, the discussion of Nazis at Nuremberg and how they were discovered upon a closer look not to be exceptionally evil. They were like so many people: sane, intelligent, and prejudiced and having had the chance to grab power, behaved horribly. So many wanted to diagnose evil. But the thing is there is no such thing as an evil gene. There are sociopaths that are capable of doing horrible things because of their lack of empathy, and perhaps that is what they should have been looking for instead, the lack of empathy as an indicator.
Though plenty of people lack empathy that don't commit atrocities. Though, the ability to objectify others seems to be a key ingredient, although everyone on some level does just that at times even when they have empathy. The thing that was and is probably hard to understand about the Nazis - the poster boys for evil - is that while some of the higher-ups may have been sociopaths, likely not all of them were. So marking them as evil discounts the fact that some of them were very intelligent and had the capacity for empathy and kindness and love. They weren't robots or killing machines void of human emotion. In fact, a great number of them were likely just doing what they were told and didn't have the character or strength to sacrifice their life defying the powers-that-be.
The truth is, the masses that did nothing did so mostly out of fear too. Without that fear, and in some cases, complacency, there would have been no holocaust. Let's not forget, the prejudice that Hitler pandered to is the same that Trump pandered to (and a long list of others before him). Neither Hitler or Trump created that prejudice, they both saw it and manipulated it and pandered to it to get into power. That doesn't make them evil, it makes them opportunistic.
The truth is people like you and me made the holocaust possible. We prefer absolutes so we put Hitler and the Nazi's on the evil pedestal because it's easier to objectify them and pretend they are monsters instead of what they really were and that is just human beings like you and me that did horrible horrible things fueled by fear and hunger for power and riches at any cost.
In so many ways, Nazi's were no different than many in power today in how they pander to prejudice. The same racial prejudice that was in Nazi Germany is in America today. It's in cities around the world today. A Nazi-like state could exist anywhere again at anytime. Those that say "no way" don't understand human nature or human history. The latter can repeat itself at anytime if the conditions are just right. The reason history repeats itself is because too few understand that.
I'm so tickled that someone like him existed. I knew very little about Rorschach before picking up this book. He was fascinating and wonderful and deserves to be known as much as Freud and Einstein and he probably would be if he hadn't died so young. The first chapter that tells of him growing up was so rich. Without even knowing what was to come, his first 18 years would make an interesting novel. It was riveting and lovely and tragic.
The fact that these Inkblots are so pervasive in pop culture is why the author digs in. To get to the heart of what they are, he tells us who their creator was. I mean seriously, who was this guy and how and why and yes, I'm curious why these specific ten designs . And how do people that are poised and able to pass every other test with flying colors trip up when the Inkblots come out? Why does a pedophile or a sociopath so easily spill it when seeing those inkblots? The answer is fascinating.
How he came up with the inkblots was so interesting. One comes away knowing that no one else but him could have come up with those ten inkblots. One comes away from this book understanding the genius of the inkblots as well as the creator's genius. But like all genius, it's a product of time and environment. Rorschach's father was a deep thinker that wrote about light and form in art and in the world. It's no wonder he came up with Inkblots with his father planting the seeds early on. His father even wrote about psychology and consciousness. The inkblot game he played as a child was the impetus, but his ultimate creation was more complicated than child's play. The thought and detail that went into them is staggering and the reason they work better than any other inkblots.
And who knew, Rorschach was kind of hot. He is one of those guys you see in old photos sometimes that could be walking around today and wouldn't look out of place. He might even be a heartthrob. Apparently he was back then too, as it was reported his patients tended to fall for him.
The times he grew up in and what and who he was exposed to is part of the story and it was really interesting. Modernity was erupting all around him. There was so much going on, it's mind blowing actually.
In Switzerland alone, during Rorschach's career there, Albert Einstein invented modern physics and Vladimir Lenin invented modern communism while working with the labor organizers in Swiss watch factories. Lenin's next door neighbor's in Zurich, the Dadaists, invented modern art, Le Corbusier modern architecture, Rudolf Steiner created Waldorf schools, and an artist named Johannes Itten invented seasonal colors (are you a spring or a winter?). In psychiatry, Carl Jung created the modern psychological test. Jung's and Sigmund Freud's explorations of the unconscious mind were battling for dominance, both among wealthy neurotic clientele and in the real world of Swiss hospitals filled past capacity. All of these revolutions crossed paths in Rorschach's life and career.
His view on Russians (he loved them) was interesting. This was pre-Stalin and all that we know now. The Russian Revolution held so much hope for so many. The excitement was akin to what the new world, the United States, felt at the time it declared freedom from royal rule. It inspired some like Rorschach at the time, but like most revolutions, the promised land was never reached.
As the story hit the midway point, I ached a bit knowing that all the discoveries Rorschach knew were to come would happen without him as he didn't have much longer. This is always true for all of us, but seemed especially poignant when it comes to an explorer and discoverer like Rorschach.
The discussion of the coinciding emergences of the concept of empathy and abstract art was absolutely fascinating. It was equally fascinating reading about the shift from perceiving character as the thing to personality being the thing. This explains pop culture so much. It also explains how generations of men with character would be replaced with cults of personality with little substance but nonetheless revered.
I would have liked to see a little more biography on those that took the Inkblots forward in the decades after Rorschach's death.
So darkly fascinating, the discussion of Nazis at Nuremberg and how they were discovered upon a closer look not to be exceptionally evil. They were like so many people: sane, intelligent, and prejudiced and having had the chance to grab power, behaved horribly. So many wanted to diagnose evil. But the thing is there is no such thing as an evil gene. There are sociopaths that are capable of doing horrible things because of their lack of empathy, and perhaps that is what they should have been looking for instead, the lack of empathy as an indicator.
Though plenty of people lack empathy that don't commit atrocities. Though, the ability to objectify others seems to be a key ingredient, although everyone on some level does just that at times even when they have empathy. The thing that was and is probably hard to understand about the Nazis - the poster boys for evil - is that while some of the higher-ups may have been sociopaths, likely not all of them were. So marking them as evil discounts the fact that some of them were very intelligent and had the capacity for empathy and kindness and love. They weren't robots or killing machines void of human emotion. In fact, a great number of them were likely just doing what they were told and didn't have the character or strength to sacrifice their life defying the powers-that-be.
The truth is, the masses that did nothing did so mostly out of fear too. Without that fear, and in some cases, complacency, there would have been no holocaust. Let's not forget, the prejudice that Hitler pandered to is the same that Trump pandered to (and a long list of others before him). Neither Hitler or Trump created that prejudice, they both saw it and manipulated it and pandered to it to get into power. That doesn't make them evil, it makes them opportunistic.
The truth is people like you and me made the holocaust possible. We prefer absolutes so we put Hitler and the Nazi's on the evil pedestal because it's easier to objectify them and pretend they are monsters instead of what they really were and that is just human beings like you and me that did horrible horrible things fueled by fear and hunger for power and riches at any cost.
In so many ways, Nazi's were no different than many in power today in how they pander to prejudice. The same racial prejudice that was in Nazi Germany is in America today. It's in cities around the world today. A Nazi-like state could exist anywhere again at anytime. Those that say "no way" don't understand human nature or human history. The latter can repeat itself at anytime if the conditions are just right. The reason history repeats itself is because too few understand that.
October 22, 2022
Buena introducción interdisciplinar para entender el contexto y la teoría detrás del Test de Rorschach.
December 28, 2016
via my blog https://bookstalkerblog.wordpress.com/
"In a twist of fate that seems too good to be true, Rorschach's nickname in school was "Klex", the German word for "inkblot". Was young Blot Rorschach already tinkering with ink, his destiny foretold?"
I remember one day in Kindergarten we took a blob of paint and created blotchy art work by folding the paper in half, most looked like moths or butterflies when we peeled open the paper. The first time I can recall mention of Ink Blots for psychological purposes, my mind went back to this day and the blots have forever interested me. What a strange way to invade the mind, and could this really tell you anything about a person's psyche? Hit the internet, there are quizzes everywhere from the silly to serious telling you about yourself. As controversy entered the ink blots growth, I too am one of those people that wonders if ' you can really sum anyone up based on images, or questions?' Really, as the reader sees in the book, if you live in another country can't the images affect you differently simply because of one's culture? The horrifying reality is tests can fail, as happened to a woman concerning the ink blots, that caused her child's abuse to be dismissed. Used as a tool, it seems to have stood the test of time, but should we ever really rely on images or questions to determine court cases, should the findings be an absolute? The research stands, is it simply coincidence if most psychopaths see certain images and I happen to see the same thing or does it mean I have psychopathic tendencies? There is solid work and decades of research, and yet always that but pushes it's way in.
This book focuses on the life of the Rorschach Test which outlived it's creator. There are stories about the man himself and I was interested in his approach to patients. From the reading, Hermann appeared to be someone who truly wanted to heal the minds of the afflicted. There is controversy in everything that is meant to help or categorize, in anything that medicates, treats. The fact stands that nothing is full proof, but do we dismiss it altogether? The ink blot test morphed through the years as it changed hands, could that be the problem? Could the biggest problem be that people reviewing the test aren't always qualified, trained to? That can be a fatal flaw. There was a time it held up, used by the military and in job hiring to weed out undesirable applicants, in trials, in abuse hearings... see it as you will, but it is an icon itself and not just in America. My thoughts are in the middle, I tend to believe that you can't peg people that easily, I always think about what we say, what we don't. My question is always, 'How do you know the answers someone is giving are honest?" Sure, the counter argument is that deception is spotted by those trained to see it, and says a lot too. But can we ever really know? As with anything, it helped and it hindered. It is alive and well today and still has its uses. I enjoyed the history Rorschach's ink blot test's birth and how it morphed into what it is today. Fascinating read that is well researched, I learned things I had never known about Hermann Rorschach and the ink blot test, the reasons why he chose the designs and color he did. Yes, read it.
Publication Date: February 21, 2017
Crown Publishing
"In a twist of fate that seems too good to be true, Rorschach's nickname in school was "Klex", the German word for "inkblot". Was young Blot Rorschach already tinkering with ink, his destiny foretold?"
I remember one day in Kindergarten we took a blob of paint and created blotchy art work by folding the paper in half, most looked like moths or butterflies when we peeled open the paper. The first time I can recall mention of Ink Blots for psychological purposes, my mind went back to this day and the blots have forever interested me. What a strange way to invade the mind, and could this really tell you anything about a person's psyche? Hit the internet, there are quizzes everywhere from the silly to serious telling you about yourself. As controversy entered the ink blots growth, I too am one of those people that wonders if ' you can really sum anyone up based on images, or questions?' Really, as the reader sees in the book, if you live in another country can't the images affect you differently simply because of one's culture? The horrifying reality is tests can fail, as happened to a woman concerning the ink blots, that caused her child's abuse to be dismissed. Used as a tool, it seems to have stood the test of time, but should we ever really rely on images or questions to determine court cases, should the findings be an absolute? The research stands, is it simply coincidence if most psychopaths see certain images and I happen to see the same thing or does it mean I have psychopathic tendencies? There is solid work and decades of research, and yet always that but pushes it's way in.
This book focuses on the life of the Rorschach Test which outlived it's creator. There are stories about the man himself and I was interested in his approach to patients. From the reading, Hermann appeared to be someone who truly wanted to heal the minds of the afflicted. There is controversy in everything that is meant to help or categorize, in anything that medicates, treats. The fact stands that nothing is full proof, but do we dismiss it altogether? The ink blot test morphed through the years as it changed hands, could that be the problem? Could the biggest problem be that people reviewing the test aren't always qualified, trained to? That can be a fatal flaw. There was a time it held up, used by the military and in job hiring to weed out undesirable applicants, in trials, in abuse hearings... see it as you will, but it is an icon itself and not just in America. My thoughts are in the middle, I tend to believe that you can't peg people that easily, I always think about what we say, what we don't. My question is always, 'How do you know the answers someone is giving are honest?" Sure, the counter argument is that deception is spotted by those trained to see it, and says a lot too. But can we ever really know? As with anything, it helped and it hindered. It is alive and well today and still has its uses. I enjoyed the history Rorschach's ink blot test's birth and how it morphed into what it is today. Fascinating read that is well researched, I learned things I had never known about Hermann Rorschach and the ink blot test, the reasons why he chose the designs and color he did. Yes, read it.
Publication Date: February 21, 2017
Crown Publishing
February 5, 2018
A Dense and Meandering Read
The Inkblots is part biography of Hermann Rorschach, part history of psychology, part cultural commentary, part history of the inkblot test known as the Rorschach that wraps up in a large, meandering undertaking with a heavy emphasis on the Inkblots in America after the death of their inventor. The book is interesting, overwhelming, and heavy handed in turns. I learned a lot reading this book, but it doesn't have a strong thesis. It wanders around the topics like a river - the current moves you, but you don't go in a straight line. It rather felt like the author just wanted to include as much information on everything relating to these ten blots of mystery as possible, even if it sacrificed quality. I believe this book would have been more compelling as separate books addressing the different parts. Yes, they wove together in real life, but reading about them on top of each other makes for a dense read. Of course, if one was already familiar with the basics about the test and a brief outline of its history or controversies this book would likely be an easier read. For the novice, having absolutely no knowledge and never having heard of this test before cracking the book open, it was a bear of a task. Interesting at times, and a drag at other points. Given, however, that an overview of the Rorschach does not appear to exist outside of this book, it is valuable and worth investing time into reading if you are looking to broaden your knowledge about the man, the test, American culture, or psychology.
2.5 stars
I was given a complimentary copy of The Inkblots from Blogging for Books in exchange for my honest review.
The Inkblots is part biography of Hermann Rorschach, part history of psychology, part cultural commentary, part history of the inkblot test known as the Rorschach that wraps up in a large, meandering undertaking with a heavy emphasis on the Inkblots in America after the death of their inventor. The book is interesting, overwhelming, and heavy handed in turns. I learned a lot reading this book, but it doesn't have a strong thesis. It wanders around the topics like a river - the current moves you, but you don't go in a straight line. It rather felt like the author just wanted to include as much information on everything relating to these ten blots of mystery as possible, even if it sacrificed quality. I believe this book would have been more compelling as separate books addressing the different parts. Yes, they wove together in real life, but reading about them on top of each other makes for a dense read. Of course, if one was already familiar with the basics about the test and a brief outline of its history or controversies this book would likely be an easier read. For the novice, having absolutely no knowledge and never having heard of this test before cracking the book open, it was a bear of a task. Interesting at times, and a drag at other points. Given, however, that an overview of the Rorschach does not appear to exist outside of this book, it is valuable and worth investing time into reading if you are looking to broaden your knowledge about the man, the test, American culture, or psychology.
2.5 stars
I was given a complimentary copy of The Inkblots from Blogging for Books in exchange for my honest review.
April 10, 2017
"You know this Rorschach...is something like peyote in a way. It looks into your mind. See the things that aren't out in the open. It is like that with peyote." page 243.
I'm not sure why it took me a month to read through this book. I enjoyed it, however the middle just dragged on. For me there was too much about the early scoring of the tests. I'm not a numbers person, and that it why I put the book aside. Also I had to look up so many words. I sometimes felt this book was more suited to psychiatrists and psychologist rather than the average reader.
I would have liked to have known Hermann Rorschach, not because of his break through testing cards, but because he sounded like a grounded, peaceful soul.
I'm not sure why it took me a month to read through this book. I enjoyed it, however the middle just dragged on. For me there was too much about the early scoring of the tests. I'm not a numbers person, and that it why I put the book aside. Also I had to look up so many words. I sometimes felt this book was more suited to psychiatrists and psychologist rather than the average reader.
I would have liked to have known Hermann Rorschach, not because of his break through testing cards, but because he sounded like a grounded, peaceful soul.
February 29, 2024
loved it, love rorschach. not a fan of the fact that as soon as he dies the entire book is entirely about america considering it had fuck all to do with america, and idgaf about america.
March 15, 2018
“What do you see?”
Hermann Rorschach (1884-1922) was a German-speaking Swiss psychiatrist who developed an interesting experiment involving inkblots. The son of an artist and himself artistically trained, Rorschach was fascinated by visual perception and hoped to use the things people saw when they looked at his inkblots to help understand their minds. The experiment was surprisingly successful, and the strapped-for-cash doctor barely managed to scrape together enough money to do a first printing of Psychodiagnostics and the associated illustrated cards.
Rorschach died short years after the publication of his book, and before he could see the test gain acceptance outside his native Switzerland. Without its creator to correct any flaws or incorporate new insights, the Rorschach Test became a force to reckon with in international psychology.
This is, according to the introduction, the first full-length biography of Hermann Rorschach, but it’s also a history of his famous creation–which doubles the length of the book.
We learn of Rorschach’s childhood happiness and sorrows, his education in Zurich, his fascination with Russian culture (Hermann married a Russian woman who’d come to Switzerland to become a medical doctor), and his important but poorly paid institutional work.
The inkblots themselves are reminiscent of a children’s game, blotting paper and trying to interpret the shapes. And some similar psychological experiments had been tried before. But Rorschach was the first to craft specific blots, neither too abstract nor too obviously one thing, and to systematize the interpretation of what the examinee saw.
Because the inkblot test interpretation contained both crunchy numbers and fanciful imagery, it could be used in a number of ways. It was adaptable across language and cultural barriers, unlike many written tests. So the Rorschach Test grew in popularity and influence, not just in the realm of medical science but in pop culture. Its imagery resonated in 1940s film noir and 1980s comic books.
But one of the flaws of the test, as Hermann Rorschach noted, was that he’d found something that seemed to work, but not laid a solid theoretical foundation under it that explained how and why it worked. So the test became itself “a Rorschach test”, with different people reading into it according to their own psychological theorems. This caused schisms among those who used the test in different ways, and eventually gave rise to a movement that believed Rorschach Tests didn’t tell you anything you didn’t already know.
The author of this biography thinks the inkblot test is still of importance, and still of use.
There are black and white illustrations throughout, and two sections of “colored plates.” An appendix directly reprints Olga Rorschach’s speech on her husband’s character. There are extensive end notes and an index.
The subject is fascinating and the writing is interesting, though sometimes veering into deep psychology jargon. There is discussion of famous cases and people involved with the inkblot test, including Adolf Eichmann!
On a side note, Hermann Rorschach was quite a good-looking fellow, and one of the few psychiatrists who could be played by a Hollywood star without suspending disbelief.
Highly recommended to those with an interest in the history of psychology.
Disclaimer: I received this book from Blogging for Books to facilitate this review. There was no other compensation requested or offered. Sadly, the BfB site is closing down, so this will be my last review from that source.
Hermann Rorschach (1884-1922) was a German-speaking Swiss psychiatrist who developed an interesting experiment involving inkblots. The son of an artist and himself artistically trained, Rorschach was fascinated by visual perception and hoped to use the things people saw when they looked at his inkblots to help understand their minds. The experiment was surprisingly successful, and the strapped-for-cash doctor barely managed to scrape together enough money to do a first printing of Psychodiagnostics and the associated illustrated cards.
Rorschach died short years after the publication of his book, and before he could see the test gain acceptance outside his native Switzerland. Without its creator to correct any flaws or incorporate new insights, the Rorschach Test became a force to reckon with in international psychology.
This is, according to the introduction, the first full-length biography of Hermann Rorschach, but it’s also a history of his famous creation–which doubles the length of the book.
We learn of Rorschach’s childhood happiness and sorrows, his education in Zurich, his fascination with Russian culture (Hermann married a Russian woman who’d come to Switzerland to become a medical doctor), and his important but poorly paid institutional work.
The inkblots themselves are reminiscent of a children’s game, blotting paper and trying to interpret the shapes. And some similar psychological experiments had been tried before. But Rorschach was the first to craft specific blots, neither too abstract nor too obviously one thing, and to systematize the interpretation of what the examinee saw.
Because the inkblot test interpretation contained both crunchy numbers and fanciful imagery, it could be used in a number of ways. It was adaptable across language and cultural barriers, unlike many written tests. So the Rorschach Test grew in popularity and influence, not just in the realm of medical science but in pop culture. Its imagery resonated in 1940s film noir and 1980s comic books.
But one of the flaws of the test, as Hermann Rorschach noted, was that he’d found something that seemed to work, but not laid a solid theoretical foundation under it that explained how and why it worked. So the test became itself “a Rorschach test”, with different people reading into it according to their own psychological theorems. This caused schisms among those who used the test in different ways, and eventually gave rise to a movement that believed Rorschach Tests didn’t tell you anything you didn’t already know.
The author of this biography thinks the inkblot test is still of importance, and still of use.
There are black and white illustrations throughout, and two sections of “colored plates.” An appendix directly reprints Olga Rorschach’s speech on her husband’s character. There are extensive end notes and an index.
The subject is fascinating and the writing is interesting, though sometimes veering into deep psychology jargon. There is discussion of famous cases and people involved with the inkblot test, including Adolf Eichmann!
On a side note, Hermann Rorschach was quite a good-looking fellow, and one of the few psychiatrists who could be played by a Hollywood star without suspending disbelief.
Highly recommended to those with an interest in the history of psychology.
Disclaimer: I received this book from Blogging for Books to facilitate this review. There was no other compensation requested or offered. Sadly, the BfB site is closing down, so this will be my last review from that source.
December 6, 2016
The Inkblots by Damion Searls is nominally a biography of Hermann Rorschach but is more interesting as the story of the Rorschach or inkblot test using Rorschach's life as a window on its creation.
The biography is interesting in its own right but the manner in which his life and work led to the test's development is fascinating. I will admit that my main interest was the history of the inkblot test over time.
Don't let anyone without any background in the subject tell you that either psychoanalysis is a thing of the past or that the inkblot test is no longer in use. Such a person is probably grinding their own personal axe at the expense of truth. Psychoanalysis is not a monolithic entity, some techniques are more popular than others and are useful in different settings. While many ideas, Freudian and otherwise, have been either refuted or carry less weight, many other ideas from Freud and many others are still valuable and relevant.
As for the test itself, don't believe anyone who claims it is out of use. It is still in use and, like any psychological test, has its proponents as well as its detractors. Anyone who claims it is a poor diagnostic test really misses the boat because it is not used to make a diagnosis any more than an EEG is used to make a diagnosis. Both are used primarily to point to possibilities and either open or close avenues for further testing and treatment. Additionally, and this is where my firsthand experience with inkblots comes in, they are used in neuroscience research. So the test has changed and been found lacking in some areas and helpful in others.
This book does a very good job of charting the ups and downs of the inkblots usage and popularity, both within the medical community and in popular culture, along with the reasons for each drop and rise. I found one portion near the end where a practitioner would like to use the tests more but, among other reasons, has issues with it becoming so quantitative.
I would recommend this book to anyone interested in psychology and psychological testing, particularly the history of medicine. A lover of biographies might be a little disappointed unless that love is coupled with a curiosity about the life of the subject's creation.
Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via LibraryThing Early Reviewers.
The biography is interesting in its own right but the manner in which his life and work led to the test's development is fascinating. I will admit that my main interest was the history of the inkblot test over time.
Don't let anyone without any background in the subject tell you that either psychoanalysis is a thing of the past or that the inkblot test is no longer in use. Such a person is probably grinding their own personal axe at the expense of truth. Psychoanalysis is not a monolithic entity, some techniques are more popular than others and are useful in different settings. While many ideas, Freudian and otherwise, have been either refuted or carry less weight, many other ideas from Freud and many others are still valuable and relevant.
As for the test itself, don't believe anyone who claims it is out of use. It is still in use and, like any psychological test, has its proponents as well as its detractors. Anyone who claims it is a poor diagnostic test really misses the boat because it is not used to make a diagnosis any more than an EEG is used to make a diagnosis. Both are used primarily to point to possibilities and either open or close avenues for further testing and treatment. Additionally, and this is where my firsthand experience with inkblots comes in, they are used in neuroscience research. So the test has changed and been found lacking in some areas and helpful in others.
This book does a very good job of charting the ups and downs of the inkblots usage and popularity, both within the medical community and in popular culture, along with the reasons for each drop and rise. I found one portion near the end where a practitioner would like to use the tests more but, among other reasons, has issues with it becoming so quantitative.
I would recommend this book to anyone interested in psychology and psychological testing, particularly the history of medicine. A lover of biographies might be a little disappointed unless that love is coupled with a curiosity about the life of the subject's creation.
Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via LibraryThing Early Reviewers.
March 26, 2017
With The Inkblots, Damion Searls takes us on a hundred year journey through psychiatry and psychology. The focus is, of course, on Hermann Rorschach and his inkblots. We meet Rorschach early in his life, and we spend time getting to know the young man behind one of the most controversial tests in the history of psychology. We learn the driving factors behind Rorschach's creation, as well as how he ultimately settled on the ten inkblots that have remained the mainstay of the Rorschach test.
I was fascinated by Hermann Rorschach's story. The author does an excellent job of showing us Rorschach as a scientist, psychologist, artist, and family man. His personality comes alive on the pages. In many ways, Rorschach's thoughts and motivations were far ahead of his generation, and it took some time for the scientific world to catch up to him. His early death feels all the more tragic in hindsight, and I can't help but wonder how much more insight he'd have been able to offer had he lived a long life.
While Rorschach and the evolution of his inkblot test remains the focus, to a lesser degree this story also encompasses the evolution of psychotherapy and patient treatment. We see the struggle to understand various personalities, with good, bad, and indifferent qualities. We also see the paradox unfolding, as we often find that the more we learn, the less we truly understand.
Damion Searls has taken an enormous amount of research, whittled it down, organized it, and brought it to life in story form ideal for everyone from the casual reader to the psychology student.
*I was provided with a review copy by the publisher, via Blogging For Books, in exchange for my honest review.*
I was fascinated by Hermann Rorschach's story. The author does an excellent job of showing us Rorschach as a scientist, psychologist, artist, and family man. His personality comes alive on the pages. In many ways, Rorschach's thoughts and motivations were far ahead of his generation, and it took some time for the scientific world to catch up to him. His early death feels all the more tragic in hindsight, and I can't help but wonder how much more insight he'd have been able to offer had he lived a long life.
While Rorschach and the evolution of his inkblot test remains the focus, to a lesser degree this story also encompasses the evolution of psychotherapy and patient treatment. We see the struggle to understand various personalities, with good, bad, and indifferent qualities. We also see the paradox unfolding, as we often find that the more we learn, the less we truly understand.
Damion Searls has taken an enormous amount of research, whittled it down, organized it, and brought it to life in story form ideal for everyone from the casual reader to the psychology student.
*I was provided with a review copy by the publisher, via Blogging For Books, in exchange for my honest review.*
September 7, 2017
How odd to try to write a review for a psychology themed biography book based on evaluating ones mind through visual assessment criteria which is abstract. I don't believe it is my job to persuade anyone to read or skip this book. Those who have interest will dive in for the experience and what they walk away with will be uniquely their own whether they enjoy it or not. Instead, I choose to share a very small excerpt that seemed to jump from the pages as I came across it. Most of the following ideas and statements are lifted from this book. The discussion was how Freud was a word person, used talk therapy, founded "Freudian Slips", and focused on uncovering the unconscious in what one says or doesn't say. Modern psychology worships at the altar of statistics. In contrast, Rorschach was a visual person who created visual psychology. Our brains are highly devoted to visual processing, estimates run as high as 85%. Seeing runs deeper than talking.
January 24, 2018
You have to read the acknowledgements for one of the best research stories EVER.
This was a well rounded book. I had assumed that it would be mainly about Hermann Rorschach's life. But he's dead after only 1/3 of the book. It also explores not only what his successors did with the test, but also our societal perceptions have changed about it over time. A very interesting book about perception and psychology and cultural anthropology.
This was a well rounded book. I had assumed that it would be mainly about Hermann Rorschach's life. But he's dead after only 1/3 of the book. It also explores not only what his successors did with the test, but also our societal perceptions have changed about it over time. A very interesting book about perception and psychology and cultural anthropology.
March 25, 2017
https://msarki.tumblr.com/post/158808...
…cultures, and individuals within a culture, see things their own way…We see through our personal and cultural “lens”, according to the habits of a lifetime shaped by particular culture… One culture’s trackless wilderness is full of detailed and meaningful information specific plants and animals, for members of another culture… An enormous advantage of the Rorschach test is that it largely gets around these lenses—as Manfred Bleuler put it, it lets us strip off “the veils of convention.”
Frightening that a psychological evaluation based on the Rorschach Test can decide a legal case or job interview. A psychology fascinating to study and extremely interesting. Perhaps an intricate art form used as science. Nonetheless, a powerful tool no matter the consequences. Damion Searls has written not only a riveting study on the man Rorschach and his test, but what was to come from his labor and where it might be leading us now. A work crafted by a master wordsmith obviously willing to delve deeply into his subject. I could not recommend a book more highly than I do this one.
…Looking at a Rorschach blot is not as powerful an experience as taking a blot of acid, obviously, but they operate in analogous ways.
…cultures, and individuals within a culture, see things their own way…We see through our personal and cultural “lens”, according to the habits of a lifetime shaped by particular culture… One culture’s trackless wilderness is full of detailed and meaningful information specific plants and animals, for members of another culture… An enormous advantage of the Rorschach test is that it largely gets around these lenses—as Manfred Bleuler put it, it lets us strip off “the veils of convention.”
Frightening that a psychological evaluation based on the Rorschach Test can decide a legal case or job interview. A psychology fascinating to study and extremely interesting. Perhaps an intricate art form used as science. Nonetheless, a powerful tool no matter the consequences. Damion Searls has written not only a riveting study on the man Rorschach and his test, but what was to come from his labor and where it might be leading us now. A work crafted by a master wordsmith obviously willing to delve deeply into his subject. I could not recommend a book more highly than I do this one.
…Looking at a Rorschach blot is not as powerful an experience as taking a blot of acid, obviously, but they operate in analogous ways.
March 21, 2019
With captivating storytelling, Damion reveals how the inkblots came to be, rose to the stars, came crashing down, got resurrected. How their coding were misunderstood, misinterpreted, a big mess, and how they got a new, thorough and more valid system.
In psychology courses we'd get a very brief comment about that Rorschach's inkblots exist, and a judgemental comment about that they are invalid and almost voodooesque. This book is seeking objectivity and truth behind the most interpreted abstract art pieces of the 20th century and it's an eye-opener.
Rorschach has been misunderstood, hopefully so no more.
In psychology courses we'd get a very brief comment about that Rorschach's inkblots exist, and a judgemental comment about that they are invalid and almost voodooesque. This book is seeking objectivity and truth behind the most interpreted abstract art pieces of the 20th century and it's an eye-opener.
Rorschach has been misunderstood, hopefully so no more.
January 16, 2026
"Talvez o lembrete mais valioso que o teste de Rorschach pode oferecer é que a empatia é uma questão maior do que palavras e histórias. Empatia é visão: sentir que está dentro do mundo e, em seguida, enxergar dali algo ao qual você se conecta, em seu corpo. A empatia é uma alucinação reflexa, uma resposta de Movimento. Ela requer não apenas imaginação ou certa sensibilidade, mas também uma percepção sensível e precisa. Você não entende os sentimentos de alguém sem ver essa pessoa como ela realmente é e sem saber o que significa ver o mundo através dos olhos dela."
Displaying 1 - 30 of 232 reviews