Among all colors, the most poignantly emotional tone undoubtedly
belongs to red. The ancient observation concerning the resemblance
of scarlet to the notes of a trumpet has often been repeated, though
it was probably unknown to the young Japanese lady who, on hearing a
boy sing in a fine contralto voice, exclaimed: “That boy’s voice is
red.” On the one hand, red is the color that idiots most easily learn
to recognize; on the other hand, Kirchhoff, the chemist, called it
the most aristocratic of colors; Pouchet, the zoölogist, was inclined
to think that it was a color apart, not to be paralleled with any
other chromatic sensation, and recalled that the retinal pigment is
red; Laycock, the physician, confessed that he preferred the gorgeous
red tints of an autumn sunset to either musical sounds or gustatory
flavors. Artists more cautious than men of science in expressing such
a preference--knowing that a color possesses its special virtue in
relation to other colors, and that all are of infinite variety--yet
easily reveal, one may often note, a predilection for red by
introducing it into scenes where it is not naturally obvious, whether
we turn to a great landscape painter like Constable or to a great
figure painter like Rubens, who, with the development of his genius,
displayed even greater daring in the introduction of red pigments into
his work.
In all parts of the world red is symbolical of joyous emotion. Often,
either alone or in association with yellow, occasionally with green,
it is the fortunate or sacred color. In lands so far apart as France
and Madagascar scarlet garments were at one time the exclusive
privilege of the royal family. A great many different colors are
symbolical of mourning in various parts of the world; white, gray,
yellow, brown, blue, violet, black can be so used, but, so far as I
am aware, red never. Everywhere we find, again, that red pigments and
dyes, and especially red ochre, are apparently the first to be used
at the beginning of civilization, and that they usually continue to
be preferred even after other colors are introduced. There is indeed
one quarter of the globe where the allied color of yellow, which often
elsewhere is the favorite after red, may be said to come first. In a
region of which the Malay peninsula is the center and which includes a
large part of China, Burmah and the lower coast of India, yellow is the
sacred and preferred color, but this is the only large district which
presents us with any exception to the general rule, among either higher
or lower races, and since yellow falls into the same group as red, and
belongs to a neighboring part of the spectrum, even this phenomenon can
scarcely be said to clash seriously with the general uniformity.[E]
[E] A further partial exception is furnished by the tendency to
prefer green which may be found in certain countries, now
or formerly Mahommedan, such as North Africa and to a large
extent Spain, which have an arid and more or less desert
climate.
If we turn to Australia, whither the anthropologist often turns
in order to explore some of the most primitive and undisturbed
data of early human culture still available for study, we find the
preference for red very well marked. In times of rejoicing the tribes
at Port Mackay, Curr remarked, paint themselves red; in times of
mourning, white. In describing the paintings and rock carvings of the
Australians, Mathews states that red, white, black and occasionally
yellow pigments were used, precisely the four pigments which Karl von
den Steinen found in use in Central Brazil. Prof. Baldwin Spencer and
Mr. Gillen, in their valuable work on the natives of Central Australia,
have pointed out the significance and importance of red ochre. One of
the most striking and characteristic features, they say, of Central
Australians’ implements and weapons is the coating of red ochre with
which the native covers everything except his spear and spear-thrower.
The hair is greased and red-ochred, and red ochre is the most striking
feature in decoration generally. For ages past the Australian native
has been accustomed to rub this substance regularly over his most
sacred objects, and then over ordinary objects.
There is, however, no need to go so far afield in order to illustrate
the primitive use of red ochre. Our own European ancestors followed
exactly the same methods, and the German woman of early ages used red
and yellow ochre to adorn her face and body, while the finds of the
ice age at Schussenquelle, described by Fraas, included a brilliant
red paste (oxide of iron with reindeer fat) evidently intended for
purposes of adornment. Moreover, the early artists of classic times had
precisely the same predilections in color as the aboriginal Australian
artists. Red, white, black and yellow are the dominant colors in the
_Iliad_, and Pliny mentions that the most ancient pictures were painted
in various reds, while at a later date red and yellow predominated. He
also mentions that yellow was the favorite color of women for garments,
and was specially used at marriages, while red being a sacred color
and apt to provoke joy, was used at popular festivals, in the form of
minium and cinnabar, to smear the statues of Jupiter.
This well-nigh universal recognition of the peculiarly intense
emotional tone of red is reflected in language. The color words
of civilized and uncivilized peoples have been investigated with
interesting and on the whole remarkably harmonious results. It is only
necessary here to refer to them briefly in so far as they are related
to our present subject. It seems that in every country the words for
the colors at the red end of the spectrum are of earlier appearance,
more definite and more numerous, than for those at the violet end. On
the Niger it appears that there are only three color words, red, white
and black, and everything that is not white or black is called red. The
careful investigation of the natives of Torres Straits and New Guinea
by Dr. W. H. R. Rivers, of the Cambridge Anthropological Expedition,
has shown that at Murray Island, Mabuiag and Kiwai there were definite
names for red, less definite for yellow, still less so for green, while
any definite name for blue could not be found. In this way as we pass
from the colors of long wave-length towards those of short wave-length
we find the color nomenclature becoming regularly less definite. In
Kiwai and Murray Island the same word was applied to blue and black,
and at Mabuiag there was a word (for sea-color) which could be applied
either to blue or green, while Australian natives from Fitzroy River
seemed limited to words for red, white and black. In a neighboring
region of Northern Queensland Dr. Walter Roth has reached almost
identical results, the tribes having distinct names for red and yellow,
as applied to ochre, while blue is confounded in nomenclature with
black. In Brazil, again, while all tribes use separate words for red,
yellow, white and black, only one had a word for blue and green. Even
so æsthetic a people as the Japanese have no general words for either
blue or green, and apply the same color word to a green tree and the
unclouded sky.
Here again we may trace similar phenomena in Europe; the same greater
primitiveness, precision and copiousness of the color vocabulary
at the long wave end of the spectrum are found among Europeans as
well as among the lowest savages. The vagueness of the Greek color
vocabulary, especially at the violet end of the spectrum, has led to
much controversy. Latin was especially rich in synonyms for red and
yellow, very poor in synonyms for green and blue. The Latin tongue
had even to borrow a word for blue from Teutonic speech; _caeruleus_
originally meant dark. Even in the second century A. D. Aulus Gellius,
who knew seven synonyms for red and yellow, scarcely mentions green and
blue. Magnus has pointed out that a preference for the colors at the
violet end of the spectrum coincided with the spread of Christianity,
to which we owe it, he believes, that yellow ceased to be popular and
was treated with opprobrium.[F] Modern English bears witness that our
ancestors, like the Homeric poets, resembled the Australian aborigines
in identifying the color of the short wave end of the spectrum
with entire absence of color, for ‘blue’ and ‘black’ appear to be
etymologically the same word.
[F] In this connection I may mention that the preference
for green, which, as I have shown elsewhere (“The Color
Sense in Literature,” _Contemporary Review_, May, 1896),
developed in English literature with the rise of Puritanism
in the seventeenth century.
At this point we come across an interesting and once warmly debated
question. It was maintained some twenty years ago by writers who had
been impressed by the defectiveness of the color vocabulary at the
short wave-length end of the spectrum, that primitive man generally,
and early Hellenic man in particular, were insensitive to the colors
at that end of the spectrum, and unable to distinguish them. On
investigation of individuals belonging to savage races it appeared,
however, that no marked inferiority in color discrimination could
be demonstrated. Hence it became clear that the vague and defective
vocabulary for blue and green must be due to some other cause than
vague and defective perception, and that sensation and nomenclature
were not sufficiently parallel to enable us to argue from one to the
other.
That, in the main, is a conclusion which still holds good. In all parts
of the world it has been found that color discrimination, even amongst
the lowest savages, is far more accurate than color nomenclature. Thus
of an African Bantu tribe, the Mang’anja, Miss Werner states that
they can discriminate all varieties of blue in beads, but call them
all black. The sky is black; so is any green, brown or grey article,
though a very bright grey counts as white. Violet or purple is black.
Yellow is either red or white. A word supposed sometimes to mean green
really means raw, unripe or even wet. Thus the Mang’anja only have
three colors--black, white and red. In quite a different region, the
Zulus, more advanced in color nomenclature, have not only black, white
and red, but a word which may mean either green or blue, and another
which means yellow, buff or grey, or some shade of brown. At the same
time it now appears that the earlier scientific writers on this subject
were not entirely wrong in stating that among savages there is some
actual failure of perception at the short wave end of the spectrum,
although they were wrong in arguing that it was necessarily involved
in the defects of color vocabulary, and in imagining that it could
be as extensive as that hypothesis demanded. It now appears that the
conclusions reached by Hugo Magnus of Breslau, as expressed in 1883
in his study ‘Ueber Ethnologische Untersuchungen des Farbensinnes,’
fairly answer to the facts. In large measure relying on the examination
of 300 Chukchis made by Almquist during the Nordenskiold Expedition,
Magnus concluded that although the color vision of the uncivilized has
the same range from red to violet as that of the civilized and all the
colors can usually be separately distinguished, there is sometimes a
certain dullness, a diminished energy of sensation, as regards green
and blue, the shorter and more refrangible waves of the spectrum, while
the colors at the other end are perceived with much greater vividness.
Stephenson, more recently, among over one thousand Chinese, examined at
various places, found only one case of color blindness, but a frequent
tendency to confuse green and blue and also blue and purple, while
Dr. Adele Fielde, of Swatow, China, among 1,200 Chinese of both sexes
examined by Thomson’s wool test, found that more than half mixed up
green and blue, and many even seemed to be quite blind to violet.
Ernest Krause also has argued that primitive man was most sensitive to
the red end of the spectrum, hence setting about to obtain red pigments
and acquiring definite names for them, an explanation which is accepted
by Karl von den Steinen to account for the phenomena among the Central
Brazilians. The recent investigations of Rivers at Torres Straits have
confirmed the conclusions of Magnus. He found that, corresponding
to the defect of color terminology, though to a much less degree,
there appeared to be an actual defect of vision for colors of short
wave-length; in testing with colored wools no mistake was ever made
with reds, but blues and greens were constantly confused, as were blue
and violet.
It may even be argued that the same defect exists to a minor degree
not only among the peoples of Eastern Asia whose æsthetic sense is
highly developed, but among civilized Europeans when any kind of
color blindness is altogether excluded. This was noted long since by
Holmgren, who remarked that some persons, though able to distinguish
between blue and green wools when placed together, were liable to call
the blue wool green, and the green blue, when they saw them separately.
Magnus also showed that such an inability is apt to appear at a very
early stage in some persons when the illumination is diminished,
although the perception of red and yellow remains perfectly distinct.
He further showed that blue and green at certain distances are often
much more difficult to recognize than red. Most people probably are
conscious of difficulty in distinguishing blue and green pigments
with diminished light and find that blue easily passes into black.
Violet also appears for many people to be merely a variety of blue;
the word itself, we may note, is recent in our language, and plays
a very small part in our poetic literature, and in fact the color
itself, if we rigidly exclude purple, is extremely rare in nature. It
is a noteworthy fact in this connection that in normal persons the
color sense may be easily educated; this is not merely a fact of daily
observation, but has been exactly demonstrated by Féré, who by means of
his chromoptoscopic boxes, containing very dilute colored solutions,
found that with practice it was possible to recognize solutions which
had previously seemed uncolored. It is also noteworthy that in the
achromatopsia of the hysterical, as Charcot showed and as Parimand has
since confirmed, the order in which the colors usually disappear is
violet, green, blue, red; sometimes the paradoxical fact is found that
red will give a luminous sensation in a contracted visual field when
even white gives no luminous sensation. This persistence of red vision
in the hysterical is only one instance of a predilection for red which
has often been noted as very marked among the hysterical. Red also
exerted a great fascination over the victims of the mediæval hysterical
epidemics of tarantism in Italy, while the victims of the German
mediæval epidemic of St. Vitus’s dance imagined that they were immersed
in a stream of blood which compelled them to leap up.
It may be noted that red and perhaps yellow have been stated to
be the only colors visible in dreams; this is possibly due to the
blood-vessels. Such an explanation is probable with regard to the
various subjective visual sensations which constitute an aura in
epilepsy, among which, as Gowers notes, red and reddish yellow are most
frequently found. Féré has further noted that in various emotional
states somewhat resembling epilepsy, and even in mystic exaltation,
red may be subjectively seen. Simroth has gone so far as to argue
that not only is red fundamental in human color psychology, but that
in living organisms generally, even as a pigment, red is the most
primitive of colors, that since the algæ at the greatest sea-depths
are red it is possible that protoplasm at first only responded to rays
of long wave-length, and that with increased metabolism colors became
differentiated, following the order in the spectrum.
If it is really the case that in the evolution of the race familiarity
with the red end of the spectrum has been earlier and more perfectly
acquired than with the violet end, and that red and yellow made a more
profound impression on primitive man than green and blue, we should
expect to find this evolution reflected in the development of the
individual, and that the child would earlier acquire a sensitiveness
for red and orange and yellow than for green and blue and violet. This
seems actually to be the case. The study of the color sense in children
is, indeed, even more difficult than in savages; and many investigators
have probably succumbed to the fallacies involved in this study.
Doubtless we may thus account for some discrepancies in the attempts
to ascertain the facts of color perception and color preference in
children, while doubtless also there are individual differences which
discount the value of experiments made on only a single child. A few
careful and elaborate investigations, however, especially that of
Garbini on 600 North Italian children of various ages, have thrown much
light on the matter. There is fairly general agreement that red is the
first color that attracts young children and which they recognize. That
is the result recorded by Uffelmann in Germany, while Preyer found
yellow and red at the head; Binet in France concluded that red comes
first; Wolfe in America reached the same result, and Luckey noted that
his own children seemed to enjoy red, orange and yellow very much
earlier than they could perceive blue, which seemed to come last.
Baldwin, indeed, found in the case of his own child that blue seemed
more attractive than red; his methods have, however, been criticised,
and his experiments failed to include yellow. Mrs. Moore found that
her baby, between the sixteenth and forty-fifth weeks, nearly always
preferred a yellow ball to a red ball; this was doubtless not a
matter of color, but of brightness, for there is no reason to suppose
chromatic perception at so early an age. Red, orange and yellow, it may
be added, are perceived by a slightly lower illumination than green,
blue and violet, the last being the most difficult of all to perceive,
so that it is not surprising that the colors at the violet end should
be inconspicuous to young infants. Garbini, whose experiments are worth
noting in more detail, found that the order of perception is red,
green, yellow, orange, blue and violet, and as he experimented with a
large number of children and used methods which so competent a judge as
Binet regards as approaching perfection, his results may be considered
a fair approach to the truth. He found that for the first few days
after birth the infant shuns the light; then, about the fourteenth
day, he ceases to be photophobic and begins to enjoy the light, as is
shown by his being quieted when brought into a bright light and crying
when taken from it; this may sometimes begin even about the fifth
day. Between the fifth week and the eighteenth month children show
signs of distinguishing white, black and grey objects. It is not until
after the eighteenth month that their chromatic perception begins,
any preference for red and yellow objects at an earlier age being due
merely to their greater luminosity. Garbini considers that it is the
center of the retina, or the portion most sensitive to red and yellow,
which is most exercised in young infants. Between the second and third
years children, both boys and girls, were found to be most successful
in the recognition of red, then of green, but they very often confused
orange with red, and mixed up yellow, blue, violet and green; he thinks
they tend to confuse a color with the preceding color in spectral
order. Under the age of three children may be said to be color-blind,
and they are liable to confuse rosy tints with green. Between the ages
of three and five they are able to distinguish red in any gradation,
green nearly always, with an occasional confusion with red, while
yellow is sometimes confused with orange, orange sometimes replaced
by rose, blue often not recognized in its gradations, and violet
often selected in place of blue. At this age, also (as in hysterical
anæsthesia of the retina), blue seems dark or black. In the fifth and
sixth years red, green and yellow are always correctly chosen; orange
gradations are not always recognized, and blue and violet come last,
being sometimes confused. In the sixth year children are perfecting
their knowledge of orange, blue and violet and completing their
knowledge of color designations. Garbini has reached the important
result that color perceptions and verbal expression of the perceptions
follow exactly parallel paths, so that in studying verbal expression
we are really studying perception, with the important distinction
that the expression comes much later than the perception.[G] These
investigations of Garbini are very significant, and there can be little
doubt that the evolution of the child’s color sense repeats that of the
race.
[G] Garbini, “Evoluzione del senso cromatico nella infanzia,”
_Archivio per l’Antropologia_, 1894. I.
In dealing with the color perceptions of savages and children we are,
of course, to some extent dealing more or less unconsciously with their
color preferences. There is some interest from our present point of
view in considering the conscious color preferences of young and adult
civilized persons. Red, as we have seen, is the color that fascinates
our attention earliest, that we see and recognize most vividly; it
remains the color that attracts our attention most readily and that
gives us the greatest emotional shock. It by no means necessarily
follows that it is the most pleasurable color. As a matter of fact,
such evidence as is available shows that very often it is not. There
seems reason to think that after the first early perception of red,
and early pleasure in it, yellow or orange is frequently the favorite
color, the preference often lasting during several years of childhood;
Preyer’s child liked and discriminated yellow best, and Miss Shinn was
inclined to think that it was the favorite color of her niece, who in
the twenty-eighth month showed a special fondness for daffodils and
for a yellow dress. Barnes found that in children the love of yellow
diminishes with age. Binet’s child was specially preoccupied with
orange. Aars in an elaborate and frequently varied investigation into
the color preferences of eight children (four of each sex), between
four and seven years of age, found that with the boys the order of
preference was blue and yellow (both equal), then red, lastly green;
while with the girls the order was green, blue, red and yellow; in
combinations of two colors it was found that combinations of blue come
first, then of yellow, then green, lastly red. It was found (as J. Cohn
has found among adults and cultivated people) that the deepest and most
saturated color was most pleasing; and also that the love of novelty
and of variety was an important factor. It will be observed that at
this age green was the girls’ favorite color and that least liked by
the boys, whose favorite color, in combination, was blue; the number
of individuals was, however, small. This was in Germany. In America,
among 1,000 children, probably somewhat older on the average (though I
have not details of the inquiry), Mr. Earl Barnes found, like Dr. Aars,
that more boys than girls selected blue, while the girls preferred red
more frequently than the boys; Barnes considers that with growing years
there is a growing tendency to select red; as is well known, girls are
more precocious than boys. Among 100 students at Columbia University,
the order of preference was found to be blue (34 per cent), red (22.7
per cent), and then at a more considerable distance violet, yellow,
green. It is noteworthy that among 100 women students at Wellesley
College the order of preference was not very different, being blue
(38 per cent), red (18 per cent), yellow, green, violet; in a later
investigation the order remained the same, there being only some
increase in the preference for red; it was considered that association
accounted for the preference for blue, while more conscious as well as
more emotional elements entered into the preference for red.
By far the most extensive investigation of color preference was that
carried on at Chicago by Professor Jastrow on 4,500 persons, mostly
adults, of both sexes and various nationalities.[H] Blue was found
to be the favorite color, less than half as many persons preferring
red; of every thirty men ten voted for blue and three for red, while
of every thirty women five voted for red and four for blue. The men
also liked violet and on the whole confined their choice to but few
colors, the women also liked pink, green (very seldom chosen by men)
and yellow, and showed a tendency to choose light and dainty shades.
There was on the whole a decided preference for dark shades; the least
favorite colors were yellow and orange. It is evident that, as we
should expect, within the elementary field of popular æsthetics, women
show a more trained feeling for color than men.
[H] J. Jastrow, “The Popular Æsthetics of Color,” _Popular
Science Monthly_, 1897.
It is not quite easy to coördinate the various phenomena of color
predilection. Careful and extended observations are still required. It
seems to me, however, that the facts, as at present ascertained, do
suggest a certain order and harmony in the phenomena. It is difficult
not to believe that there really is, both among many uncivilized
peoples and also many children at an early age, even to a slight extent
among civilized adults, a relative inability, by no means usually
absolute, to recognize and distinguish the tones of color at the more
refrangible end of the spectrum. The earliest writers on the subject
were wrong when they supposed that color nomenclature at all accurately
corresponded to color perception, and it is well recognized that there
are no peoples who are wholly unable to distinguish between green
and blue and black. But as Garbini has clearly shown, there really
is a parallelism between color nomenclature and color recognition,
and Garbini’s wide investigation has confirmed the experiments of
Preyer on a single child by showing that there is a certain hesitancy
and uncertainty in recognizing the colors at the more refrangible
end of the spectrum, long after children are familiar with the less
refrangible end. In the same way the important investigations of
Rivers have confirmed the earlier observations of Magnus and Almquist
in showing that savages in many cases exhibit a certain difficulty
in recognizing and distinguishing blue and green, such as they never
experience with red and yellow. The vagueness of color nomenclature
as regards blue and green thus indicates, though grossly exaggerating,
a real psychological fact, and in this way we have an explanation of
the curious fact that in widely separated parts of the world (at Torres
Straits, among the Esthonians at Rome, etc.) as civilization progressed
it was found necessary to borrow a word for blue from other languages.
There is almost complete harmony among a number of observers, now very
considerable, in many countries, showing that the colors children first
take notice of and recognize are red and yellow, most observers putting
red first. There is no true predilection for these colors at this early
age because the other colors do not yet seem to have been perceived.
At first, doubtless, all colors appear to the infant as light or dark,
white or black. That this is so is indicated by the experience of Dr.
George Harley, who at one period of his life, in order to cure an
injury to the retina caused by overwork at the microscope, resolutely
spent nine months in absolutely total and uninterrupted darkness. When
he emerged he found that, like an infant, he was unable to appreciate
distance by the eye, while he had also lost the power of recognizing
colors; for the first month all light colors appeared to him perfectly
white and all dark colors perfectly black. He fails to state the order
in which the colors reappeared to him. It is well recognized, however,
that eyes long unexposed to light become color-blind for all colors
except red. Preyer’s child in the fourth year was surprised that in the
twilight her bright blue stockings looked grey, while for some time
longer she always called dark green black. By the sixth year all colors
are seen and known with fair correctness. Among young children at this
age, so far as the evidence yet goes, red is rarely the preferred
color, this being more often yellow, green or blue. There is doubtless
room here for a great amount of individual difference, but on the whole
it appears that children prefer those colors which they have most
recently learnt to recognize, the colors which have all the charm of
novelty and newly-won possession. It is probable, too, that (as Groos
has also suggested) the stimulation of red is too painfully strong
in this stage of the development of the color sense to be altogether
pleasurable, in the same way that orchestral music is often only a
disturbing noise to children.
One may note in this connection that hyperæsthesia to color is nearly
always an undue sensibility to red and very rarely to any other color.
The case has been recorded of a highly neurotic officer who, for more
than thirty years, was intolerant of red-colored objects. The dazzling
produced by scarlet uniforms, especially in bright sunshine, seriously
interfered with the performance of his duties, and in private life red
parasols, shawls, etc., produced similar effects; he was often overcome
in the streets by giddiness, sometimes almost before he realized that
he was looking at a red object. Many years ago Laycock referred to the
case of a lady who could not bear to look at anything red, and Elliston
also had a lady patient to whom red was very obnoxious, and who, when
put into a room with red curtains, drank seven quarts of fluid a day.
I am not aware that any such hyperæsthesia exists in the case of other
colors. It is also noteworthy that the morbid affection in which color
is seen when it does not exist is most usually a condition in which
red is seen (erythropsia), yellow being the color most frequently seen
after red (a condition called xanthopsia); the other colors are very
rarely seen, and Hilbert, in his monograph on the pathology of the
color sense, considers that this is due to the fact that red and yellow
make the most intense effect on the sensorium, which thus becomes
liable not only to direct but to reflected irritation, in the absence
of any external color stimulus. There are other facts which show that
of all colors red is that which acts as the most powerful stimulus on
the organism. Münsterberg, in some interesting experiments which he
made to illustrate the motor power of visual impressions as measured
by their arresting action on the eye-muscles, found that red and
yellow have considerably more motor power in stimulating the eye than
the other colors. It may be added also that, as Quantz has found, we
overestimate the magnitude of colors of the less refrangible part of
the spectrum and underestimate the others.
After puberty blue seems still to maintain its position, but red has
now come more to the front, while yellow has definitely receded;
although so favorite a color in classic antiquity, it is rarely the
preferred color among ourselves. J. Cohn in Germany found that among a
dozen students it was never in any degree of saturation the preferred
color, while at Cornell Major found that all the subjects investigated
considered yellow and orange either unpleasant or among the least
pleasant colors.
While blue seems to be the color most usually preferred by men, red
is more commonly preferred by women, who also show a more marked
predilection for its complementary green. Whether the feminine love
of red shows a fine judgment we could better decide if we knew among
what classes of the population red lovers and blue lovers respectively
predominate; it may be noted, however, that the necessities of dress
give the most ordinary woman an acquaintance with the elementary
æsthetics of color which the average man has no occasion to acquire. In
any case it might have been anticipated that, even though the typically
‘cold’ color should appeal most strongly to men, the most emotional of
colors should appeal most strongly to women.