.png)
I was on Twitter the other day, and this story from BBC
News was at the top of my Twitter Feed. In addition to being drawn to it because
of Ben and George’s jovial faces, I was intrigued by the description in the
tweet, which referenced Darwin. Oh Darwin- everyone’s favorite theorist/ scientist
to throw around when naming evolution as the cause of every phenomenon. After reading
the story that was linked (feel free to read it to get more context for my blog
entry!) I thought- “This will make a perfect blog post!” So here is my analysis,
aided by some theorists, of the research on the popularity of beards and some
researchers’ conclusion that there exists such a thing as “peak beard.”
Some scientists in Australia have done research on the
attractiveness of beards. From their analysis of their research (where people
rank the attractiveness of faces with varying beard lengths), the scientists
concluded that beards are more attractive when they are a rare find in the
sample. Similarly, being clean shaven is more attractive when it is rarer among
a sample. This research led the scientists to coin the word, “peak beard,”
meaning the time when beards are at the highest frequency in a population and
therefore the clean-shaven men have the best advantage. The scientists
proclaimed that we are currently at peak beard because of “the climax of the
trend for beards in professions not naturally associated with a bristly chin -
bankers, film stars, and even footballers began sporting facial hair” (see
picture above to find Ben Affleck and George Clooney- film stars- sporting full
beards). The scientists conclude by proposing that the beard trend started to
rise because of the financial crisis of 2008, because men need to find
competitive advantages to attract mates because they cannot find work that
would provide for a family.
As mentioned, the scientists use Darwin and the general
theory of evolution to support their conclusions. They acknowledge that beards
are not totally genetic, so cannot totally be evolutionary in nature. Rather,
they are referencing the idea that humans want to reproduce and must compete
with one another to find mates to reproduce with. But I was not interested in
what a Darwinian would say about these beard trends, but rather how some of our
other theorists would take on the case of peak beard.
1. What Would a Symbolic Anthropologist Think?
Focusing on meaning, interpretation, and symbols, I
hardly think that a symbolic anthropologist would agree with the researchers’
conclusions that the reason men are growing or not growing beards is to be more
competitive in reproduction. I think that a symbolic anthropologist would look
at some other aspects of who in the society are growing beards- young, old,
married, unmarried, working, jobless, prominent, non-dominant, etc. I think
that they would propose perhaps even beard-growth as a relation to a rite of
passage- perhaps when larger generations are entering manhood, and therefore
growing beards to symbolize this step into a new stage of life, there is a
greater trend of beards. Or, maybe beards represent power and so once men in
prominent positions (i.e. film stars) decide to grow beards to represent their
power, other men emulate that to symbolize their own desire for power. Overall,
these theorists would not stop at evolution as a causal explanation for peak
and non-peak beard.
2. What Would a Feminist Anthropologist Think?
Butler researched the performativity of gender, stating
that there are certain behaviors that individuals choose that reconstruct their
own gender expression and therefore the definition of a gender in the society.
Therefore, she would probably attribute beard trends to different definitions
of “masculinity.” When a society believes beards to be definitive of being more
masculine, then men grow beards to affirm this gender trait. When a society
believes that being clean-shaven is more masculine, men may choose this
instead, to affirm their masculinity. They would also assert that these trends
are culturally relative, and so cannot be generalized across the world or
across time periods.
3. What Would a Post-Modernist Think?
POMO’s biggest critique of the scientists’ analysis would
be that they are not culturally or historically situating their conclusions.
The scientists reference the cyclical nature of beard trends across history,
without truly analyzing each situation in itself. They also generalize across
disciplines, grouping all men into one category and not considering the
differences. Similarly to the symbolic anthropologist’s view, a post-modernist
would be more interested in the symbolic nature of beard growth, not so much
the biologic/evolutionary view. A post-modernist might propose that beards
somehow relate to power in a specific culture, but that the rest of the
symbolism in that specific context must be taken into consideration, as should the
biases of the researchers.
4. What Would Olivia Whitener Think?
I think no matter the reason behind the growth in beards
(evolutionary competition, symbolic power, defining masculinity, etc.), it is a
trend that I will be happy to see go downhill from peak beard.
Olivia, I found your post very entertaining to read, and I would like to expand upon the post-modern viewpoint of the peak beards.
ReplyDeletePost modernism is this idea that everyone is inherently biased therefor it is impossible to have any objectivity. People form their own respective viewpoints based on their experiences and the environment they are surrounded by, and the way they interpret each and every thing will be based on numerous factors that are specific to them and them only, such as their cultural background, their personal experiences, their language, their relationships, their identity. And although one is/can be aware of this fact, it is not possible to get rid of the biases that will form as a result of the combinations. These things that make up who you are will shape your worldview, no matter how unbiased and objective one tries to be.
The post-modernist’s approach to this beard phenomenon would be, as Olivia said, very critical of the fact that they are grouping men into one large category and not looking at these men’s differences. For instance, instead of claiming that Affleck’s and Clooney’s beards may be guided by Darwinian selection, the POMO might suggest that Clooney has a beard because he is getting old and will soon start balding, so, he wants to keep as much hair on him as possible, before he loses it all. Affleck’s reason could be that his family has sported the beard for ages as a way to remember his extremely poor forefathers who could never afford to get a clean shave. Ultimately, through my post-modernist eyes, since I come from a completely different background and have my own experiences, even if I had asked these two actors myself and this is what they told me, my retelling of their reasons on this blog post would still be biased because my understanding and interpretations of their reasons are themselves biased.
So. In conclusion. Everyone has their own reasoning of peak beards and it is impossible to be objective about it.
I think you are spot on with your interpretation of the Feminist Anthropologist. In high school I worked alongside the athletic trainers for all of the sports teams at our school, but because of our size, we focused mainly on the football team. Because of this I spent an inordinate amount of time with the team and became very close friends with many of the football players.
ReplyDeleteSpending so much time with them in locker rooms and on buses, I was inadvertently allowed a glimpse into the "locker-room talk" that often accompanies the sport. A lot of the teasing, especially of the younger kids, was focused around their inability to sprout facial hair - or if they did - if it was a full beard or came in in patches.
Using this as my background, I definitely can see Butler's idea of the performativity of gender. Those who could "perform" and those that could not. Especially in a time like high school where everyone is trying to assert their dominance over others, and in a highly masculinized sport such as football - it is easy to see that facial hair can be definitive of being more masculine, and thus more likely to be emulated.
I think also, that the idea of a "peak beard" is interesting. I agree that the value placed upon having a beard or not is culturally relative, and so cannot be generalized across the world or across time periods. However, I think this could be related more back to Darwin (although you might not like this).
I see the idea of a "peak beard" as a way of individuals differentiating themselves from the rest of the pack trying to make himself more appealing - much like a male peacock. When everyone catches up and becomes similar, then to again stand out, the male must transition again and become clean shaven, or sport only a mustache or a soul patch in order to differentiate himself. This follows with the research you cited from Australia.
In this sense, Brad and George could simply be trying to differentiate themselves from the rest of the male actor population in order to gain more attention for themselves to land a new role or to promote a new movie of theirs. Perhaps in a few weeks time, they will be sporting Fu Manchus!
Excellent post, nicely alternating among theoretical approaches. And two thoughtful responses! Though note that performativity tends to emphasize intentional acts and agency.
ReplyDelete