The Facial Hair of a Hundred Years Ago

By David Michael Newstead.

The facial hair of a hundred years ago was like a portrait gallery of old styles and the forgotten empires that created them. In Europe, this was epitomized by Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany whose appearance would be ridiculous to modern audiences. From his elaborate uniforms and spiked helmet to his capes and long handlebar moustache, the man was practically a caricature of the past. In contrast, U.S. President Woodrow Wilson – clean-shaven and in a suit – might be seen as a harbinger of things to come. Of course, clean-shaven leaders in suits are now much more common than extravagant monarchs. And while facial hair may not be the best measure of historical changes, it’s sometimes hard to miss.

 

Advertisements

American History X Revisited

By David Michael Newstead.

American history tends to get whitewashed and Disneyfied overtime until the past seems like something it never really was. Of course, there are lots of good moments in American history and I don’t mean to diminish that. Then again, anything tends to look good when you leave out all the bad parts.

I say all that to say that race and racism are central to American history and any attempt to paper over that fact is at best a well-intentioned fantasy. In bookstores, for instance, I used to have this habit of opening up American history books and seeing if they made any real mention of Native Americans. More than a few do not. Similarly, African Americans and others tend to fall by the wayside in this grandiose national narrative we’ve constructed overtime. It’s not incorrect per se, it’s just an incomplete picture of what happened. And to quote founding father Benjamin Franklin, half a truth is often a great lie.

Lately, I keep thinking about the movie American History X. I like movies a lot, I’ll just say that now. But this isn’t one you enjoy exactly. It’s thought provoking more than anything else and sad as you watch one tragic event or bad decision leading to more of the same and you’re left to wonder if that cycle ever really ends. The film is almost twenty years old now and it follows a misguided young man as he moves into and later out of the white supremacist movement.

It had been awhile since I’d actually sat down to watch it. American History X is from the late 1990s after all. The film stars the normally affable Edward Norton who is transformed into a muscle bound Neo-Nazi skinhead covered in tattoos and swastikas. But we also get to see Norton’s character before he shaved his head and became a Nazi and the unfortunate path that took him there. Given the subject matter, it can be difficult to watch. There’s graphic violence and racism. But everything people are grappling with in 2017 is right there: xenophobia and immigration, anti-semitism and arguments about police violence, angry white people and hate proliferating the internet.

As an audience though, we’re not just bombarded with hate for the sake of it. You watch how the main character and his brother are pulled in. And you get to see them realize everything that’s wrong with it, how their anger and grief were manipulated. How that hate solved nothing. Is that some kind of redemption? I don’t know. The movie ends with a quote from Abraham Lincoln and so that’s what I’ll leave you with: We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory will swell when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.

american-history-x-1998.jpg

The Most Famous Beard

1553358_com_castro2

By David Michael Newstead.

Fidel Castro is interesting the way a time capsule is interesting, because his reign intersects with so many major events in world history: the Cuban Revolution, the Cold War, the Bay of Pigs Invasion, the Cuban Missile Crisis, the rise of Che Guevara, the Mariel Boatlift, and more. And how many other world leaders ruled through the entire period between President Eisenhower and President Obama, between Nikita Khrushchev and Vladimir Putin? Throughout the years, a caricature of Castro entered our culture and has remained a fixture for decades. He was a bearded revolutionary in green fatigues who gave eight hour long speeches, smoked Cuban cigars, and evaded multiple assassination attempts by the CIA. Outside of that portrait, of course, Fidel Castro was a highly polarizing figure with generations worth of criticisms leveled against him regarding human rights abuses, his communist dictatorship, and the perennial impoverishment of the Cuban people. With his passing, it’s hard to say what the future holds for a place John F. Kennedy called “that imprisoned island”. Over the last fifty years, Fidel Castro went from being a young revolutionary to a senior citizen. The Soviet Union collapsed. And the classic cars in Havana became mechanical reminders of life before the American embargo in 1960. When those cars will finally breakdown and when the ruling Communist Party will finally fall from power is anyone’s guess. But Castro once said that he never shaved his beard, because it saved him time throughout the year. As it turns out, time catches up to us all.

Gillette’s New Razor

By David Michael Newstead. 

For two weeks, I tried the new Gillette Fusion ProShield, jotting down my thoughts along the way. Cool and ultra modern-looking, the ProShield’s main benefits are the lubricant stripes around the entire blade. And while this does make for a noticeably smoother shave, the stripes wear out pretty quickly. Because packs of replacement blades are priced at around $41.00, I consider the ProShield way too expensive for day-to-day use. And after giving it a try, I think I’ll stick with my regular blade.

image.jpeg

Of Beards and Men: Author Interview

By David Michael Newstead.

Christopher Oldstone-Moore is a history professor at Wright State University where he focuses on gender and masculinity. And today, we’re discussing his new book, Of Beards and Men: The Revealing History of Facial Hair. It’s a far reaching examination of the subject, covering things like evolution, biology, and ancient history. Notably, he delves into the beards of ancient Egypt, Israel, Greece, and Rome. The book also explores the facial hair issues of early Christianity and the Middle Ages as well as the larger political and religious significance of facial hair all the way to the present. Our conversation is below.

David Newstead: You’ve studied this material for some time now. Writing this book, what did you learn about facial hair and masculinity that you didn’t already know?

Christopher Oldstone-Moore: That’s what is really fun about this subject. Very little was known about the history of facial hair by anybody. Some people knew parts of the story, but the whole thing has never been told. One of the surprises is the prevalence of shaving in the history of Western civilization. Many imagined it went back and forth in a fashion cycle over time, or that shaving was relatively recent, but that is not even close to true. Times when beards predominate were fairly rare. The common explanations of why beards come and go—like the invention of the safety razor– are also wrong. What I learned is that changes in ideas of masculinity are often represented by changes in facial hair.

David Newstead: You mentioned the lack of research related to facial hair, what challenges did that present? And how did you overcome them?

Christopher Oldstone-Moore: This was a huge challenge. For one thing, granting bodies do not generally recognize this as a worthy historical topic. The National Endowment for the Humanities turned me down flat. So money was hard to come by. Second, much of what I did was original research, which means I had to find, study and analyze material that few, if anyone, had looked at before. In many cases I had to have these items translated from the original Latin, German, Russian, and so forth. My main way to overcome these obstacles was time and tenacity. It took me more than a decade to research this topic. It must be said that the joy of finding new things that no one ever knew about helped keep me going.

David Newstead: When and how did you develop an interest in this subject?

Christopher Oldstone-Moore: About 14 years ago, when I was looking for new material on social history for my classes at Wright State, I looked into the matter of shaving and facial hair styles, and found to my surprise that no historian had studied the subject. This seemed like too important a subject to be passed up!

David Newstead: During your research for the book, did you find yourself especially identifying with any of the historical figures you discuss? Peter the Great? King David? Abraham Lincoln? Clark Gable?

Christopher Oldstone-Moore: Abraham Lincoln is a very likable figure. His humbleness comes out even in the story of his beard. He was not vain about his looks, but did follow the advice a little girl to grow his beard to look better. I also felt some sympathy with those in the past who wrote about beards, like the Renaissance scholar Marco Olmo or the 18th-century writer Jacques Dulaure, who were in a sense earlier versions of myself. On the other hand, many of the figures I discuss are really terrible people, like Peter the Great and Stalin.

David Newstead: As I was reading, I was particularly interested in your research on Alexander the Great and Tsar Peter the Great, both of which are famous for being anti-beard and this got me thinking. What would you say are some of the negative effects of anti-facial hair policies throughout history?

Christopher Oldstone-Moore: On this point, I would add the US court decisions of the 1970s and 80s (like Supreme Court’s Kelley v. Johnson) that support employers’ power to require shaving. Peter the Great, Supreme Court, etc. are imposing conformity and limiting personal freedom. This is deliberate, because this sort of body conformity is important for those attempting to maintain social order or control. This does not exclude the possibility of beards being enforced for the same reason. I also talk about the Taliban and ISIS, which enforce beards on all male subjects as a sign of piety and loyalty, and also the military requirement of European armies during the 19th century that all soldiers wear mustaches. It does seem, however, that shaving is the more popular choice when the goal is regularity and conformity.

David Newstead: If you could have a beard during any time in history, what historical era would you pick and why?

Christopher Oldstone-Moore: The early seventeenth century Van Dyke beard is pretty cool. I think I could pull that off with my thin face. The massive, braided Assyrian beards of the 9th and 8th centuries BCE are perhaps the most awesome, but I don’t think I could manage it.

David Newstead: What’s the future of facial hair? And, for that matter, masculinity?

Christopher Oldstone-Moore: That is the great unknown. It seems to me that we are not witnessing the full triumph of beards in our time. We do not have a masculine consensus on this. And this indecision may be a real sign of our times. There is no consensus on masculine style or on masculinity in general, and I am not sure we are getting one soon. I see websites were different guys or groups are promoting their ideas, but they cover the waterfront. This is likely to be the subject of my next book; what guidance has been offered to help men be men in the past, and now in the present? It seems to have become an increasingly complex and difficult matter. Our choices about facial hair have become correspondingly diverse.

David Newstead: Why do you think it’s become more complex and difficult nowadays?

Christopher Oldstone-Moore: I can’t say for sure, but we live in times when gender norms are undergoing many changes, not just one or two. Masculinity is a far more complex thing when gay, trans and fluid sexualities are newly accepted as normal. Not just sexuality, but also family, social and political structures. Feminism and social change mean that the link between masculinity and family and political leadership is weakening. Men and women alike seem less committed to older social or family roles. On it goes. There are many more ways to be a man today, and much less agreement about what the norms should be.

David Newstead: Any final thoughts?

Christopher Oldstone-Moore: My main hope for this book is that people enjoy seeing history in a new way, and that it will inspire people to look at our world with fresh eyes, seeing masculinity as a dimension of our human experience over time.

Read Of Beards and Men

9780226284002-557.jpg

The Origins of #MasculinitySoFragile

By David Michael Newstead.

In December 2013, a young woman on Twitter started a hashtag. Two years later, it went viral, sparking a discussion about toxic forms of masculinity as well as parodies, observations, and the fury of internet backlash. To learn more, I spoke to the hashtag’s creator, @puppydogexpress.

@DavidMNewstead: So, you started the #MasculinitySoFragile hashtag in 2013?

@puppydogexpress: Yes, that’s when I tweeted it first.

@DavidMNewstead: So, what was going on at the time that motivated you to do that?

@puppydogexpress: I don’t think it was any particular event or situation that inspired the initial tweets, but a general sense of frustration at the fragility of masculinity – the idea that all it takes to revoke a guy’s “man” card is to use a pink razor to shave or something.

@DavidMNewstead: It seems like there was a long time lapse between when you started the hashtag and when it finally went viral. Especially in internet time. Did anything interesting happen during the interlude?

@puppydogexpress: It totally slipped my mind during that time. I don’t have many followers. I had just been thinking out loud when I wrote them. It wasn’t until this year (2015) when folks who weren’t mutual follows started liking the initial tweets and I noticed it had become a “thing”. User @anthoknees was the one who brought it back from the dead, but I’m not sure if he knew it at the time.

@DavidMNewstead: What did you think about all the attention it received once it took off?

@puppydogexpress: First, I was baffled, because I don’t have the follower power to make something go viral on my own, and it had been two years since I wrote it. Second, for a moment I worried it had been trending because maybe offended men had co-opted it and took to Twitter to air their grievances. It turned out to be a happy accident.

@DavidMNewstead: Two questions. Do you think anything positive came out of #MasculinitySoFragile? And what do you think of backlash against it?

@puppydogexpress: 1. Absolutely. Anytime a hashtag goes viral it gives masses of people the opportunity to share something, and in this case, it was the sharing of micro-aggressions, personal experiences, and satire relating to the fragility of masculinity. There’s potential there to shed light on ideas in a way that’s easy for people who aren’t necessarily familiar with masculinity studies to digest. It’s a big inside joke everyone collectively “gets”.

2. There’s this internet rule called Lewis’ Law, which basically states the response to feminist content justifies feminism. Comment sections, for example. I think of the backlash against feminist hashtags like #MasculinitySoFragile in the same way. The backlash proves the point. Some men saw it as an assault on their manhood, and responded accordingly. Folks of all genders participated in the hashtag. The message was, overwhelmingly, that toxic masculinity hurts people. This includes men.

@DavidMNewstead: Kind of like Gamergate from a few years ago?

@puppydogexpress: Exactly. The fact Anita Sarkeesian’s assessment that sexism is evident in video games was met with actual rape and death threats proved her point.

@DavidMNewstead: Has any of this impacted you personally? Like in terms of people messaging positively or negatively or anything like that?

@puppydogexpress: Well, @anthoknees and I did a little shout out to one another on Twitter, but that’s it. It didn’t gain traction until he picked it up, so I get the impression he bore the brunt of the backlash. I do wonder what the backlash looked like for him as a man, and how it might manifest if I or another woman was on the receiving end instead.

@DavidMNewstead: Ah, so on that note. My final question is – how would you describe yourself then?

@puppydogexpress: I’m 24 years old, cis woman, white and Latina. I live in Philly.

@DavidMNewstead: Well, 24-year-old cis woman in Philly, I’m glad we got a chance to talk.

Read Part Two