Williamsburg Night At MCU Park

Last night at MCU Park, home of the Brooklyn Cyclones, Williamsburg hipsters were given their own evening to watch baseball ironically. There were food vouchers for anyone with a beard, and those wearing skinny jeans were promised a trip around the bases after the game (although apparently the latter didn’t happen, presumably because running the bases is way too earnest for hipsters). Reports on the event at NY Mag indicate mostly a lot of detached embarrassment at being labeled “hipster,” but it also included this Very Important Infographic regarding what actually qualifies as a beard. You can probably already guess which baseball player is representing True Beardness, but I believe that two of the three “not beard” examples qualify as controversial. See for yourself:


Who gets a beard voucher / NY Mag

What do you guys think? Is this a fair representation of True Beardness, or is it taking beard snobbery a step too far?




Print This Post

Summer Anne Burton is a writer and illustrator living in Austin, Texas. She is drawing pictures of Every Hall of Famer.


Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
dockmarm
Guest
dockmarm
4 years 19 days ago

They are correct. Goatees and face patches are not beards. If they were beards, they’d be called beards.

The English language has given us numerous categories of whiskercraft for this very reason.

Dainer's Hubris
Guest
Dainer's Hubris
4 years 19 days ago

Seconding Summer Anne’s appreciation for “whiskercraft”. It really is the ‘mot juste’ for a topic I spend an inordinate amount of time discussing and answering questions on. Consider it added to my vocabulary. Now, to petition the OED to add it to the next edition.

Mrs. Featherbottom
Guest
Mrs. Featherbottom
4 years 19 days ago

Due to the quality of the picture I will remain out of the argument on picture one. (there may be enough cheek hair to be considered a beard)
However a Goatee is not a beard.
As well a Mustache is not a beard.
They are parts of a beard, but unto themselves a beard they are not.

Dainer's Hubris
Guest
Dainer's Hubris
4 years 19 days ago

Facial hair nomenclature tends to be quite important to those of us who painstakingly groom our whiskers. Observe : http://www.dyers.org/blog/beards/beard-types/

According to Mr. Dyer’s excellent blog, the three non-beards are more aptly described as, from left-to-right, the Van Dyke (although this is a Van Dyke on steroids), the Chin Curtain and the Copstache.

You’ll also note than within the are-beards, one can draw distinctions. Mr. Wilson’s is, by Dyer’s list, a Short Boxed, though I feel like he has let it blossom into a Garibaldi on occasion.

Hanstock
Guest
4 years 19 days ago

Seeing as how goatees are, by definition, not beards, I would say that this sign is 100% accurate

olethros
Guest
olethros
4 years 19 days ago

Do Mimi Rogers, Nicole Kidman, and Katie Holmes count?

MSpitz
Member
MSpitz
4 years 19 days ago

I was always under the impression that a moustache was above the lip, a beard was below the lip, and a goatee surrounded the mouth, and a goatee was a type of beard. By that classification, #1 and #2 would be beards, but #3 wouldn’t.

Either way, #2 definitely deserves to be a beard, because that is one beautiful piece of facial hair.

EMD
Guest
EMD
4 years 19 days ago

#2 is an unkempt, mangy, chinderance.

Nu? BillyBaroooo
Guest
Nu? BillyBaroooo
4 years 18 days ago

Being Chassidic rules.

Unkempt Neckbeard
Guest
Unkempt Neckbeard
4 years 17 days ago

As a person who did not come into the world folically blessed enough to grow anything closely resembling the qualifying example, I resent the assumption of moral and spiritual superiority on the part of the privileged class. Perhaps the unqualifying examples are not sufficiently beardly for the unswerving taste of the creator of the graphic, as well as that of many participants in this fine establishment. However, the possibility must be considered that, even in such a circumstance, it may have been the best choice available to the individuals involved.

ElJosharino
Member
ElJosharino
4 years 17 days ago

I have some qualms with the definition of goatee as a type of beard. Beard is defined as “Facial hair on the chin, cheeks and jaw.” (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/beard), and Goatee as “A beard trimmed to grow only at the center of the chin.” (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/goatee)

Ah-ha! So we might say that a goatee is not necessarily a type of beard, but rather is something which once was a beard but no longer is a beard due to modifications.

I think what we have here is a matter of irreducible complexity. Just as the cells which make up the bodies that produce the hair are made up of many parts (cell wall, mitochondria, cytoplasm, etc), without any one of these parts the cell is no longer a thing which is a cell. It no longer functions as a cell should function, and it is certainly no longer as handsome as it once was when it was whole.

Similarly, a beard is made up of many parts: sideburns, moustache, neck… area, and so forth. Without any one of these pieces in place, the beard no longer functions as a beard should function, and certainly is not as handsome as it was when it was whole.

So while a goatee may have its place in the grand scheme of things, that place is not comparable to that of a beard. That place is more comparable to that of a pool of cytoplasm, helplessly oozing about without a cell wall to keep it under control. And that place is certainly not one where foodstuffs are discounted.

Robert J. Baumann
Member
Member
4 years 16 days ago

John Franco is actually a Hipster Emeritus.

wpDiscuz