Williamsburg Night At MCU Park

by
July 6, 2012

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?





 

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

18 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
dockmarm
11 years 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.

4
Summer Anne Burton
11 years ago
Reply to  dockmarm

I really appreciate your use of the term “whiskercraft,” but why does every dictionary’s definition of goatee describe it as a type of beard? I’m not being snarky, I am genuinely curious about this disconnect between the obviously passionate facial hair enthusiasts of the world and the dictionaries and encyclopedias of the world.

0
Resolution
11 years ago
Reply to  Summer Anne Burton

perhaps ultimately (and somewhat simplistically), a goatee IS in fact a beard but IS NOT a beard worthy of a food voucher.

0
dockmarm
11 years ago
Reply to  Summer Anne Burton

You’re welcome, everyone, for “whiskercraft” 🙂 To the matter at hand, I believe the disconnect is denotation vs. connotation, or even science vs. religion.

For Noah Webster and his devotees, I believe “beard” is a generic term. The lexicographer, bound by language, has the very narrow word “mustache” for hair worn on the upper lip and must do with “beard” for everything else. So everything from the smallest goatee to the grandest hulihee becomes a “beard.”

For the orthodox whiskercraftsperson, “beard” has one necessary component: connected sideburns. There are various schools of thought as to whether a mustache is required, whether it must be integrated, whether chin hair is required, etc. In any case, they are free to add color to the language within their circle, so that “beard” becomes lingo rather than a dictionary entry.

So the lexicographers are the scientists, explaining what they observe with the tools the language provides, and the whiskercraftspersons are the faithful, observing philosophically through a moral lens. That’s my two cents.

Full disclosure: I possess a hard science baccalaureate degree … and currently sport a full beard.

0
Dainer's Hubris
11 years ago
Reply to  dockmarm

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.

0