| BODY HOT SPOTS: The Anatomy of Human Social Organs and Behavior R. Dale Guthrie New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, June 1976 |
Rating: 5.0 High |
|||
| ISBN-13 978-0-442-22982-5 | ||||
| ISBN 0-442-22982-8 | 240pp. | HC/FHD | $8.95 | |
Everyone knows about status symbols, right? Those are the big house, the fancy car, the Italian shoes and English haberdashery and all the other finery that goes with conspicuous consumption.
According to anthropologist R. Dale Guthrie, "that has been found not to be the case."1 Writing with considerable insight into comparative ethology (and with a graceful style that approaches poetry in places), he makes a good case that the status symbols that matter to humans — as to most other mammalian species — are the ones that are inborn or the social behaviors learned early in childhood.
Guthrie bases his idea on analysis of the mammalian features that other individuals of a given species can perceive. These are the "body hot spots" of the book's title. He also calls them "social organs." At bottom, according to his thesis, all these features have evolved to improve the individual's chances of producing offspring that survive to breed a third generation. Threat displays, therefore, are only half the picture. Organs of sexual attraction (Guthrie calls them "copulatory lures") are also important, as are organs that facilitate cooperation — as in the raising of young.
Perhaps the primary threat organ is sheer size. Among ungulates — antelopes, deer, elk, goats, and sheep — the dominant males are those with the biggest antlers or the thickest necks. As well as being more imposing visually, large antlers give better leverage in a tussle, and thick necks contain (or imply) more muscle to drive the antlers. I say "or imply" because sometimes part of the game is deception. Growing bigger muscles is costly in energy terms, especially for grazers; a ruff of thick hair on the neck may achieve the same result while requiring less food intake. Also, the tussles themselves are costly, especially for the losers. Far better, says Guthrie, that they pass up a conflict with a visibly superior challenger in hopes of better odds the next time.
Most animals, including humans, have ways of appearing larger in they eyes of rivals. Sheer stature is the most prevalent; but often a crest or mane of hair, a large hump (as in the buffalo), or the ability to rare back on hind legs while waving the forelimbs and expanding the chest, will serve the same purpose. Bellows or other threatening sounds also help, as does a strong, rank odor. The smile was originally a baring of canine teeth, a formidable threat in animals that fight with their mouths. Similarly, a strong chin and high cheekbones are, in evolutionary terms, associated with the ability to deliver a nasty bite.
We humans, of course, seldom fight physically for mates. We have softened these threat signals, says Guthrie, into marks of relative rank — status symbols. Individuals (male or female) who display these signals more prominently typically have more status and thus more privileges. But provision is made for the young, for immature individuals are allowed liberties forbidden to lower-status adults. The badge of this freedom is multifaceted; its facets include smaller size, lighter and smoother skin or fur, rounder body contours, milder odors, less-pigmented irises in eyes relatively large with respect to face, and greater expressiveness in movements, gestures, facial expressions, and vocalizations. Note that these characteristics tend to be seen in both the young and the more attractive females of a species. Hence, in humans, the most desirable women are less hairy, have lighter skin, eye and hair colors, voices softer and higher in pitch, and smell better.
These factors explain why we tend to admire the taller man over the shorter, regardless of professional competence, why moustaches and beards often lend an air of authority and distinction, and why a man with a receding chin looks weak and ineffectual while women with softer skin and rounder faces are more appealing. "Baby face" is, after all, a term of endearment. Guthrie cites an analysis of beauty by Kathrin Perutz to support these conclusions. Apparently, the women most sought after by modeling agencies are the blondes with light-colored eyes, while girly magazines pick the brown-eyed brunettes for pinup pictures. Perutz is quoted thus: "light hair is usually the wife, heroine, princess, maiden in distress, or Doris Day, dark hair is for women, mistresses, or more aggressive heroines." and later, referring to those pinups, "The girls look available, show what they've got and invite masturbation. They are no one's ideal."2 And Guthrie reinforces the point with an observation about a woman who for many is an archetype of wantonness: "Salome is always pictured with tendrils black and tightly curled, not too dissimilar from pubic hair." [Page 58]
Guthrie goes on in this vein, often with considerable overlap between his 27 chapters. He provides plenty of pictures to illuminate his ideas. These typically show variations in a body feature like the beard, either among humans or across primate species. His aim is to show how humans use these features, often in subtle ways, to establish relative status and to attract mates. (The two purposes are not so tightly bound that both are served by the same "social organs".)
The advent of civilization has changed things considerably. We now moderate many of our signals by wearing clothes, by bathing frequently, and by other means. Yet the basic imperatives remain active in our daily interactions with other humans. In the last chapter, he discloses his motive in writing the book: He hopes that more people will learn to appreciate the additional depth of perspective on human life that the information presented can bring — not to turn everyone into social scientists, but to aid them in reflecting on their behaviors and perhaps thus achieve a better balance in their lives.
Guthrie's goal is a noble one, and he makes many excellent points. Perhaps his keenest is that the roots of adult sexual behavior lie in the acts of nursing and cuddling that babies undergo. But my own reflection on the topic brings to mind too many cases that break the rules he proposes. I simply feel the true picture is more complex. In retrospect I must conclude that his ideas are stimulating, but not persuasive. The book is nonetheless worth reading for its fresh insights into primate morphology as well as human behavior. It is also well-researched, has a good index and an extensive list of references. And there are the poetic passages I mentioned. Here's just one example, from page 186:
An Easy Rider's chopper motorcycle was a biological as well as a cultural phenomenon. There was something more behind the repugnance that sweeps town when the gaudy choppers roar down Shady Lane than mere cultural threat. It was another animal bedecked in every threat releaser we've ever known, the fearsome hordes we've suffered from since the Australopithecenes, and here they come, roaring into River City. What a sad, historical irony in a way: the new pacifistic, eco-religionist movement inadvertently took on the older threat signals by only having the option to go opposite soft white cotton and gray flannel neotenic. Under the roar of the electric guitar and scraggly hair there was supposed to be flowers and love. But we establishmentarians had already become so neotenized with our baby-powder skin, mouthwash, super-chrome-plated razor blades and Ivory soap ideal that becoming flower children in appearance was impossible: the niche was filled. The other mode signalled a frightening ghoul, a leather-and-fang troll, all the ogres from our hidden past. – Page 186 |
Of typos, there are several, most probably due to Guthrie's editor. I list them in a file linked below. I also feel that Guthrie might well harbor some resentment towards his publisher. While the book's illustrations are often explicit — showing sketches of penises, breasts and other private parts — there is nothing prurient about them or the text. But the cover! This shows us a naked man and woman running toward each other. The artwork is tastefully done, but leaves no doubt about their intentions or their physical characteristics. The woman is young, dark-haired, sharp-featured and well-shaped. In short, she has all the requisite copulatory lures, and they are all top-rank. The man, while no Arnold Schwartzenegger, matches the woman in fitness for mating. I read Guthrie as the type of man who would resent this promotional suggestiveness not because he's prudish, but because it misrepresents what his book is about. Perhaps someday I'll meet him and learn whether my suspicion is warranted.
To contact Chris Winter, send email to this address.