Monday, June 08, 2026

'Acquainted With His Real Character'

We all do it, even the most sophisticated and open-minded among us: we draw conclusions about people based on their physical appearance. Sure, there’s pretty/handsome versus ugly/plain. Most men will pause when they see a beautiful woman. That’s natural, not depraved. But we read faces and bodies in ways other than aesthetically. In The Spectator on this date, June 8, in 1711, Joseph Addison writes: 

 “[E]very one is in some Degree a Master of that Art which is generally distinguished by the Name of Physiognomy; and naturally forms to himself the Character or Fortune of a Stranger, from the Features and Lineaments of his Face. We are no sooner presented to any one we never saw before, but we are immediately struck with the Idea of a proud, a reserved, an affable, or a good-natured Man; and upon our first going into a Company of Strangers, our Benevolence or Aversion, Awe or Contempt, rises naturally towards several particular Persons before we have heard them speak a single Word, or so much as know who they are.”

 

A parent will tell a child: “Stop staring.” It’s rude and can be interpreted as invasive or threatening. Most of us learn early to conceal our interest in another’s face. But Addison suggests we can glean useful information from observing the faces of strangers, though I was told before my first visit to New York City: “Don’t make eye contact.” It’s complicated and we can easily commit a faux pas. Addison writes: “I think we may be better known by our Looks than by our Words; and that a Man’s Speech is much more easily disguised than his Countenance.” He quotes Martial’s epigram 12.54:

 

Crine ruber, niger ore, brevis pede, lumine lœsus:

Rem magnam prœstas, Zoile, si bonus es.”

 

Here is a translation:

 

“Red-haired, black-mouthed, lame-footed, squint-eyed;

it would be a miracle, Zoilus, if you were honorable.”

 

Poor Zoilus. His appearance condemns him to perpetual misunderstanding. He will seldom be judged an honorable man, despite what might be an honorable life. We’re no different. In The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals (1872), Charles Darwin suggests facial appearance is important, and that certain expressions are likely an evolutionary inheritance.

 

“We are so familiar with the fact of young and old animals displaying their feelings in the same manner, that we hardly perceive how remarkable it is that a young puppy should wag its tail when pleased, depress its ears and uncover its canine teeth when pretending to be savage, just like an old dog; or that a kitten should arch its little back and erect its hair when frightened and angry, like an old cat. When, however, we turn to less common gestures in ourselves, which we are accustomed to look at as artificial or conventional,—such as shrugging the shoulders, as a sign of impotence, or the raising the arms with open hands and extended fingers, as a sign of wonder,—we feel perhaps too much surprise at finding that they are innate.”

 

Addison urges thoughtfulness as a antidote to prejudice:

 

“[A] wise Man should be particularly cautious how he gives credit to a Man’s outward Appearance. It is an irreparable Injustice we are guilty of towards one another, when we are prejudiced by the Looks and Features of those whom we do not know. How often do we conceive Hatred against a Person of Worth, or fancy a Man to be proud and ill-natured by his Aspect, whom we think we cannot esteem too much when we are acquainted with his real Character?”

1 comment:

Thomas Parker said...

This brings to my mind a passage from Eric Ambler's A Coffin for Dimitrios:

A man's features, the bone structure and the tissue which covers it, are the product of a biological process; but his face he creates for himself. It is a statement of his habitual emotional attitude; the attitude which his desires need for their fulfillment and which his fears demand for their protection from prying eyes. He wears it like a devil mask; a device to evoke in others the emotions complimentary to his own. If he is afraid, then he must be feared; if he desires, then he must be desired. It is a screen to hide his mind's nakedness. Only a few men, painters, have been able to see the mind through the face. Other men in their judgments reach out for the evidence of word and deed that will explain the mask before their eyes. Yet, though they understand instinctively that the mask cannot be the man behind it, they are generally shocked by a demonstration of the fact. The duplicity of others must always be shocking when one is unconscious of one's own.