The biology of cuteness
|
Cuteness triggers innate releasing mechanisms of caring
|
IN A recent column in The New York Times (reprinted in The Hindu of January 4), Natalie Angier described some aspects of cuteness. Particularly apt was her description of how cuteness is different from beauty; cuteness emphasises, "rounded over sculpted, soft over refined, clumsy over quick. Beauty attracts admiration and demands a pedestal; cuteness attracts affection and demands a lap. Beauty is rare and brutal, cuteness is commonplace and generous."
Makes evolutionary sense
How true! Angier goes further and discusses how the cuteness factor makes evolutionary sense. In pursuing this rich and enjoyable theme on the web, I read an insightful article by Dr. Gary Genosko, a `technoculturist' at Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, Canada, entitled `Natures and Cultures of Cuteness,' in the journal Invisible Culture.
This delves into both the cultural and biological aspects of cuteness — and indeed even its commercial aspects. I shall summarise some of the more important points of his paper here.
A case in point is the metamorphosis of the image of Mickey Mouse by the cartoonist Walt Disney over the years. From pointed ears and sharp face in the beginning, Mickey became more rounded off, with larger eyes, longer head and such.
Disney's advisory note to his staff, apparently, was "keep it cute!" As they began "cutifying" Mickey, he became more lovable and saleable, and raked in more money. Genosko also suggests that the National Geographic magazine uses `cutified' pictures of animals in its pages so as to encourage specific kinds of involvement in readers.
The evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould discussed this `progressive juvenilisation' of Mickey in his book `The Panda's Thumb.'
The Nobel-winning ethologist Konrad Lorenz had done some early research into what constitutes cuteness and why is it attractive to young and old animals alike. Note the word animals; it is used to make the point that it is not only humans who are drawn towards cuties, but even monkeys, dogs and wolves.
Lorenz suggests that cuteness triggers what he has called "innate releasing mechanisms" of caring, and related responses of affection and protection.
Biologically rooted
The importance of such mechanisms in caring for the young would thus be expected to have an evolutionary basis.
It implies that these mechanisms are biologically, involuntarily and instinctively driven. While culture and local/group/clan customs play a role, the phenomenon is to be seen as biologically rooted.
Why is a bunny rabbit, a tiny pup or even a big lumbering panda cute? What are the features of cuteness? Lorenz has come out with a set of baby-like (or paedomorphic) features (kindchenschema) which run thus: (a) large head, (b) protruding forehead, (c) large eyes below the middle line of the total head, (d) short, stubby limbs and pudgy hands and feet, (e) rounded, fat body shape, (f) soft, elastic body surface, (g) round chubby cheeks and (h) clumsiness.
The response to cuteness, that is, the gamut of innate releasing mechanisms, comes in the form of affection and caring. It involves cuddling, comforting, using pet names such as kutty or kunju (both in Tamil or Malayalam, denoting tiny), cooing and baby talk, nursing and such.
One can appreciate how two-sided or reciprocal the benefits can be, when adults interact with infants.
The infant is comforted, feels safe and bonding increases. Curiously, the adult too feels all these. "Cuteness attracts affection and demands a lap".
Binary transaction
Note too that this binary transaction is not limited to parent-offspring; nor is it restricted to strictly human interactions. Little children keep carrying pet rag-dolls and are devastated when they lose them. And what is the most favorite doll? It is the Teddy Bear or its equivalent.
And what are the preferred pets of humans? Dogs and cats. Some believe that this preference might be due to their widely perceived cuteness, and that humans selectively breed these animals for their infant-like characteristics, non-aggressive behaviour and childlike appearance.
Just as the features of cuteness listed above are universal, response to cuteness is also not always culture-specific, and seen in people regardless of where they come from.
It is also seen across a variety of mammals. Dogs and monkeys are famous for cooing, petting and cuddling their young.
That these mammals came on earth long before we emerged means that the phenomenon is biological in origin.
Few mammals, even ferocious ones such as wolves and tigers, which are habitual flesh eaters, even eat their own kind.
Protecting offspring
Even hyenas are passive cannibals. (Reported cases of lions or langurs killing their own young appear to be explained not as cannibalism but a need to protect their own offspring.) They take care of their young, and occasionally even babies of other species. There are several reports of feral human babies adopted by, and cared for, by wolves.
Some examples are the wolf boy of Hesse, the dog boy of Kenya, or the occasional stories from rural India of human infants brought up by wolves, dogs and even elephants.
While each one of these needs to be verified, they are examples of cross-species rearing, and emphasise the role of maternal instinct in these mammals.
Dogs adopting and caring for kittens seems more common. Interestingly, lower animals and invertebrates have not been known to do so, and are known for their cannibalism.
A major marketing tool
Even this habit of eating their young is thought to be a strategy to reduce overcrowding, and when severe conditions such as drought or heavy winter occur.
A voracious cannibalistic species would rapidly eat itself out of existence, and this does not actually occur — again an evolutionary explanation seems possible.
Cuteness is a major marketing tool. Cute animals and dolls, cartoon characters and movie figures all sell well, and the seller mints money — Pokemon, Elmo, ET, and of course the ever-favourite Teddy Bear.
The Vermont Teddy Bear Company of USA (which delivers Bear-Grams or gifts of hand-crafted teddy bears instead of flowers) reported a revenue of over $40 million last year.
D. Balasubramanian
dbala@lvpei.org
Printer friendly
page
Send this article to Friends by
E-Mail
Sci Tech
