I n 1964, the Observer examined the back, sides and top of the new capillary recklessness that was sweeping Britain, complete with pictures of many luscious-locked gents. ‘Hair, which used to keep men’s heads warm, has suddenly become an object of derision, controversy and fervent partisanship.’ Why? Because British men were letting it grow.
It turned out that 1964 was ‘A year when haircuts – or the lack of them – have kept males off the dole, lost them jobs and made them go to school with the girls.’ Long-haired life wasn’t easy: you were regarded with suspicion by the police, gawped at by tourists and rejected by employers. ‘You go for an interview with, say, 12in of hair and, no matter how capable you might be, they just ask you to leave,’ complained one; another recommended wearing a hat.
So why bother? Ralph Webster, manager of Merseybeat band the Takers explained the trend was born when the Beatles were in Hamburg and too busy (and lacking German vocabulary) for a trim. ‘Hair’s important,’ his bassist Jackie Lomax (whose locks were ‘like Elvis Presley’s, but longer, shaggier and unoiled’) added, simply. Quizzed in London’s Trafalgar Square, another 20th-century cavalier gestured at the National Gallery.
‘They all go in there to look at portraits of men with long hair. But when they come out..
. they think I’m some kind of nut.’ Another was inspired by a picture of Tolstoy.
‘Marvellous. Hair all over the place. It was literally co.