Too much innovation: Everybody must get stroned

Every week, the Wall Street Journal publishes a quick-and-dirty "Tricks of the Trade" column with an expert within a certain field. Some weeks, it might be a wine sommelier at a fancy restaurant explaining how to preserve a bottle of wine overnight, while other weeks, it might be a big-shot travel expert explaining how to save a few bucks on a travel reservation to Europe. (I find these types of insights strangely addictive, even if I don't actually get to use them.) So anyway, the topic of this week's column was "A salon owner shaves," and it featured the owner of a chain of private men's salons that provide grooming services to men. What better person to explain how to get a nice, close shave? After all, John Allan Meing ("John Allan" to his clients) also has a line of grooming products available at Saks Fifth Avenue and Barneys New York and considers himself something of a close shave expert.


That's why I was surprised to hear that he uses a Gillette Mach 3 blade -- something you can buy off-the-shelf at the local Duane Reade. As John Allan points out, "Three blades is enough. I tried five blades and didn't see a real benefit from it." Let me repeat: three blades is enough.

Which brings me to my innovation question of the day: Is there ever a case when you can have "too much" innovation? I think

that companies like Gillette have been laboring under this delusion,

with their breathless claims of brand-new technology ("Fusion," "Nitro") or

breakthrough shaving experiences (e.g. is Mach 3 a razor blade that functions at three

times the speed of sound?). For the past 50 to 60 years, in fact, the razor blade industry has always operated under this assumption -- that rapid, technological innovation with razor blades is the way to go. Referencing this 1948 vintage shaving advertisement, Corey Greenberg of the Shave Blog weighs in:

"Shavegeeks tend to romanticize the past, and I'm as guilty of it as

anyone. I talk about safety razors like they're some pure manifestation

of The Greatest Generation, used by JFK, Cary Grant, and Lee Marvin,

back when men were men and shaved like men, even though the women

probably had legs that felt more like Brokeback Mountain than

smooth 'n' silky.

But the more I delve into shaving's past, the

more I see that the times, they've never really a' changed much. Witness

this 1948 magazine advertisement for the then-new Schick/Eversharp

Injector safety razor, and its absurd claim that each and every blade

was "stroned!"

Stroned?

That

is to say, stropped and honed, like a straight razor's edge -- honed on

a whetstone, and stropped on a hanging leather strop. Serious he-men

wetshavers who use a straight razor have to periodically hone their

razors on a stone, and then before each and every shave, they swipe the

blade to and fro on a leather strop to keep the edge keen. But safety

razor blades?

I believe Schick was honing all of their

Injector blades -- all razor blades are "honed" in one way or another,

whether it's done with a stone or a laser beam. But am I really

supposed to believe Schick was stropping each and every Injector blade

with "30 ft. of leather" any more than I'm supposed to believe that the

Mach3 Power's "micro-pulses" make the shave closer?

How stroned do they think I am?"

[image: Shave Blog]

​There are two kinds of failure – but only one is honorable

Malcolm Gladwell teaches "Get over yourself and get to work" for Big Think Edge.

Big Think Edge
  • Learn to recognize failure and know the big difference between panicking and choking.
  • At Big Think Edge, Malcolm Gladwell teaches how to check your inner critic and get clear on what failure is.
  • Subscribe to Big Think Edge before we launch on March 30 to get 20% off monthly and annual memberships.
Keep reading Show less

Apple, Amazon, and Uber are moving in on health care. Will it help?

Big tech is making its opening moves into the health care scene, but its focus on tech-savvy millennials may miss the mark.

Apple COO Jeff Williams discusses Apple Watch Series 4 during an event on September 12, 2018, in Cupertino, California. The watch lets users take electrocardiogram readings. (Photo: NOAH BERGER/AFP/Getty Images)
Sponsored by Northwell Health
  • Companies like Apple, Amazon, and Google have been busy investing in health care companies, developing new apps, and hiring health professionals for new business ventures.
  • Their current focus appears to be on tech-savvy millennials, but the bulk of health care expenditures goes to the elderly.
  • Big tech should look to integrating its most promising health care devise, the smartphone, more thoroughly into health care.
Keep reading Show less

Harvard: Men who can do 40 pushups have a 'significantly' lower risk of heart disease

Turns out pushups are more telling than treadmill tests when it comes to cardiovascular health.

Airman 1st Class Justin Baker completes another push-up during the First Sergeants' push-up a-thon June 28, 2011, Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska. Participants were allowed 10 minutes to do as many push-ups as they could during the fundraiser. Airman Baker, a contract specialist assigned to the 354th Contracting Squadron, completed 278 push-ups. (U.S. Air Force photo/Airman 1st Class Janine Thibault)
Surprising Science
  • Men who can perform 40 pushups in one minute are 96 percent less likely to have cardiovascular disease than those who do less than 10.
  • The Harvard study focused on over 1,100 firefighters with a median age of 39.
  • The exact results might not be applicable to men of other age groups or to women, researchers warn.
Keep reading Show less

The colossal problem with universal basic income

Here's why universal basic income will hurt the 99%, and make the 1% even richer.

Videos
  • Universal basic income is a band-aid solution that will not solve wealth inequality, says Rushkoff.
  • Funneling money to the 99% perpetuates their roles as consumers, pumping money straight back up to the 1% at the top of the pyramid.
  • Rushkoff suggests universal basic assets instead, so that the people at the bottom of the pyramid can own some means of production and participate in the profits of mega-rich companies.
Keep reading Show less