Cinefantastique and the two-piece toup.

If you type the words "Shatner" and "toupee" into Google's image search engine, the very top result you'll likely see is the following image from one of our earliest posts:


As to why that particular image has made its way to the top of Google, who knows? However, there is a story behind the "frontal hairpiece" and "rear main hairpiece" idea...

Early on in the existence of Shatner's Toupee, we speculated on the notion of the "Jim Kirk lace" perhaps being a two-piece toup, meaning that the front and rear sections might have been separate. Nonsense? Perhaps. It was admittedly just speculation - we had no real evidence to substantiate this idea (and subsequently have become rather skeptical). But there was one source making what can be construed as that claim - the now defunct science-fiction magazine Cinefantastique.


We've since obtained the text in question, from a 1996 Star Trek 30th anniversary edition of the magazine.


The issue contains reviews of all of Star Trek's 79 episodes - nothing amazing in that. But reviews of two episodes also contain what purports to be toupological information.


In Cinefantastique's review of the episode "The Deadly Years" (the one where the crew, including Kirk, age), the authors add a curious side-note: "Kirk reveals his age as 34 years and he [meaning Shatner] removes his frontal hairpiece during the aging process for this show".


The review for the third season show "The Enterprise Incident" makes a similar toupological claim:


"Notable in this show is William Shatner's surgically altered appearance. He is seen here without the hairpiece that was normally added to give him that 'fuller' look at the top of his forehead."

"I've tried the ears Leonard, it only follows that you should try the toupee..."

Firstly, the positive. We've been campaigning across the globe for years for Bill Shatner toupological trivia to be made a full and indivisible part of the pantheon of Star Trek behind-the-scenes information. So to that end, we certainly applaud Cinefantastique - imagine if your local TV guide did the same:

"Thursday at 10pm 'Spectre of the Gun'. The Enterprise crew find themselves in the Old West. Strong gusts of wind at the end of the episode: will Bill Shatner's toupee survive?" Wouldn't that be welcome?


But what of the claims made by the magazine? The first and most fundamental problem we have is that the toupological assertions are entirely unsourced (according to whom?), nor is any evidence whatsoever presented to support these claims. As one of the world's foremost scientific and research institutions, the WSSTS has rigorous standards for the evaluation of crucially important data on William Shatner's toupees. Simply put: stating something does not make it true.


Let's examine the specific claims: In "The Deadly Years" Bill Shatner "removes his frontal hairpiece during the aging process for this show". Upon a close examination of the episode in question, we believe this claim to be false.

HD screencaps via Trekcore.com.

In all stages of aging, (we believe) a lace line is visible on Bill Shatner's forehead. The image above, which shows the most "receding" stage, nonetheless still shows a lace hairpiece stuck to the center of the actor's forehead. Is Bill Shatner only wearing a "rear hairpiece"? Is that actually the actor's real hairline? It's possible and we don't rule it out entirely, but somehow, we doubt it. More toupological analysis of this episode here.


What of the claim that in "The Enterprise Incident" Bill Shatner is "without the hairpiece that was normally added to give him that 'fuller' look at the top of his forehead"?


Similarly, an analysis of this episode also suggests that the lace front toupee, though styled differently, is still firmly in place throughout. (The Cinefantastique claims also led to some speculative early analysis from us).

An unmistakable lace line.

Accordingly, we also rate this claim as false.


Is it possible that the authors confused the terminology? Having heard that Bill Shatner wore a "lace frontal hairpiece", did they confuse this to mean a hairpiece that only thickened up the front of the head?


As we know, the "Jim Kirk lace" also served the crucial function of covering up a large bald patch at the back of Bill Shatner's head - the toupee's characteristic smooth arch over the head is unmistakable!


In both "The Enterprise Incident" and "The Deadly Years" the characteristic "frontal swoosh" is somewhat subdued. Is it possible that this led the authors to conclude that this was Bill Shatner's real hairline and that the "frontal hairpiece" was simply a bulking up appliance not used in these two examples? Were they unaware of the rear toupee or did they view this as a separate cap-like piece? We just don't know and therein lies the problem of unsourced assertions - there's no way to evaluate them.

The lid flips in "The Empath" - more here.

So was the "Jim Kirk lace" comprised of a rear lid and a separate frontal fence-like bulking piece? We don't rule it out, but asides from the assertions in Cinemafantastique, we just don't have any evidence to support this theory.

Bill Shatner in 1967: "So I had to have a full wig"!

Utilizing Google's research tools (more here), reader "ttttttttt" has found a great little article from a May 19th 1967 issue of the now defunct Pittsburgh Press. The article (sourced here) reports on Bill Shatner's involvement with the movie White Comanche, which was filmed during the hiatus between Star Trek's first and second seasons (this gap in filming ran from February to May 1967 - more here). In the article, the actor mentions having to wear a wig:

"William (Star Trek) Shatner, who made a movie 'White Comanche,' in Spain, in which he played dual roles - brothers, one reared as an Indian and one as a cowboy:

He Had to Be Doctored

'One brother had to be blond and I couldn't bleach my hair because of the series. So I had to have a full wig. One character is light-eyed, and one dark, so I had to have contact lenses made.'"



Has Bill Shatner been caught in some sort of toupological fib? A closer inspection reveals layers of nuance and considerable room for maneuver:

"I couldn't bleach my hair because of the series" - Bill Shatner did have his own real hair at the back and sides, and bleaching that may indeed have presented a problem.


A closer inspection of the above image from White Comanche reveals that Bill Shatner's own hair at the very base of the wig is indeed darker and has not been intensively dyed.

"So I had to have a full wig."

This one is a little more tricky. Is Bill Shatner emphasizing the words "had to" or "full"? If the first is true, then he is essentially saying that he had to wear a wig, even though he need not have - not true: baldness meant Bill Shatner wore a toupee, irrespective of hair color issues. Although, here, the distinction could be between a toupee, hairpiece or wig - he had to wear a wig, instead of the toupee. If the emphasis is on the latter "full", then the meaning is somewhat different. "So I had to have a full wig" - meaning "a wig larger than the hairpiece I normally wear."

Since there is only clever parsing and no overt verifiable deception, our Shat-no-Meter rates this one as "Mostly True".


To hear Bill Shatner say the word "toupee" click here, and to hear him say the word "hairpiece" click here.

Toupee wordplay: a Shat-no-Meter ruling.

Bill Shatner, much like the lawyer that he portrayed in Boston Legal, is a master of wordplay. This has been strikingly evident on those very rare occasions when he has been asked publicly about the toup. Previously, we've brought you a toupee denial during a 2008 interview conducted by the British newspaper The Daily Telegraph in which Bill Shatner volunteered: "And no, it isn't a toupée," reportedly underscoring this by tugging at his hair. Of course, the wording was very clever. "It" wasn't a toupee. "It" was a transplant (or a new kind of hair system - the jury's still out).


There was also the January 2006 story on Shats from The Times of London entitled "Man of Enterprise". The article noted, "Once asked whether he wore a hairpiece, [Shatner] replied: 'It’s a question that I find like asking somebody, "Did you have a breast implant?" or "When did you get your lobotomy?" ' "

Again, a cleverly worded non denial denial. However, in the notorious MJ Kelli incident, Bill Shatner did actually deny that he wore a toupee, adding that the question was "stupid".

Now, thanks to a discovery by amateur toupologist "RM" we can present another example of Bill Shatner toupee wordplay. In a 1991 interview (sourced here - not sure which magazine it's from), reporter Martin Kihn asks the actor to comment on a campaign that was underway at the time by the "Bald Urban Liberation Brigade" to "out" bald actors. Basically, BULB, a group founded by trade-magazine writer Ed Leibowitz and graphic designer Lorraine Heffernan made computer-generated images of allegedly bald celebrities including Bill Shatner and hung these images as posters around New York. You can read more on this here, here and see an old newspaper report here.


The exchange with Kihn went thus:

Kihn: Are you aware that there are posters all over New York with your photograph that claim you are really bald?

Shatner: Well, I thumb my hairy nose at them. But I'll still go look in the mirror and make sure everything's there.

As "RM" pointed out, the response is classic Shatner and it also serves as a textbook example of the non denial denial. In the statement, Bill Shatner does not deny that he is bald per se. He may "thumb his hairy nose" at BULB, but that doesn't mean that he is actually refuting their allegations.

The next sentence is far more daring, with Shats demonstrating the skills of a well-trained magician or politician: "But I'll still go look in the mirror and make sure everything's there". What does that mean? The implication is that because "everything" (the hair) is "there" (on my scalp), it means that Bill Shatner isn't bald. That is technically true if you think about it, but wonderfully warped too. What Bill Shatner is basically saying is "The last time I looked, there was hair on my head. But to humor you, I'll go and check to see if it hasn't somehow disappeared, which of course it hasn't." Again, in absolute literal terms, a toupee qualifies as hair. Denny Crane would be proud.


This all rings slightly of former President Bill Clinton's "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is" or Donald Rumsfeld's known knowns and unknown unknowns. Bill Shatner's statements are true in the strictly literal sense. However, the questioner asked a pretty direct question about whether the actor was actually bald (offering Shats the opportunity to refute or confirm the baldness allegations). Bill Shatner technically didn't deny the allegations of BULB, but the inference was that the suggestion was so ridiculous that it could only have happened since the last time he looked in the mirror.

"Kiiiihn!"

Our inclination would be to give the above a "False". However, because we must factor-in the strictly literal and balance this against what we believe was implied, we have no choice but to rate Bill Shatner's above statements as Half-True.


Click here to see all of our Shat-no-Meter rulings.

Note: We're still trying to track down the BULB poster of Bill Shatner.

Shat-no-meter ruling...

"I don’t wear a hairpiece." - William Shatner, 1994, (source here).

There is a mountain of conclusive evidence that William Shatner has worn a variety of hairpieces throughout his career. Unlike with our previous ruling on a more recent statement that gave Bill Shatner the benefit of the doubt because of a clever use of the word "it", here we find nowhere near enough wriggle room with the word "don't". The evidence of toupee wearing is so overwhelming and has, we believe, been conclusively demonstrated at this website, that this statement can only be described as ridiculous. We therefore have no choice but to give it our lowest Shat-no-meter rating - "Pants on Fire".

William Shatner's technically correct toupee denial: a ruling from the Shat-no-meter.

In a May 2008 interview with the British newspaper The Daily Telegraph, William Shatner voluntarily denied that he was wearing a toupee. But to get to that point, we begin with the corset (the other rumor!) :

"Actually, I wasn't wearing a corset,' he corrects. 'I had fallen off a horse and broken some ribs. I had to be strapped up and some kind soul told the tabloids I'd got so beefy that I needed a corset to get into Kirk's costume.' Shatner smiles broadly, his earlier introspective mood erased. 'And no, it isn't a toupée,' he says, tugging his hair."


Now, according to the Shat-no-Meter, Bill is being a little clever in his wording here. The fact that he does not have a full head of his own hair is beyond doubt. We also suspect that he has had a hair transplant in recent years (or some other form of drastic change from his previous Trek movie-era hair - the jury's still out. UPDATE: See here for our latest findings suggesting it's still a toup) - from curly long to shorter hair more naturally attached to the scalp.

A visible scalp.

That being the case, the hair that Bill was tugging on during the interview was indeed likely not a toupee per se - as a toupee is technically a hairpiece or partial wig and that is something that Shatner no longer needs to wear. Is a hair system a hairpiece?

But the wording is revealing: "And no, it isn't a toupée."

The use of the word "it" is calculated and avoids having to commit to a broader claim, such as "I have never worn a toupee." Shatner is merely pointing out that what is on his head at that moment is not a toupee ("it's a hair system" perhaps?) and in that sense he is correct - but he very carefully does not deny that he has ever worn one in the past, and in that kind of wordplay, he is being a little disingenuous. Nonetheless, we rate his statement to be "Mostly True".


UPDATE: See here for our latest findings suggesting it's still a toup, which would shift this ruling into the "barely true" category - the argument, from Bill Shatner's theoretical perspective, being that a "hair system" doesn't necessarily qualify as a toupee.