Skip to main content

making faces :: quick peek [dior spring 2012]

i know that readers in the united states have had spring programs on their shelves since before christmas [which, frankly, should be illegal, because it's way too confusing], but here in canada, we're just starting to get the first hints of spring colour in cosmetic displays. sure, we can order from the u.s., but that's cheating... in a way. and besides, if you live in montreal in january, you know that spring is a distant mirage that exists merely to tease you with the promise of its eventual visit. in the meantime, we know it's going to be cold and miserable until the middle of april. and even then, i wouldn't bet serious money on a thaw.

nonetheless, as i mentioned, some bold folk are starting to dangle their springy bits in our faces, at least in certain retail locations. this past week, i spotted the new dior "garden party" collection [because, really, who doesn't want to have a garden party when it's -17 a snowing?]. i was able to grab some very rough photos with my phone and i thought i'd share them with you, as well as some of my initial thoughts on what i saw.

i have to say, this collection is really well named. looking at the soft florals and pastels, one of the first things that springs to mind is a highly civilised garden party, complete with butlers serving crustless sandwiches, blush-coloured wine, intricate centrepieces on perfectly laid-out tables and ladies in old-fashioned hats. trust me, i lived next to the lieutenant-governor's house in halifax and the annual garden party there is a big deal. and it's bursting with hues like those found in dior's spring collection.

IMAGES AND FIRST THOUGHTS AFTER THE BREAK...



everything here is soft- lilacs, pistachio greens, peachy pinks, ivory shimmer- there is not a heavyweight among the group. the collection boasts two "quints", or five-shadow palettes of harmonised colours. the first is a combination of light pinks and violets called "garden roses". it's super-pretty, feminine and delicate, like the blossoms of spring venturing out from their buds. or something more poetic. you'll have to imagine it, because apparently the blossoms don't take well to being photographed under fluorescent lighting on someone's hand. they're particular that way.

the second quint, "garden pastels" is slightly more varied in terms of its colour selection, but still very springy. featuring shades of pearly white, buttercream, seafoam, spring green and, of course, a delicate pink, it's the sort of thing that could appeal to a variety of complexions and skin tones [whereas "garden roses" seems more appropriate for the very fair and those with the skin of an english rose]. the colours aren't tremendously unique, so if this interests you, it's worth checking to see how many of the shades you can duplicate with your existing collection. if it's more than half, you might want to look into buying individual shades to replace the ones you're missing. if you only have one or two similar, you're probably better off buying the palette.

dior "garden pastels" five shadow palette


honestly, the colour payoff on both of these was phenomenal. each of the colours was smooth and rich, even though i was simply applying a quick swatch with my finger. the finishes are quite frosty, which might be an issue for some.

there were four lipsticks in the display, although only two of them are new with the collection- the permanent shades andalouse and diorama were included as well. the two new shades "corolle pink" and "tulip pink" are examples of the kind of colour dior does really well- pretty, soft feminine shades in the pink-coral family that go everywhere and suit most complexions. to me, they're actually very reminiscent of the two shades released with their 2011 spring collection, just a little less peach and more pink.

l to r :: andalouse, diorama, corolle pink, tulip pink top :: party lilac, pretty rose


there are two glosses as well- "pretty rose" and "party lilac". both more or less live up to their name, impart a little bit of colour and a lot of shine. i didn't put much effort into photographing these, i'll admit [you can see them on top of the lipstick swatches], because they're too sheer to capture properly without careful lighting. i'll admit straight up that i'm not a fan of dior's glosses, because i find that they're almost all so close to clear that they're indistinguishable from one another.

there is a smaller eye palette and a blush that are supposed to be included with the new collection, but this counter didn't have either one. they did have the two nail polishes- a medium lilac-purple called "forget-me-not" and a slightly shimmery soft green [which was actually my favourite part] called "water lily".you can see good images of both polishes here.

overall, it looks like a classic interpretation of spring. if you like soft pastels, it's bound to be your thing.

best bets :: water lily nail polish, garden pastels palette

meh :: glosses

Comments

as long as you're here, why not read more?

losers?

just a short time ago, i waxed prosaic about trump supporters who felt betrayed by their candidate pursuing in office the exact things that he said he would. short version: i have no sympathy.

today is a bit different. in the wake of america's bombing of a syrian air strip, in response to a chemical weapons attack by the syrian government, my facebook and twitter feeds were peppered with plaintive shades of "we believed you". these are the people who heard trump say that he wanted the united states to step back and focus on defending its own. indeed, trump did say such things, over and over; america cannot be the policeman of the world. even arch-liberal cynics like me had to admit that this was a refreshing argument to hear from someone outside the paul family, and, could easily have been turned into trump's greatest argument against hillary clinton. [he chose to go another way, which also worked.]

trump also said, repeatedly, that america needed to invest heavily …

long division

after the united states election last year, there were the usual calls for the country to unite behind the new president. that never happens anymore, because, since george w. bush scored a victory in 2004, having launched the country into a war in iraq for no reason, the people on the losing side of a presidential election have been pretty bloody angry about it. democrats hated bush 43. republicans really hated obama. democrats really hate trump.

it didn't help that trump didn't make the typical conciliatory gestures like including a couple of members of the opposite party in his cabinet, or encouraging his party to proceed slowly with contentious legislation. barack obama arguably wasted at least two and as many as six years of his tenure as president trying to play peacemaker before he felt sufficiently safe to just say "screw you guys" and start governing around the ridiculous congress he was forced to deal with. not-giving-a-shit obama was the best president in …

don't speak

you might think that it sounds dramatic, but linguistic genocide is something that happens. people in power will go to great lengths to eradicate certain languages, not just for the sheer joy of making the world a lesser place, but as a way of beating down the culture that's associated with it. language has a unique reciprocal bond with culture, and every group that has attempted to break down another has recognised that forbidding a cultural group from communicating in their own language is an extremely effective way to tear apart their culture.

there are lots [and lots and lots and lots] of examples of this sort of thing, some successful, some not, but far too many to cover in one blog post. however, i thought it was worth looking at some languages that have been the subjects of active repression, and what the political consequences of that have been.

devastation :: the native north american languages :: it should come as no surprise that the largest genocide in history [by a ma…