Skip to main content

making faces :: my life as an easter egg


sometimes, the answer to "what colour should i wear today?" is "all of them".

after all, we live in the era of plenty as far as wearable colours are concerned. when it first occurred to ancient civilisations to rub stuff around their eyes to see what happened, their options were pretty limited. the egyptians, men and women, rich and poor, lined their eyes with kohl for effect, but also for the same reason baseball players do- they noticed that it cut down on the glare. for the romans, who developed a slightly wider palette, it was an aesthetic choice enjoyed by the upper classes and, once again, it wasn't gender specific. 

what's odd is that most histories of eye makeup end there, or jump from there to the 1950s when beauty pioneer helena rubenstein started marketing blue shadow to young women apparently unaware of the fact that blue shadow can be trickier to wear than a lot of colours because of its tendency to emphasise dark under-eye circles. it's as if eye shadows were unchanged from the time of the roman empire to the time of doris day. 

possibly, of course, it's that a few bad experiences led women to stop agreeing when their chemist asked them to smear something on their eyelids to see how it looked. you only have two shots to get that wrong before you're well and truly screwed. but for whatever reason, there seems to have been little improvement in the basic formula for a surprisingly long period of time. not that women weren't wearing eye makeup, of course, there just wasn't much in the way of colour. 

SEE HOW THINGS HAVE CHANGED...

now, we've conquered every possible colour. there are shadows in all the shades of the rainbow and beyond. there are shades that look as matte as crate paper and some that shine like liquid metal. there are some that glitter and some that change colour depending on the light. and they work best when you combine them in different ways, to accent different features and subtly shift the focus of the onlooker in the direction you want. 

the multi-coloured easter eggs so prominent at this time of year have a likewise muddled history that seems to begin with ancient zoroastrians [based in modern-day iran], who painted eggs for their new year's celebration, which took place at the vernal equinox [where it logically should be -ed.]. somehow, and we're not a hundred percent clear on this, this clearly pagan tradition managed to make the leap [kind of like a bunny...] to the christian world and persists in all its multi-coloured glory to the present time. 

of course, with the dawn of spring, it does sort of make sense to shift to a palette of many colours, since the world seems to be doing it at the same time- buds, first flowers, shoots of grass- it's all a bit of relief after a very long stretch of grey. 

so this is a little something i threw together with those things in mind, realising that if i'm going to use my own face as a canvas, i might as well take a chance and see how many different shades i can fit on at one time before it all looks like mud. 

the key with this sort of thing seems to be blending. or rather not blending, because some of the shades [particularly the green and purple] don't look all that nice when you mix them, plus they lose their impact when they're softened through blending. so doing this was mostly an exercise in tapping colour in the appropriate spot and then very delicately smudging them a little closer to one another. 

i'll apologise up front for the fact that almost everything i used is no longer available. mac and their limited collections are becoming a wee but overwhelming... [they're releasing three on thursday.]

products used

face ::
marcelle new age foundation "ivory"
smashbox high definition liquid concealer  "fair/ light"

eyes ::
mac e/s "going bananas"* [bright lemon yellow]
mac e/s "sun blonde"* [dirty mustard yellow]
mac e/s "surf baby"* [bright teal-green]
mac e/s "power boosted"* [bright pink-purple]
mac e/s "shop & drop"* [matte indigo blue]
mac e/s "rosy outlook"* [light powder pink]
mac superslick liquid liner "on the hunt" [black]
mac eye kohl "smolder" [black]
chanel inimitable intense mascara

cheeks ::
mac mineralize blush "miss behave"* [light peach with icy green shimmer]
benefit blush "bella bamba" [bright pink-coral]

lips ::
mac l/s "phlox"* [sheer, light pink with white-blue shimmer]

*suggested alternates :: going bananas = mac bright sunshine + nylon; sun blonde = nars mangrove [greener, matte]; surf baby = nars misfit; power boosted = mac stars & rockets [pinker]; shop & drop = mac indian ink; rosy outlook = inglot 356; miss behave = nars sex appeal + mac crystal avalanche e/s [was the closest i could come to a match for the colour and the sheen]; phlox = chanel boy [actually, the best match would be guerlain "rose innocent", which is limited edition but still available in many locations]

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…