Skip to main content

making faces :: warning! this is the face that busted my camera!

as i mentioned, i've been pillaging the archives a little more for "making faces" posts, since my regular camera seems to have shuffled of its mortal coil. or whatever kind of coil inanimate objects have to shuffle.

anyway, this is the look that finally killed my camera.

i really don't think it's that offensive or anything. i mean, it came to me when i was waxing nostalgic for mac cosmetics' 2010 spring collection, inventively called "spring colour forecast". it was really one of their high water marks as far as i'm concerned, because so much of it was so wearable and at the same time quite original. basically, the collection was divided into four smaller colour collections- pink, coral, plum and amber. i have to say that it was really more of a collection for all seasons, which is part of what made it so particularly strong. for instance, the set of plum shades really seems to have a lot more in common with the richer, deeper shades of fall than with spring, but i like using it as an excuse to use these sorts of colours early in the year, so i'll roll with it.

and although i will admit that i've worn this sort of combination a lot, i consider it a bit arrogant on the part of my camera to just walk off the job in protest.

ok, on behalf of the camera, dom would like me to point out that the camera not working could be due to the fact that i dropped it and that its death followed suspiciously closely on the heels of this incident. to that, i would say that i was holding the camera and to me, it felt like it jumped from my hand, implying a suicide attempt. there's really no way to settle these things for certain. besides, dom is always taking the camera's side when something goes wrong.

DO YOU DARE SEE THE DETAILS OF THE CAMERA-KILLING FACE?



yes, it's true, this is definitely not the sort of look you're normally "supposed" to sport in spring as a rule. but aren't rules meant to be broken? [and cameras, apparently -ed.]

but apparently my drama queen camera had made its decision and now it is no more. or at least, it's in a sort of coma while i check from time to time to see if it's recovered at all.

anyway, if you have any older cameras around your house that you want to kill [or drive to suicide], here's what you need:

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

eyes ::
mac e/s "mink pink"* [matte fleshy plum-pink]
mac e/s "bruised plum"* [shimmery dirty mauve]
mac e/s "black tulip"* [dark iris purple]
mac e/s "jungle moon"* [matte blackened eggplant]
inglot e/s "352" [peachy highlighter]
guerlain eye kohl "black" [black]
mac superslick liquid liner "on the hunt" [black]
armani eyes to kill excess mascara

cheeks ::
mac blush ombre "vintage grape"* [rich reddened plum]

lips ::
rouge d'armani l/s "605" [plummy medium pink with white and silver shimmer]

*suggested alternates :: mink pink = chanel berry-rose [lighter side- lighter, pinker]; bruised plum = hourglass exhibition [lighter side- lighter and warmer]; black tulip = mac plush [lighter]; jungle moon = mac shadowy lady; vintage grape = mac dirty plum, but vintage grape is actually still available on the mac cosmetics canadian web site last time i visited



so that's it. now i have to learn to work with the big camera. that's sort of terrifying, mostly because, like most people, i'm somewhat reticent to embrace newness. plus, of course, we just got that camera repaired and i don't want to take responsibility when my looks drive it to suicide.

Comments

PerilouslyPale said…
Your camera is crazy. This look is fabulous!
Kate MacDonald said…
Thank you so much! Plummy shades are among my favourites, because I find they're a perfectly balance of warm and cool for my neutral-toned skin. Maybe the camera prefers neutrals?

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…