Skip to main content

making faces :: my christmas face ["maestro, please!"]]

this is really my christmas eve face, since christmas day was all about going to the police station, which really isn't something you have to get all jazzed up for. [although, ironically, the makeup i threw on while i was on my way out the door ended up looking really nice and probably would have warranted its own "christmas at the police station" post if i'd remembered to take pictures of it, which i didn't, because i was more concerned with getting to the police station.] but this is what i wore for our little gift exchange and dinner extravaganza, which i've already gone on about, so i thought i'd just do this really quick post about what i was wearing [on my face, since i never comment about clothing, although i think about it quite a bit], which is turning into a nightmare of run-on sentences for no reason i can fathom except that i'm kind of excited because i just finished writing a short story, a whole story, which is something i haven't managed to do in a while and was worrying that i wouldn't be able to do again because i'd lost my mojo or whatever it is that writers have.

ahem.

as may already be abundantly clear, i chose to go with a pretty classic holiday kind of look for the occasion. in reality, though, what i was thinking was that a fairly neutral eye and a deep lip is actually very much "me". it's how the people who are closest to me are used to seeing me when i'm made up. so for me, this isn't so much about fulfilling a seasonal stereotype as it is about familiarity and being myself.

i relied on one of my favourite releases of the year, nars "vent glacé", to hold down the neutral eye duties here. it's a great option for when you want a little sizzle, but nothing that's going to overwhelm. i also love it as an option with a more matte lip, because it adds a bit of shimmery light as a counterbalance.

to get a bit of depth in the outer corner and crease, i also added chanel's "khaki vert" which is exactly what you'd think it is from that description- a deep khaki green with some shimmer to it. blends seamlessly with vent glacé and with the deep olive liner i used- tarina tarantino's "sparkling ammunition".



to give myself that healthy holiday flush, i went with nars again and "amour" blush. this is a pretty pigmented shade, which is what i wanted, because i was going for a definite rosy-cheeked look, but it can easily be sheered out to something quite subtle.

the real star here, though, is clearly the lips, courtesy of armani. this is "dark velvet", one of their new "lip maestro" liquid lipsticks. although it looks like a deep, bloody brown-red when swatched, i found that my naturally cool tones pulled it towards more of a blue red on the lips. that's kind of surprising, considering how opaque it is. it wouldn't have expected it to "react" to my colouring so much.

as a skeptic on liquid lipsticks in general, i haven't really leapt on board the bandwagon that has clearly possessed everyone in the industry this year. i eventually got comfortable with chanel's "rouge allure laque" formula and then they discontinued it, so i felt a bit bereft. i wasn't moved enough by any of the forays into the arena this year, and there were lots, although i am curious about guerlain. but something about the armani product interested me. perhaps it's because i know that they're always coming up with interesting things.

indeed, i have to admit, i'm quite smitten with the formula. despite the tacky red-capped packaging, it's a classy product. it applies very easily and evenly and once its on, it stays put. however, if you make a mistake in application, you can correct it without too much hassle and, what's even better, when it sets, it continues, miraculously, to feel slightly creamy on the lips. dryness is one of the biggest things that turns me off liquid lipsticks.

this one feels soft when you press your lips together and if you spot any uneven fading, you can correct it by doing exactly that- just like a regular lipstick. but when it's on and you're just going about your day, it's lightweight enough that you'll likely forget you're wearing it. quite remarkable.

being a matte formula, it did pull into my lip lines a little, although not much. it wore for several hours [i was cooking, which for me involves taste-testing, which means that it was subject to a fair amount of abuse] and when it did finally fade, it was mostly even. i didn't experience feathering, except if i tasted something that contained a lot of oil. even then, i found it pretty easy to smooth the feathering away with my finger.

the colour selection is very user-friendly and very basic. there aren't tons of options here that you won't have seen other places, although i couldn't really find a dupe for "dark velvet" because it looked so different on my lips than it seemed to when i swatched it on my arm. i don't think that you'll have a problem finding a shade that will work for you. as with all liquid lipsticks, it'll more be a question of whether you like the texture enough to warrant getting the product.

i'm pretty happy with the way this turned out, because i felt like it was dressy, but also a completely "me" sort of look. other people feel relaxed without a stitch of makeup on. me, i feel most like myself when i look like this.

products used

the base ::
armani fluidmaster primer
mac paint pot "painterly"
diorskin nude hydrating concealer "01"
clarins everlasting foundation "103"

the eyes ::
nars e/s "vent glacé" [shimmery ivory and sage-grey]
chanel e/s "khaki vert" [deep shimmery khaki green]
tarina tarantino e/l "sparkling ammunition" [sparkling olive green]
yves st. laurent "faux cils" mascara

the cheeks ::
nars blush "amour" [matte warm rose]

the lips ::
armani maestro l/s "#201 dark velvet" [crimson red]

Comments

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

fun-raising

no, i am not dead, nor have i been lying incapacitated in a ditch somewhere. i've mostly been preparing for our imminent, epic move, which is actually not so terribly epic, because we found a place quite close to where we are now. in addition, i've been the beneficiary of an inordinately large amount of paying work, which does, sadly, take precedence over blogging, even though you know i'd always rather be with you.

indeed, with moving expenses and medical expenses looming on the horizon, more than can be accounted for even with the deepest cuts in the lipstick budget, dom and i recently did something that we've not done before: we asked for help. last week, we launched a fundraising campaign on go fund me. it can be difficult to admit that you need a helping hand, but what's been overwhelming for both of us is how quick to respond so many people we know have been once we asked. it's also shocking to see how quickly things added up.

most of all, though, the ex…

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 …