Skip to main content

making faces :: new year's yves

i'm sorry, please don't look at me that way
with all of the conspicuous consumption in which i've indulged this year, i have to say that i feel sort of guilty for leaving out my old friend yves st. laurent. it's not that he had a bad year. in fact, he seemed to have a very good year and his fascinating "glossy stains" which i've yet to get around to purchasing, despite having swatched them at every available opportunity since they launched in the spring, have to go down as one of the most fascinating product advances of the year. in fact, my inability to commit to a purchase has nothing to do with skepticism about the product and everything to do with my inability to decide what shade i want to get first. so, i'm sorry, yves, you've been unjustly ignored because you've been too appealing.

that's not to say, though, that yves has been absent from my cosmetic wardrobe this year. ysl faux cils mascara reigns supreme as the king of dramatic lash-dom as far as i'm concerned. and i've been quietly pigging out on purples, which yves suddenly has in every lip formula you could imagine.

this get-up below is actually something that i wore earlier this week, but i thought it was a really nice, slightly understated-but-effective look for an evening out. if you're planning for that sort of thing.

here's a description of what i did...

the base ::
benefit the porefessional primer
clarins everlasting foundation "103"
diorskin nude hydrating concealer "01"
mac paint pot "painterly"
benefit liquid highlighter "high beam"
diorskin nude flawless perfection powder "010"

although that looks like a lot of products, i actually kept the foundation fairly light. since the clarins formula is fairly thick, i applied everything and then buffed it quite a bit with the urban decay optical blending brush. i received "high beam" as part of a set from sephora, so i've been endeavouring to try it again, despite the fact that it seemed to break me out when i first had it. it's such a perfect shade for my skin, a very light pearl with a slight pink cast, i can't bring myself to turn my back on it entirely. sadly, the results are not promising, as i do have a few little bumps where i'd applied it [sparingly!] along my cheekbones.

"painterly" continues to be my fail-safe for neutralising my eye lid colour and getting shadows to look their best. no more creasy-beasties for me!

the eyes ::
urban decay e/s "virgin" [shimmery light ivory]
urban decay e/s "buck" [warm medium brown]
tarina tarantino e/s "sawdust heart" [matte dark brown]*
tarina tarantino e/s "glinda's kiss" [white with gold frost]*
mac superslick liquid liner "on the hunt" [patent leather black]
mac e/l "i get no kick" [shimmery nude]*
ysl effet faux cils creme e/l "gold star" [antique gold]*
ysl faux cils mascara

looky looky! new camera makes it easier to do macro shots!



the point of this look was to do something that would complement and not distract from the tiered liner effect and so i went with a solid selection warm-ish neutrals from two of my workhorse palettes: urban decay's original naked palette and tarina tarantino's "emerald pretty". this is stone-cold basic for me, the kind of thing i could probably do in my sleep [which would probably be less disturbing than what i already do in my sleep]. the magic is all in the liner application. and the magic of that is really no magic at all. the ysl liner is incredibly smooth to apply and using an angled brush [i used the mac 266, but there are many], the flared point makes itself. for the black, i love how "on the hunt" stays glossy even when it dries. once again, the applicator does all the work with this one.

the cheeks ::
nars blush "outlaw" [bright rose with gold shimmer]

if i don't stop using this, all my other blushes are going to beat it up and dump it behind the dresser out of jealousy. it's just that it makes for such a nice pop of colour plus that beautiful glow that the shimmer imparts.

i wanted a nice pop of colour for a "doll cheeks" effect, one of my favourite things to do with blush. this involved lightly smoothing a little over my cheekbones for overall colour, then picking up a fair amount of powder with my new favourite toy, the nars yachiyo brush, and tapping it right on the apples of my cheeks. pow!

the lips ::
ysl golden gloss "white gold topaz" [opalescent purple with gold shimmer]

ok, yves, two things: 1. why "white gold topaz"? "purple gold opal" would really be a much better descriptor, but for some reason you went with "white" and "topaz", neither of which make any sense in the context of a beautiful sheer-but-dazzling fuchsia-purple gloss. 2. please stop with the fig scent. you aren't the only ones who use it, but you're the worst offenders [estee lauder, you're right behind him in line]. it's sickening. it smells like what happens when someone accidentally makes the cobbler out of the plastic fruit and tries to hide their mistake by dumping perfume and jam over top of it. your beautiful products deserve better.

moving on, i love this shade enough that i'll put up with the scent [which is cloying enough that it refuses to dissipate]. dom, who is normally a lover of opaque lip colour [on ladies] chose this above a couple of opaque options when i bought it, because it really has that magical multi-coloured shifting in the light quality of the inside of a seashell or a mother-of-pearl pendant. or an opal, like i said earlier. [note: he didn't use those words, but i know that's what he was thinking. because i always know what you're thinking dom.] there's definitely some glitter- all the golden glosses apparently have ittybitty flakes of gold inside them- but you won't come off looking like a candy-goth raver, even if that's what you're going for.

the formula is lovely- very smooth and slick, but surprisingly long-lasting for a gloss. there are heavier, tackier glosses that disappear faster.

i love the colour-wheel counterpoint of the purple gloss with the gold eyeliner. opposites will always make each other appear a bit brighter, because they "compete", but what i like about these two products together is that neither of them is terribly bold to begin with, so the dynamic "colour tension" isn't in your face. [although i suppose it is "on your face", which sounds like it would be worse, but apparently isn't.]

so there you go, yves. i have not forgotten you and, in fact, i continue to turn to you when my face is in need of some lively intervention. and i will eventually get around to purchasing one of your magical gloss stains. you can consider that my first beauty-related new year's resolution.

*suggested alternates :: saw dust heart = mac brun; glinda's kiss = mac white gold pigment; i get no kick = makeup forever 23l; gold star is still available from ysl and at their retail counters and there is absolutely no reason to skip it, because it's perfect

have fun celebrating in however you choose to adorn yourself, even if it's just your skin!

Comments

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

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…

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 …