Skip to main content

making faces :: the fallback face

one of the things i like about doing posts on what makeup i wear is that it sometimes forces me to think outside the cosmetic box [who are we kidding- boxes]. it keeps me experimenting with techniques and colours that i might not otherwise use.

but the fact is that there are still a lot of days when i go into default mode and start pulling out the same group of products, or at least grabbing from the same shade ranges and for all the experimentation i might enjoy, those colours have been very similar for the last ten or fifteen years. the individual shades in the palette have varied- they still do- but we're talking about the same basics. and since i hadn't shared what those are before, i thought i might as well do so now.

everybody, this is the kate that most people see on a daily basis at work, out shopping, even lounging around the house writing blog posts and playing with cats.

SHE'S HIDING JUST AFTER THE BREAK...



step one :: slightly smoky eyes that are noticeably darker on the outer corners. like most women, i reach for neutral eye shades because once you've committed to turquoise, you've basically determined that everything on you is going to have to connect to that somehow. you can do that, of course, but when you're talking about days where you're stuck for time, or maybe limited by laundry options, adding a bold makeup touch is going to make all your subsequent decisions more complicated. and so most women will reach for their trusty, dusty taupes and greys.

in this particular case, i went more towards the rosy edge of neutrals. over most of the lid, i'm wearing nars "cairo", a pink-leaning deep champagne shade with a soft golden shimmer. having something that catches the light is important for me when it comes to my lids, because it tends to make my eyes look wider awake and a bit brighter. matte colours, unless they're quite light, tend to make me look tired.

in the crease, i have burberry "antique rose". i love colours like this, faded roses and purples like the spines of old hardcover books and i have a lot of them. "antique rose" is on the pink end. chanel "hasard" and le metier de beaute "icon" are more purple. mac "copperplate", one of their classic shades, is a gorgeous warm grey brown in the same family. all of them mimic literal shadows, in varying degrees of softness and sharpness depending on the colour and the intensity of the application. i love them because they make the eyes look sculpted, but not overdone. and when i'm in a hurry, i don't have the energy for overdone.

in the outer corners and blended into the outer part of the crease, i added a black shadow. just a simple, matte black, let's say it's the black from armani's neo-black palette. the point here is to define the shape of the outside of my eyes because, and i realise how weird this sounds, i find they look unfinished without it. although this should be something that closes my eyes in, i find that the effect is the opposite. without that little bit of shading, my eyes look smaller and less distinct. this is one of the reasons why you'll rarely see me in a combination of pastel shades, unless some serious eye liner is involved.

speaking of eyeliner... let's not bother, shall we? i have the black shadow smudged along my lash lines and honestly, that's all i really felt capable of doing. i am never too busy for mascara, though. in this case, it's hourglass "film noir".

i was actually in my thirties before i ever started wearing blush on a regular basis, so originally, i'd just skip that step altogether. however, i have realised that despite wishing to maintain my porcelain pallor, it is a good idea to add some colour to the face, if only to help offer some relief. i don't mean relief as in assistance, either, i mean it as in topography. blush doesn't just make you look healthy, it helps direct the eye to things like your cheekbones, or the hollows of your cheeks, or your jawline. it draws attention to the shape of your face which, on most people in most lights, can seem kind of flat.

when i started wearing blush, i went for very soft neutrals, because i just wanted to help out the architecture a little. that's pretty much what i've done here. the particular shade i'm wearing is yves st. laurent "pepper rose" with hourglass "dim light" dusted over it for an extra bit of glow that i don't actually possess. the point isn't to add a lot of colour. the point is to remind you that my cheekbones exist.

finally, there is lipstick. i have always been an avid collector of lipsticks, but the difference now is that you can tell most of them apart easily. at an earlier point in my life, my lipstick collection occupied a very narrow slot of the colour wheel, the muted plums. some were a little more red. some were a little more purple. some were a little lighter. some were darker. but they didn't stray very far from the central description: muted plums. the one you see me in here is hourglass "nocturnal", which is a recent acquisition, because for the longest time i just stopped buying such shades until i'd gotten all the way through a few tubes or until they'd gone off.

some people think of a soft or nude lip for an effortless look, but this has always been my go-to. it's a little less casual and it holds its own weight against the medium-deep eyes.

and that's it, in a nutshell. that's what i look like when i need to make enough of an effort to look presentable, but don't feel inclined or allowed to let my imagination run wild.

anyone else have a "fallback" look they want to share? a palette of colours in which you're most comfortable?

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 …