Skip to main content

making faces :: g-force sneak peek

the eagles have landed. beautiful, majestic eagles of the makeup world, under the name of rouge g lipsticks by guerlain.

if you've read this blog before, you probably know that rouge g is one of my favourite lipstick formulas [neck-and-neck with rouge d'armani]. if you haven't read this blog before, now you know.

along with every other guerlain fan, i was excited to hear that the brand was adding a half a dozen new shades to the line at once this summer. all are available at some locations now, with others to follow shortly.

while guerlain has been adding new shades to the rouge g assortment from time to time, they haven't done a refresh like this since the formula was initially launched. i've noticed that the size of the display doesn't actually seem to be changing and that there are a few shades that have been out of stock for some time, so it's possible that a number of shades that are being discontinued, but i don't have confirmation on that.

the official descriptions of the newly launched shades are:

galiane [15] :: nude beige
gaetane [16] :: deep brown
geraldine [77] :: luminous pink
gladys [78] :: vibrant fuchsia
geneva [48] :: blood orange
rose grenat [864] :: velvety red-pink
rose glace [866] :: nude, barely there pink

the last two shades, like all 800-series rouge g shades, are limited edition.

now here they are swatched on my hand [kind of surreptitiously in store]:


on the extreme left, next to my cuff, you may see a slightly shiny patch of skin. that's rose glace. and it's built up to get that. on the first swipe, i thought i had accidentally applied a plastic "dummy" from the display, because i could see anything. it's truly a lip balm and nothing more. there is a little shimmer, but i had to squint to see it even after three passes.

next is "geraldine". isn't she pretty? this is a great medium pink that's a little brighter than a lot of guerlain's offerings, but still works for everyday wear. it's cooler and brighter than "georgia" [62], which is the closest shade i could come up with from the existing guerlain line.

"geneva" is a happy reddened orange. it's a little less opaque than most rouge g lipsticks and seemed a little tricky to get even. that said, i've had this happen with armani lipsticks before and they apply perfectly, so it's possible that won't be a problem in use. i loved the colour, although there are a lot of these shades around at the moment. "genna" [28] is much redder and deeper. "nahema" from the rouge automatique line is extremely close, but a little bit less pink and more orange. you wouldn't need both, unless you adore corals.

"gaetane" is a chestnut colour, brown yes, but not especially deep. it also seemed to have a bit of translucency, like "geneva". there wasn't any colour i could find among the rouge g's that came close to it. there are some browns among the rouge automatiques, but they all seemed softer. i didn't have access to other brands to compare, but i think this bears a resemblance to chanel "baroque", just a little lighter and without the shimmer.

"gladys" is a knockout. it's a cool, bold fuchsia with amazing pigmentation that went on extremely smoothly. what you're looking at in the photo is a single pass. it is very similar to "gigi" [68], which is just a hair deeper and plummier.

"rose grenat" is my favourite shade from the launch and probably the first i'm going to pick up, since it's limited. the description of a velvety red-pink gives a perfect sense not only of the colour, but of the texture. it is pretty close to "madame batifole", which is cooler and has more shimmer and "provocative", which is a bit redder. my tube of "provocative" went missing, which is one reason why i'm lusting after this one so much. i can't see how you'd need both. [however, since both "madame batifole" and "provocative" were limited, this would be kind of like buying an insurance policy.]

finally, we have "galiane", a very wearable nude-beige. it's too warm to work as a nude for me, but i suspect it will please a lot of people. to my eye, it's indistinguishable from "gillian' [14] and there are a lot of nude shades that are similar.

the three pink-fuchsia shades are the clear winners for me. i don't hesitate to recommend any of them. skip rose glace, for certain. the others are question marks. i would like to see how "geneva" and "gaetane" perform on the lips before committing. "galiane" is an exact dupe of an existing shade, but if you want a nude lipstick, it's an excellent choice.

see any that you like? i know i do...

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 …