Skip to main content

making faces :: bombshell

she's everything you want
at some point, i fell behind on reviewing new members of the nars audacious lipstick family that i'd purchased and never recovered. there are a few that i have picked up since last i blogged about these remarkable lipsticks, but i've just not prioritised them, because they're not new and shiny anymore. [behold the beauty blogger at her consumerist worst.] but i am making myself go back to these because:
  1. it remains a great formula
  2. all the shades are permanent [and there has never been a limited shade released], so they're still easy to get
  3. what "they" want is for all of us to continuously give in to the allure of the new, so revisiting existing products is a way of resisting "their" commands

those are all good reasons, but i specifically felt compelled to review the newest of my acquisitions, because i felt like it was the answer to a rather difficult colour analysis question: what does a bright season neutral look like?

bright seasons are those whose main requirement is saturation and clarity of colours. normally, that's associated with bright shades and, truly, the bulk of the shades that will suit people with these complexions are bolder, but what if you want to do something understated? what if you want to do a smokey eye and would prefer not to look like an extra from the "addicted to love" video or like your lips decided not to go with you when you left the house? neutrals tend to achieve their neutral-ness by incorporating either brown [autumn] or grey [summer], neither of which will be flattering on a winter/ spring blend.

enter nars "brigitte".

surely i don't need to specify that, in a line of lipsticks inspired by goddesses of the silver screen, "brigitte" is named for brigitte bardot, the iconic post-war symbol of femininity and sexuality. marilyn monroe might be better known, especially in north america, but bardot is the more complex character. simone de beauvoir said bardot was the first liberated woman of the post-war era, on the vanguard of women's transition from the home into the broader world. bardot was the original "sex kitten" [as in, the person for whom the term was coined], but she was also a serious actress, nominated for numerous awards. she made a name for herself starring in fluff comedies, but she also worked with the likes of jean-luc godard. arguably still at the height of her fame, she retired from the screen in 1973 and has never returned.

beyond the screen, she is no less a contradictory figure. for decades, she has been an outspoken advocate for animal rights, confronting national governments about the slaughter of seals and dolphins and donating hundreds of thousands of dollars to animal welfare causes around the world. [the sea shepherd conservation society has a boat named for her.] in 2008, she characterised then vice presidential nominee sarah palin as a disgrace to women, particularly for her opinions on climate change and gun proliferation.

on the other hand, she has been convicted five separate times for inciting racial/ religious hatred, specifically because of her views on muslims. her most recent husband [who she has been married to for over twenty years] is a former advisor to jean marie le pen and she has expressed sympathies with the national front's anti-immigrant stance. she has derided gay men for being too "showy" about their sexuality, while still claiming that she was sympathetic to their cause since she was "entirely surrounded by homos".

so with all of those complications bound up in one woman, is it any wonder that nars "brigitte" is something of a paradox? it is a light neutral shade, the kind that she made popular and the kind that symbolised a sort of revolt against the more conservative deep reds of the forties. the age of bardot was the age when cosmetic companies began expanding their colour range, eventually shades that were frosted to make them as light and shimmery as possible, miles away from the shades worn before and during the war. but, as might befit a blonde bombshell, this is not a brownish or muted nude, but a clear peachy pink. it isn't one of those difficult to wear white-based pinks, either, but one without a hint of brown or grey that still remains understated and wearable anywhere understatement is required- work, court, or with dramatic eye makeup.

so from the paradox that is brigitte bardot emerges a lipstick shade that is a paradox as well: the perfect neutral shade for a bright season.

trust me, i've tried a lot of neutrals and i like many of them, but i can tell they aren't perfect on me the way that bright pinks or berry shades almost always are. this lady is the exception. she never leaves me looking washed out, but is never competes with stronger colours elsewhere on my face either. like so many men in the 50s and 60s, i am completely enamoured of brigitte.

brigitte

brigitte

given that bright season neutrals are rarer than hen's teeth, i'm not surprised that i didn't have a match for this in my collection already. hourglass "fawn" is warmer, glossier, sheerer and more muted, but it's the closest thing i could come up with. nars has done an amazing job with these shades overall and this one tops the list in terms of uniqueness.

l to r :: brigitte, hourglass fawn

of course, i couldn't pass up the opportunity to share a look with you, just to prove that, yes, a bright season person can wear a neutral lip without looking weird. or without looking weirder than she does normally.




on the eyes, i'm wearing  armani eyes to kill shadow in "madre perla" and nars dual intensity eyeshadow in "pasiphae". i don't know why, but i got kind of obsessed with putting these two together. i think it had to do with the fact that they each have a green sheen, despite the base colours being quite different. i dunno, i think it works. i also have urban decay "smoke" eyeliner on there.

so, while "brigitte" may not be new, she is still groundbreaking, no matter how soft or [heaven forbid!] ordinary she might look at first glance. i think this would be a nice colour on many, many complexions, but if you're someone who always seems to look better in brights, but who still wants something subdued, you must give this lady a place in your collection. 

Comments

Kristin Leslie said…
Great post! And those colours are to die for, I have the Nars lipstick and was looking at the Hourglass Fawn, thanks for clarifying the differences :)

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…