14 May 1983
The commodification of beauty
Admiration of female beauty may gradually be supplanted by admiration of female makeup: “Look at the makeup on that woman!!” “Doesn’t that chick have great hair-dye?” “She certainly knows how to fix her face!” – the latter exclamation perhaps suggesting a further progress of democracy, in that natural beauty, being a cause of envy and division, will be replaced by quantified makeup appeal, that anyone can partake of – beauty as a possession, rather than an indefinable, ephemeral, “I know not what.” Concomitant with the above, beauty will become active rather than passive – one makes oneself beautiful, rather than simply sit and wait to be admired for something that is already there – this adding a masculine dimension to feminine beauty. As the “classical” forms of female beauty are forgotten, and a new kind of beauty is invented to fit each particular face, the idea that there is something intangible called female beauty – that there is a form of female beauty – will gradually be forgotten. The ironical result of all this may be that the universal beautification of women will end in depreciation and abandonment of the value and meaning attached to female beauty. As was hinted above, by this time beauty may be perceived as an ability. Hence, there may be a return to the classical Greek idea that a strong and well-proportioned man, with a mind as powerful and well-organized as his body, is the most beautiful creature there is.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
Exactly, this society has given women to beautify themselves with these makeup and hair coloring. For myself, I feel that women with so much makeup are "fake". But thats how things are these days.
I just stubbled upon this blog. I love your writing and I have writen a few papers on the commodification and fetishism surrounding beauty. Just wanted to tell you I enjoyed reading it.
-N
She is a very beautiful woman;
A perfectly anorexic
Supermodel with many legs.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
The beholder is an insect.
The eye is compound.
Is the beauty enhanced
By multiple images?
Or is the beauty diminished
By biting mouthparts?
aww..I rarely wear makeup..
I really think the more you wear..the more you need ..( make any sense?)
some people are beautiful at every stage of life..They just have a spark..you know ?
Never thought of it as such. Again, everything is a cycle, that’s why we, men/women, are attracted to that shape. The beginning becomes the end, so it makes sense that we should go back to that certain point in time when beauty was described as the totality.
"Beauty perceived as an ability."
Interesting, but I think it's always been this way. Women have been slathering themselves in makeup for centuries. Charcoal around the eyes...white plaster on the face.
I think it should be "Beauty perceived by how rich you are."
Because, really only people with money can afford make-up, good make-up...and it always has been that way.
So, I guess, under my assumptions, to find true beauty in a woman you'll have to land yourself a poor girl and that just brings us into another realm of topics.
well I still dont know a single woman who would trade natural beauty for the ability to apply makeup well and look good...
so times havent changed THAT much
Each individual in each society since the begining of human existance has utilized tools to make themselves the most attractive to their mate. Be it Cover Girl makeup or ancient Egyptian eye liner or henna. Really, if you found "that one poor, but beautiful girl" wouldn't you still put her in the finest clothing and clean her up and soften her hands and give her perfume? Accessory always trumps plainness. Men are no different in this respect.
Another problem being that women create their "beauty" in such privacy - behind closed doors - that we must constantly live up to an ideal that should never have been created in the first place. Men assume that women are naturally smooth and soft and sparkly-eyed because, due to this latent grooming ritual, that is what we present to the outside world with no clue as to the effort that goes into it.
Natural beauty is never truly natural.
Rawcus, you mean like how men act tough and controlling but are really pansy ass mama's boys underneath? How is that any different?
Women expect women to look beautiful. Men expect women to look beautiful. But the ideals to which all women are compared are unachievable--perfection does not exist, even supermodels have their magazine images highly edited. So there will continue to be a pursuit of perfection as long as there is a comparison to it. Now that the standard *is* the magazine image, which is *not* attainable without computer graphics, no woman could ever reach the grand goal of perfection.
One would hesitantly suggest that people commenting "Look at the makeup on that woman!!" were not looking at how beautiful she is but rather only how beautiful she looks. Idealistically (naively?) this true and as you say dissipating beauty should be in the existence of woman as person--the life that one lives, the very actions of living. I'm not talking about waltzing around gracefully necessarily, though that too may be included. Just existence. Shouldn't that be beautiful enough.
/random blabbering
~Tas (www.tasihan-empire-main.blogspot.com)
interesting view. to be more interested in the packaging that the product. typical of consumerism. the ad men spend more time on the package than the product and they create consumer thinking so why wouldn`t consumer society resonate?
Men can always detect the fake from what is real or natural, can they? But men has to be blamed in some ways. For natural beauty to evolve as what it is now, must have a definite reason -- men like it! men admire women with enhanced "parts"....
Your post may be more relevant to 1983 than today in terms of the role hair-die and make up play in the perception of beauty. Today a better subject would be the wide-spread adoption of cosmetic procedures (and even full blown surgery) which would provide stronger subject matter for your argument.
The beauty mythos in the US is more alarming due to its obsession with retaining youth. Or the characteristics of youth (post teen figures). In Europe, surely many of the same issues of the beauty game are in place, but overall, a woman can be a “40 year old knock out” with a higher degree of success there than in America.
As for "classical" beauty, make-up is a curious thing to dwell on. It has been with us from the Roman Republic and before. A more interesting discussion would be on the subject of "body image"…potentially the most drastic change in beauty perception in the last 500 years. Being thin was not a “good thing” until Twiggy. Now…its quite a yoke around the necks of every woman I’ve dated.
Hmm.. here is a twist to the many thoughts..
I feel it all started with agriculture. When man was a nomad, women also hunted for food (fruits and berries) and were free to choose the most strong man as their mate. But when man settled down and became the sole provider of food then the woman had to woo the man to choose her. Thus started the whole thing.
But now.. considering the woman is back to foraging for her own food...
Oh beauty that all I seek, natural or fancy made, (makeup can be art) In my arms
I hold you tight your love is all I need.just dont wear a mask unless it Halloween.
In the light of surgery...it beckons me to question if there was an operation that instead of erasing the lines on our faces and removal of 'fat', but erase are materalistic values and remove layers of self, would it be as popular?
i like your blog and it's really interesting...i kind of agree...beauty is what 'people' define it as(who else?), but it's like-if a lot of people come up to you and say you're not beautiful, then you're not beautiful. the concept of beauty is based on opinions. my definition of female beauty would be that looking at 'her' gives you pleasure. again 'beauty lies in the beholder' so nothing really conclusive can be said about beauty. 'Law, like love' by W H Auden is similar even though it is talking about law. the guy presents the different viewpoints of different people (priest with a priestly look, judge peering down, etc.). and the message he was trying to convey (i think, i analysed this in school, and my teacher thought it was okay) was that people have different opinions about what law is, and you can have your own opinion, but no one truly knows what it is. but that doesn't matter, it's just enough to know that law exists, even if you can't define it you just can know it's there and be happy. so i think this is kind of like 'beauty' and a lot of other abstract concepts...
Post a Comment