Skip to main content

making faces :: scary stuff [part two]

do ya think i'm sexy?
a while back, i posted pictures of myself wearing blue and aqua shadow, something that's always a bit intimidating for me. i'm still a little shy of brighter shades of blue, but putting it out there did seem to help me confront my cosmetic fear and so i thought i'd bring the theme back once more, since we're now in the season of fear. and so, ladies and gentlemen, i present to you something else that makes me tremble with fright: nude lips.

this is such a finicky thing to pull off, because, done properly, it looks very sexy and pairs incredibly well with a smoky eye [which i love] and seems to enhance the skin. done improperly, it makes it look like you pinned pieces of undercooked chicken schnitzel on your face. and what's truly scary is that the difference between schnitzel and sensual is much finer than it should be.

this isn't, of course, the first time that i've posted pictures of me with a nude lip, but most times, i have to admit that i cheat 'nude' towards the category of 'my lips but better', meaning that i opt for something that still shows the pinkness of my actual lips rather than finding something that's a little more fleshy [which is what's meant when you hear talk of a nude or neutral lip]. alternately, i'll opt for something that has a taupe-y tone which makes things cooler [as in colour scale] and more modern. alternately, i'll go for something that has a lot of shimmer and dimension to it. but a true, creamy nude is something that always makes me nervous. personally, i feel it's a much bolder statement than a bold red or vampy shade.

for today's demonstration, i picked mac's "creme d'nude", which i like because it's a cooler shade, so it harmonises better with my skin, but which also gives me problems, since it's not opaque and allows bits of my natural colour to seep through, which always ruins this sort of look for me. in order to help me overcome that, i filled in my lips with a pencil liner beforehand, which means that the colour of my lips is muted to begin with.

i could have gone with a really smoldering smoky eye for this- it would have been totally appropriate- but i felt like i wanted to try something different. i also felt that an intense smoky eye would have drawn some attention at the drug store, which is where i was planning on heading this afternoon. so i went for a neutral eye with a little pop of colour just to keep things interesting. [also, i thought that a pop of blue or teal would go nicely with the sort of 'statement' necklace i wanted to wear.]

my fear, especially now that my hair is quite light, is always that making my lips neutral will turn my face into a blob of beige silly putty. my hair is light, my eyes are light... there's really not a lot to make a statement if everything is kept pretty neutral.

but i do think that this works as well as a neutral lip can on me. i'm not crazy about the formula of mac's cremesheen lipsticks- i found it difficult to get the colour to apply evenly- but i do like the shade, enough to make up for its flaws.

here, ultimately, is what i came up with:

the base ::
marcelle beauty balm spf 20 "light/ medium"
urban decay naked skin foundation "2.0" [as i lose my tan, this is starting to become a little dark on me]
lush colour supplement "jackie oates"
mac paint pot "painterly"
urban decay e/s "naked" [to fill in brows- i always forget to mention what shades i use for this; also, i forget about my brows at least half the time i put on makeup anyway...]

eyes ::
marcelle e/s "champagne bubble" [light neutral ivory]
rouge bunny rouge e/s "angelic cockatiels" [shimmery honey-amber]
chanel e/s "complice" [frosty light peach]
rouge bunny rouge e/s "periwinkle cardinal" [silvery cool sage green]
mac pigment "partylicious" [bright turquoise with gold shimmer]*
gosh liquid liner "brown" [ebony wood matte brown]
mac eye kohl "fascinating" [white]
benefit bad gal mascara

cheeks ::
mac mineralize trio bronzer/ blush/ highlighter "pink power" [light warm brown, shimmery coral-pink, frosty pink-beige]*

lips ::
mac lip pencil "in synch" [light yellow pink]
mac l/s "creme d'nude" [pink-tinged beige]

*suggested alternates :: partylicious = tarina tarantino "ozma" [quite muted in comparison]; pink power = guerlain terracotta bronzer 01 + nars deep throat + mac soft & gentle mineralize skinfinish; i had heard that "in synch" was limited, but it still seems to be available [and not marked as limited] on the mac web site; if you can't find it, in synch = mac prolongwear lip pencil "in anticipation" [brighter]

so... love 'em or leave 'em when it comes to nude lips? i have to say that i'm still way more comfortable with my typical bold lip shade [really, that's the look that i go back to day after day, even for office wear], but i don't hate this. it's definitely something i could see trying out from time to time, especially if i found a really perfect shade to work with that wasn't as tricky to apply. feel free to share your thoughts!

Comments

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 …

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…

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 …