Skip to main content

making faces :: sweet and savoury bites

as i mentioned in my initial review of bite beauty's amuse bouche lipsticks, there are some new shades that have been released for summer. the collection, featuring six new shades is called "sweet and savoury", three that fall into each 'camp'. the sweet shades are lighter and softer. the savoury shades are intense and deep. i've heard different things about the status of these shades: some say all are limited, some say all are permanent, still others say it's a mix, but even then, i've heard different things about which are the limited shades. it's all very stressful and confusing, because i wasn't sure which shades i should pick up to ensure i didn't miss out.

in the end, i selected two, which was difficult, because in this small collection, bite has managed to overcome the one niggling concern that i had about them. i've mentioned before that the biggest reason i don't rush out and buy every single bite lipstick is because i find a lot of their shades are just too easily matched to colours already in my considerable lipstick cache. with "sweet and savoury", they have broken through into the realm of very original shades, including ones that are offbeat and ones that are understated.

in the end, i went with probably the two most eye-catching shades, one sweet and one savoury [because i'm a libra and obsessed with balance]: "lavender jam" and "kale".

"lavender jam" is a bright blue-toned purple, that will pull more blue on those with cooler undertones. there's a slight grey cast to it that keeps it from looking neon, which is nice, since a lot of these types of colours are made with a white base, something i'm increasingly convinced looks good on no one. i think that this shade would look amazing on someone with cool, slightly muted colouring, someone who falls in the light summer, true summer or dark winter sci/ art seasons. it's still a bit daring for anyone, because the colour almost glows from within, another thing that makes it very distinctive. i think that auxiliary beauty hit the nail on the head when she compared the colour to hydrangeas, a flower that has already inspired a blog post for me.

lavender jam
lavender jam

the formula is very good, in keeping with what i've come to expect from the amuse bouche lipsticks, but i found that this one had a tendency to appear a little uneven if i didn't take the time to get it right. it wore evenly enough, which is a relief, and left a faint lilac-purple stain after a few hours.

i didn't even bother making comparison swatches for this shade, because i knew right away that i have nothing similar. remember what i said about my extensive cache of lipsticks? it is a pretty amazing thing when i have to throw up my hands and admit that there is nothing close enough to even warrant a comparison.

my savoury choice was "kale", which is certainly one of the most talked-about shades bite has ever released [not least because they gave titillating hints about it on social media before its release]. it's a deep, dark green with a lustrous sheen, like a steamed or sauteed version of its namesake vegetable. [preferably with olive oil and a hefty amount of garlic, because otherwise, kale doesn't appeal to me very much.] in the shadows, it can read as black, but when any light hits it, you can see the green depths twinkling away.

kale
kale
dark colours can appear patchy, but this one is a knock-out. it was almost completely even after a single light pass and stayed that way. seriously, i think it would have stayed looking just about the same the entire day if i hadn't eaten. and even then, there wasn't a lot of colour removed. this is one of the longest-wearing lipsticks i've ever encountered. when i removed it at the end of the day, my lips were still left with a faint stain. i had to exfoliate them to complete remove the colour.

now, canny readers of this blog will remember that it wasn't too terribly long ago that i ordered a dark green lipstick from rituel de fille, which raises the question: how many dark green lipsticks does one girl need? despite the fact that i was drawn to "kale" like a moth to a vegetable-based flame, i was vaguely nervous that it would be more or less the same as "chrysalis", which is still practically new to me itself.

l to r :: kale, rdf chrysalis
however, they're very little alike at all. "kale" is a lot darker and it's a cooler, bluer green, whereas "chrysalis" is more of an olive-tinged forest green. "kale" is also quite glossy, whereas "chrysalis" is matte. i was a little surprised at how different they were, until it occurred to me that i'm never surprised when i find a distinctive berry shade, and i have about a thousand of those already, so why should i be surprised to find variety in dark greens, where there are only about three in the world? [i know there are more, but i also don't literally have a thousand berry lipsticks. i swear.]

the more pertinent question is, "how often am i going to wear a green lipstick?" in this case, i refer you back to my comments about "chrysalis", which are appropriate: strange colours are clearly having a moment right now, which is fantastic as far as i'm concerned, but which can make one feel a little self-conscious. if you're someone who wants to try her luck with a "freaky" colour, but are a bit shy, using a dark shade can be a way to ease into the weirdness. dark lip colours, as dramatic as they can look, don't scream "i am green!! hear me roar!" in quite the same way. [at the same time, i wore "chrysalis" to a show a while back and one of my friends complimented me on wearing such a cool shade, so you're not totally losing the shock effect.]

"kale" is dramatic, but it's very flattering on my cooler colouring, which makes me feel like i could be comfortable wearing it in a number of situations. it's not ever going to pass for natural, but it's not going to read as clownish, either. if anything, i think that "lavender jam" is the more risqué of the two shades that i picked up, because of its brightness.

so how do these two beauties look in use? a little like this:



i find that you can see the slight unevenness in "lavender jam" if you look at these photos. i'd go so far as to say that you can see it more in the photos than you could in real life, but perhaps that's wishful thinking on my part. i've combined it with shades from the urban decay naked 3 eyeshadow palette and nars "sin" on the cheeks. the vibrancy of "lavender jam" makes it a little tricky to match with other colours and i don't feel like i've hit on the perfect combo yet. this one's not bad, but i just know i can do better.



like a lot of vampy shades, "kale" does best when it's allowed to take the lead. i paired it with rouge bunny rouge "gracious arasari" and "solstice halcyon", and a touch of illamasqua precision ink liner in "wisdom". yes, i like this colour very much.

i'm happy with both of these colours, particularly "kale" and i rather suspect that, budget permitting, i could be tempted by other shades in this collection. there's an inky dark blue and a luscious, earthy dark brown on the savoury side and a smoky deep lavender and a remarkably original mauve-taupe nude on the sweet side. all seem very appealing and, in case i haven't made it clear enough, these are some of the most original shades in the bite beauty line up. go forth and indulge, i command you. 

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 …

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…