Skip to main content

making faces :: inspired by fire and ice

i don't know why, perhaps because i'm starting to worry that the end of the world is nigh, but i found myself thinking about this verse earlier in the week:

Some say the world will end in fire, 
Some say in ice. 
From what I’ve tasted of desire 
I hold with those who favor fire. 
But if it had to perish twice, 
I think I know enough of hate 
To say that for destruction ice 
Is also great 
And would suffice.

i've always held robert frost at a bit of a distance, although i do love "stopping by woods on a snowy evening" and especially "acquainted with the night". [no self-respecting insomniac can exist without loving that poem. if you don't, you're an insomnia dilettante.] but there's something about the short piece above that strikes me as a kind of saying, like "a stitch in time makes nine", except that it makes more sense. it's almost too short to be a poem, and falls closer to the part of an axiom.

how we get from robert frost to makeup is really anyone's guess. the leap happened in my brain and even i don't know how it happened. but happen it did, and so i created two looks, each inspired by one of those paths to the end of the world.

fire




products used

the base ::
clarins skin illusion foundation 103
clarins instant concealer 01

the eyes ::
mac e/s "goldmine"
mac e/s "goldenrod"
mac e/s "full of flavour"*
mac e/s "dance in the dark"*
inglot e/s "495"
inglot e/s "351"
urban decay 24/7 e/l "perversion"
marc jacobs velvet noir volume mascara

the cheeks ::
hourglass ambient lighting powder "luminous light"
mac powder blush "fever"

the lips ::
bite beauty amuse bouche l/s "enoki"

*suggested alternates :: full of flavour = mac free to be; dance in the dark = nars night clubbing [darker, cooler, shimmery]

i have been having some allergy issues, which accounts for a lot of the sagginess around my eyes, but this actually looked pretty good in person. other than "goldmine" the shadows are all matte or near matte, which i find gives a really nice definition to the colours, as opposed to letting them all run together in one big mess.

this is not an appropriate look for my colouring, obviously. it's too warm by far. it would work a lot better on a woman whose colouring was that of a true or dark autumn, someone who had that fiery warmth in them already. i do think that the saturation level is acceptable and, as i mentioned in my original review, "enoki" is a surprisingly workable neutral for me, being more yellow than brown-based.

ice




the base ::
clarins skin illusion foundation 103
clarins instant concealer 01
joe fresh illuminating primer "pure glow"

the eyes ::
marc jacobs icon style icon no. 3 e/s palette "the punk"
viseart bijou royale e/s palette "silver"
marcelle velvet gel e/l "grey"
nyx retractable e/l "silver
marc jacobs velvet noir volume mascara

the cheeks ::
burberry powder blush "peony"

the lips ::
nars audacious l/s "apolline"

this one is much better suited to the undertones of my skin, definitely. i think you could argue that the eye makeup is a touch too cool, but there's just enough neutrality in the blush and lips to offset it [i think]. of course, the idea was supposed to be to create a frosty, ice queen coming to end the world look here, but i had to leave the house and run some errands, and i didn't especially want to approach looking like i was heralding the end times. ["i will take this loaf of bread, some haagen-dazs ice cream, and your soul."] coincidentally, although it's on the other side of the scale, "apolline" is another one of my favourite neutral/ natural lipsticks.

although i do rather agree with the inestimable mr. frost that the world will end in fire, for my part, i prefer how i look in ice. so perhaps that means i'm doomed to look rather feverish and unhealthy during the apocalypse, but i suspect that might be the least of my problems. i just hope i'm allowed to bring my makeup collection into the afterlife, and that i get a room with temperature control. 

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 …