Newsweek - National News, World News, Health, Technology, Entertainment and more... | Newsweek.com

HEADLINE HEADLINE HEADLINE

SPONSORED BY
Full Post
Posted Thursday, August 13, 2009 4:35 PM

Models Without Makeup: Cindy Crawford and Friends Go Bare in Harper's Bazaar

Kate Dailey
(Harpers Bazaar)
 

The September issue of Harper's Bazaar (on stands Aug. 18)  features several iconic models baring naked faces. Kristen McMenamy, Shalom Harlow, Cindy Crawford, Tatian Patitz, Amber Valetta, Helena Christiansen, Nadia Auerman, and Claudia Schiffer all went before the camera without any cosmetic help─and since they're models, they all look freaking gorgeous. (The superb lighting and semigrainy black-and-white footage seems to take care of whatever flaws genetics missed.)

Any time magazines try something like this, where they willfully defy the very standards of beauty they create/reinforce every day, you can expect a healthy backlash. For example, the very astute Tom and Lorenzo of Project Runway take a strong stand against this kind of magazine stunt:

What are we, as readers, supposed to take away from a stunt like this? That they all have great bone structure? We knew that already. Is this supposed to make the average woman identify with them somehow? If so, FAIL. They're all still amazingly beautiful women even when the artifice is stripped away ...

Advertisement

Nothing will change and the industry will go right back to presenting impossibly beautiful women day after day, month after month. And we're not even saying there's anything wrong with that. It's called the beauty industry for a reason, after all. All we're saying is that it's a stunt and like all stunts it's interesting for a moment or two, but after that it fades away into meaninglessness. Don't pretend to be something you're not, beauty industry. It's insulting.

And one could complain that glamorizing a makeup-free look only makes it harder for the nonsupermodels, who may need a little base and mascara to look even remotely like this:

 

(Harper's Bazaar)
 
(Say what you will about the mean-spirited "Stars Without Makeup" features in tabloid mags. At least they give the rest of America confirmation that many celebrities aren't a class of perfect, glowing superhumans, but instead just talented people with access to good hair and makeup teams.)

Then, of course, there's the fact none of these middle-aged models without makeup made it on the cover, and even the coverline is a little too coy. ("Fabulous at Any Age" doesn't really indicate that one can be fabulous at any age sans undereye concealer): 


But really? It almost seems too easy to hate on a fashion mag for not accurately reflecting how women really look. I can say with absolute certainty that these photos will not kick off a national trend of idealizing all women (not just supermodels) exactly as they look first thing in the morning. So let's enjoy the photos for what they are—pretty shots of pretty people—and hope that at the very least, they inspire readers to invest in some good SPF moisturizer.

You must be a registered user to comment.  Click here to register.  Already a user?  Click here to login.

Member Comments

Posted By: translanticgirl (September 8, 2009 at 7:50 PM)

As a seasoned graphic designer, I am too appalled to laugh at this ridiculous claim that these women are natural.  I want women to know that HUNDREDS of photos were taken, in the the most flattering lighting and photographic conditions, with a HEAVY HAND of Photoshop.  Then the best one photo out of 500 was picked.

westwingpotus post said it best in her post "that readers are seeing the real deal is laughable at best (and actually just a lie at worst)."  

I know it is not these models fault as this is a day of work for them.  But the magazines are selling a lie, like they always do, to get readers attention and sell the rag.

Truth be told I admire that these models are older, but I wish there were more models in the 30 - 50 range used commonly, not just for these bogus tricks.  It is hard for me, a woman in her mid-30s (and I once modeled myself), to find allure from a 15 year old child model --who I know has also been retouched.


Posted By: TruthInTexas (August 21, 2009 at 1:01 PM)

Isn't the dirty little secret about makeup that it dries out your skin, thereby accelerating aging and wrinkling?  

The ages of young, makeup-free women from the FLDS compound near Eldorado, Texas, were repeatedly underestimated by state authorities, partly based on the women's youthful faces.  Women in their 20's appeared to be teenagers.   (The women's ages were significant for legal reasons.)

Mark Brown

San Angelo, Texas

August 21, 2009


Posted By: westwingpotus (August 17, 2009 at 7:05 PM)

Oh come on --  the thing the magazine is completely overlooking is that in ANY magazine photo, including I'm sure, the No-Makeup-Harpers has EXTENSIVE retouching due to the wonders of Photoshop.

While it's sweet that the models allowed themselves to be photographed without makeup and all,  -- between the selective lighting and photoshop, the idea that readers are seeing the real deal is laughable at best (and actually just a lie at worst).  And most people are smart enough to know that.

This is not to say that the models should be or are obligated to photographed and published, "as is" with no enhancement or retouching.    But let's not pretend for even a single second that the lack of mascara or eye shadown makes that big a difference in appearance.