Tracey H. (of Unapologetically Female) sent in this series of photos from the French version of Vogue (found at Miss at la Playa). Tracey says,
The same model is photographed as if she is 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, and 60 years old. I think the differences between the photos in makeup, wardrobe, hair, facial expression, and posture really say something interesting about how we view youth and aging in women. In lots of ways, it seems to point to just how performative age can be.
It also provides a great example of the power of makeup and computerized retouching to alter appearances, meaning the people we see in magazines look little like the actual people who posed for the original photos, much less like “normal” people, though we often compare ourselves to them as though they provide realistic beauty standards.
Here are the photos, from youngest (10 years) to oldest (60 years):
Of course, in Vogue’s world, 50 and 60 year-old women have very few wrinkles; their age, as Tracey mentioned, is shown more through clothing choices, jewelry, haircuts, facial expressions, and so on, than it is through visible signs of aging (though they’re allowed to have a little gray hair).
Great find, Tracey!
10 Comments
http://hautemacabre.wordpress.com/?p=915
No, no, it isn’t NAILPOLISH it is MAN GLAZE.
Note that at every age, the magazine says “non” to surgical interventions.
I saw this a while back and thought it was great.
I don’t speak French, and Jay says that the magazine is taking a stand against surgical intervention, but it certainly DOES look like face-lifting and whatnot has been taking place for that latter ages. On the bright(?) side, at least they’re not showing a gradual decline in the attractiveness of the woman. If anything, the low-point seems to be at age 30 - why does she look so jaded and tired at 30? Is it the career? Kids? And is 30 really the age women start using botox? That sounds… stupid.
Dubi: I think it looks like the age 50 and 60 pictures involve surgical intervention because the model IS young. I imagine it would be difficult to make realistic wrinkles through makeup (without serious use of Halloween-type latex). I do agree that the 30-year-old picture doesn’t seem to make a lot of sense. She’s so heavily made up and looks almost drugged.
More specifically, the ads say NO to cosmetic surgery but YES to cosmetic products. If you hadn’t said it came from Vogue I would have assumed it’s an ad for l’Oréal.
As for the pictures… I find the lack of wrinkles in the three last ones a bit disturbing. In particular, like others I don’t see what says “30″ about the “30″ picture, and the age difference between the 40 and 50 ones is so subtle I almost don’t see it. Thank goodness for the gray hair and humongous ring on the 60 year-old or I’d say the same thing about her.
Anyway, the reaction I imagine to those pictures from anybody over 30 is “heck, NO cream or skin care will make me look like THAT ! Screw it, I’m having surgery”. Or something.
It seems like a few of the commenters missed the point? They were not trying to ACTUALLY make her look 30-40-50-60, but simply to TREAT her as if she was, which makes it an interesting comment on what is “acceptable” for different ages of women when it comes to clothing/hair/make-up/behavior (though the pose).
It’s very creepy to me that the nude ones are the 10 and 20 year old pose.
I agree that I don’t really get what’s going on in the 30 picture — but I also can see how that is often how that age of women are often portrayed. They’re “too old” to photograph nude and “mature” enough to wear that much makeup, so they glitz them up way beyond what is necessary. By 40, it’s time to tone things down and take a backseat to the naked 20 year olds and dramatically glamorous 30 year olds.
Unrelated, I recently discovered this blog and can’t get enough.
Altairian - what’s creepy about the nude poses? Nudity =/= sexuality. Nothing about the model or the poses is sexual to me at all.
Nudity =/= sexuality.
…except that, often, nudity DOES equal sexuality, and they chose that ambiguity for the *underaged* one. Why can’t she have a shirt? Is naked the usual state for 10 year old girls? Also, cropping the photo so low on her chest is pretty suggestive that the sexuality was intended.
Bagelsan - on the contrary cropping the picture so low while still not showing any sign of cleavage is done precisely to desexualize her - making it seem as if the model is prepubescent. Maybe 10 is a bit borderline, but certainly at age 6-7 shirtlessness for girls is considered non-problematic where I’m from.
Also - how can you say the 40 picture is toning it down? Her jacket is completely open with no blouse…
One Trackback
[...] [See better quality scans on Sociological Images] [...]