Tales of the Talking Tiger

Define: beauty

Feb 15th 2007
5 Comments
respond
trackback
Check out this 30 second clip:

http://www.campaignforrealbeauty.co.uk/ (and click on ‘play film’)

This clip has been circling the internet as part of the Campaign for Real Beauty.

I think this clip is both unsettling, yet almost reassuring. Unsettling as we see the features of the model distorted so much that she ultimately bears little resemblance to what she originally looked like (and developed a neck twice its original height!) I think it’s also reassuring because we suspect these kinds of ‘readjustments’ happen and now we’ve seen some kind of proof.

A question sticks in my mind after watching this clip. When the graphic artist is manipulating the image of the model, what end point does she have in mind?

Quite obviously the designer didn’t consider the original ‘look’ suitable, so what is the ideal look that she was working towards? Is there some kind of generic ‘beautiful’ image? What was so unsuitable with the actual appearance of the model that her image needed to be so drastically altered?

Based purely on ‘face’ value (yes, the unintended pun didn’t go unnoticed!), most people would say that the final image is an improvement on the original. Yet I wonder how much our perception of beauty has been, and continues to be influenced by what other people (graphic designers, advertisers, etc) tell us it is. Everyday we are shown what is beautiful (or what we should consider to be beautiful), that perhaps we now subconsciously define beauty in the ways that others have convinced us it is.

Whilst it is impossible to move into a vacuum where we are unaffected by these images, my concluding question is this. If it were possible to remove all of the influences around us, what would we actually consider beauty to be?


This post is tagged

5 Comments

  1. &

    This really isn’t an insightful comment but there is a parody of that link, which i think is a little funny.

  2. &

    beauty must be the theme for today, just after i read this post this just came in my RSS feed: Art (or beauty) according to Ze Frank

  3. Josh

    Good thoughts tiger

    Beauty is a social construct, and has always been. That is why we see different tribes and cultures with totally different views on beauty. The problem with globalisation is that the concept of beauty has become more uniform and determined by less people (as you say graphic artist and so on)

  4. Bob

    I don’t think so – I think if you want to use the ‘globalisation is bad’ card, you have to consider that maybe beauty is now determined by *more* people.

    Beauty is the thin, tall, clear-skinned look because that’s what beauty is to the majority of people. If it didn’t sell, your graphic designer would be out of a job.

  5. Mr F

    Tiger, it’s Mr. F. Again, very intriguing comments.

    I will pose this question on the back of what “bob” has said.

    If what you are saying is true, then does that apply for everything? You are saying that what the majority believes is the truth. I don’t think that is true. If most people believe she is beautiful and one person does not, does that make this person wrong? Of course not!

    In the case of determining what “beauty” is, it is an absolutely individual choice. It just so happens that most people have similar opinions on what is beautiful and what is not.

    Your question is entirely rhetorical. I don’t think anyone can answer that question, as we just simply don’t know. In the case of this Dove commercial, the final product is aesthetically pleasing to the eye. The fact that she ends up on a billboard is irrelevant. For all we know, we will most probably think she is still beautiful regardless of outside influences, including the media.

Incoming Links

Leave a Reply