Makeup Museum (MM) Musings is a series that examines a broad range of museum topics as they relate to the preservation, research and exhibition of cosmetics, along with my vision for a physical Makeup Museum. These posts help me think through how I'd run things if the Museum occupied a physical public space, as well as examine the ways it's currently functioning. I also hope that these posts make everyone see that just because the Makeup Museum does not have a physical space or official nonprofit designation, it is as valid as other museums, and more legitimate than many other profit-driven entities calling themselves "museums".
Let me just say up front that the timing of this post has nothing to do with the Capitol insurrection that took place a few weeks ago, or the fact that Black History Month starts in two days. This is something that's been in the works for over a year, as it's extremely important to the Museum's mission and to me personally. After giving myself a crash course in diversity and inclusion, I feel as though I'm finally ready to write something a little more in-depth than the thoughts I jotted down back in June 2020. One of the Museum's primary goals is to present makeup and its history differently than what currently exists, and a big part of that is sharing previously undiscovered or underrepresented stories. So many of them concern BIPOC and LGBTQ+ histories, and it's important to tell them not just for diversity's sake but for history more generally.
This post will not go into detail regarding the obvious facts that 1. Despite good intentions, all museums are rooted in colonialism; 2. U.S. museums have a critical diversityproblem; and 3. Diverse and inclusive museums are better in every way than non-inclusive spaces. Instead, it seeks to answer the following question: How can the Makeup Museum, in its current state, be as diverse and inclusive as possible? I don't have all the answers, but MM Musings are an exercise to think through the heavier issues and ponder how the Museum can be better – more of a journey than an endpoint. To help guide this installment of MM Musings I relied on these two books, along with the anti-racism books I purchased last year. I also looked at all the articles and other resourcesI could access for free online.
As I noted previously, there are unique challenges for a cosmetics museum to become a diverse and inclusive space. But that doesn't mean there's not room for improvement. If the Museum occupied a physical space and had paid employees (well-paid and with full benefits, of course, and while I hope they would not have a need for a union, they would absolutely be encouraged to form one if they want), it would no doubt have a diverse boardand staff at all levels that would be treated as integral to the organization and not tokens, along with the other essentials such as diversity training for docents and consultants to continually evaluate the Museum's efforts and provide recommendations. In its current form, however, the primary focus in terms of diversity and inclusion is on the Museum's content and collection. Since there are no blueprints as to how to run an online cosmetics museum/blog whose existence and finances depend entirely on one person who is also not technically a museum professional, it's tricky to come up with a concrete plan of action for diversity and inclusion. But here's a start.
Diversify the collection.
Collecting Chinese, Japanese and Korean brands are not an issue, nor are ones founded or owned by LGBTQ+ people – there are plenty of those as well as artist/fashion collaborations – but Latinx and Indigenous brands and collabs remain somewhat elusive. I can write about my beloved Pai Pai but they no longer ship to the U.S., and I know of only a handful of other Latinx or Indigenous-owned brands. Contemporary Black-owned brands are easier to find than ever now so I will continue purchasing more from them, but it's still difficult to find many vintage pieces simply because there were so few compared to the big mainstream brands, none of which catered to BIPOC's needs until the 1960s or so (and even then their efforts continued to miss the mark.) I will continue to keep my eyes peeled and buy from BIPOC and LGBTQ+ brands as much as possible.
Diversify blog, IG and exhibition content.
The Museum's collection may not be diverse enough right now, but that doesn't mean I can't write about objects or other pieces of makeup history related to BIPOC and LGBTQ+ communities, along with topics centered on ageism within the industry and people with disabilities. There are so many that are either have not been fully explored or not mentioned at all. One stumbling block remains: namely, I'm still not sure they're stories appropriate for a white, able-bodied, cis-het woman to tell. This is particularly important when discussing makeup used by Indigenous people, as in some cases it has a spiritual or religious purpose rather than beautification or self-expression. I'm afraid I don't have a solution other than to forge ahead and write about topics that may not be 100% appropriate but that are important. I think as long as I'm treating them in a sensitive manner and open to feedback and constructive criticism, it's better to share these histories even if they're from a non-BIPOC/LGBTQ+ person. One thing I eventually learned last summer was that being totally silent and not even attempting to diversify content is worse than trying and getting it wrong. I only hope I don't inflict any harm, but if I do, then I can always remove the post and do better the next time.
Search for more BIPOC and LGBTQ+ artists and brands to feature on Instagram and in Color Connections.
Exhibitions: How are BIPOC and LGBTQ+ represented in exhibitions? If they're not adequately represented, why? The solutions to this would normally be to have an exhibition that thoroughly incorporates diverse objects and voices, or have one focused on BIPOC and LGBTQ+ themes and ensure appropriate curation and oversight, e.g. not hiring someone who doesn't belong to those groups or has little to no knowledge about the topic at hand. This is a hurdle for the Makeup Museum as the founder and sole curator is not from an underrepresented group. The only thing I can do at the moment is choose exhibition topics in which marginalized people have adequate representation and make sure they see themselves in the exhibitions. It must be obvious that they're not niche visitors and that they are essential to the story the exhibition is telling. Theoretically I could explore whether anyone would be interested in co-curating or guest curating an exhibition focused on BIPOC or LGBTQ+, but as the Museum is entirely a labor of love and I'm unable to provide compensation, I'm sure as hell not asking someone from a marginalized group to curate or write for free. That brings me to my next point.
Identify fees for guest writers, curators and consultants and see if they are feasible without drastically cutting the budget for new acquisitions.
Like most of the initiatives I would love to pursue such as overhauling the website ($10-20k), purchasing archival storage containers ($1-2k), establishing a nonprofit (about $2-4k), getting a degree in museum or curatorial studies ($50k minimum) and purchasing and maintaining proper collections management software ($2k per year), I fear I would never be able to afford to hire professionals to work on the Museum with me even if I never bought another object, but it can't hurt to at least ask what their fees are. And who knows, perhaps I could even work out a plan whereby payments are due in installments rather than the full sum up front.
Further develop a community-focused, collaborative mindset.
Since its inception the Museum has operated in a mostly isolated environment. I'm not only a hardcore introvert and lifelong loner, but I always wanted to have my own space, something that I had full control over and without the involvement of anyone else. And that impulse is still quite strong. But I've also always wanted to educate, and though I'm not comfortable with it, being a resource means inviting people to help create it: by the public, for the public. Community for the Museum largely means either makeup aficionados/professionals or the local geographic area. I've always asked blog visitors to respond to my posts, and starting with the Stila girls exhibition in 2019, I began asking visitors to submit memories, photos or anything else they'd like to share to be incorporated into the exhibition. Lately I started investigating how the Museum might be able to collaborate with local museums, schools and historical centers – obviously I've considered pitching a pop-up exhibition at their spaces for over a decade now, but I realized I have to be more mindful of the approach. There's no way an organization is going to agree to host or be involved with an outside museum offering a pop-up exhibition if it has nothing to do with their mission or at least their collections. The goal, it seems, is to match interests. For example, the Maryland Center for History and Culture would be more interested in an exhibition on a history of Baltimore beauty parlors than, say, a display of rose-themed makeup, because their mission and collection have nothing to do with botany or natural history but is focused on the state of MD. I think there are ways in which the Museum can engage with both the makeup and local communities, and become more diverse and inclusive in doing so.
Establish metrics for the Museum's collection and content and share them publicly.
To keep any organization accountable in their diversity and inclusion efforts, it's necessary to track measurable outcomes of said efforts. Museums and Race's report card gave me the idea to develop one for the Museum based on the steps listed above. It would be updated annually each January and indicate the progress or maintenance of goals, which are as follows:
Increase the number of posts that focus on or incorporate BIPOC and LGBTQ+ makeup and related topics (for example, the "multicultural" makeup of the '90s). Originally I wanted to follow U.S. demographics and keep a strict 60/40 split in which 40% of posts would be BIPOC-focused, with 18% Latinx topics/artists/brands, 15% Black, 6% Asian and 1% Indigenous. Alas, after crunching some numbers I realized that it would be impossible unless I both greatly scaled back the number of Asian-focused posts and hired or collaborated with BIPOC/LGBTQ+, and there's no telling if I will be able to achieve the latter. So for now, I'm going to take stock of what was written in 2020 and plan on more diverse posts in 2021. In terms of Instagram, taking a cue from the 15% pledge, my goal is to ensure at least 15% of IG posts feature Black makeup history, artists, models or Black-owned brands. I've been doing 11% since June (or 1 out of every 9 posts) and it has proved challenging. It's difficult because I don't want to repeat the same brands, models or artists ad nauseam and also want to provide meaningful and unique content, i.e. I don't want to toss up some ad that people have seen a thousand times before, especially without offering any new insight, just because I need to fill a quota that I set. Representation is critical, but can easily veer into tokenism. Having said that, I'd still like for 1 post out of every 6 (or 17%) to have Black-focused content and I'm working on how I can do that without blindly regurgitating things that are readily available and well-known. I'm also going to count other topics towards this goal even if they don't show a Black model or brand. For example, I have a bottle of Revlon's Touch and Glow foundation from the early 1950s in the deepest shade they made up until about 1957. As you may have guessed, it's medium toned at best. This is an example of how mainstream brands simply did not care about the needs of BIPOC customers, especially Black ones. I'm still not sure how to handle other demographics, however; as noted above, Latinx and Indigenous brands, artists and topics are somehow more difficult to find than Black ones. Nevertheless, Instagram makes it easy to track so I will take stock of 2020's posts and work on at least increasing the number of posts involving these groups.
Increase the number of Museum objects from BIPOC-owned brands. I will keep track of what was acquired each year and work out the proportion of objects that came from BIPOC-owned brands. Then monitor those numbers each year to ensure they increase. For example, I purchased 22 makeup ads in 2020 and 6 of them were from Black-owned brands or featured Black models. So this year, let's say I purchase 22 ads again, 7 or more of them should be from BIPOC-owned brands or feature BIPOC models. The acquisition of objects from white-owned brands will still soundly outpace BIPOC-owned ones, especially for vintage pieces, but the goal is to increase that number and work towards a bigger percentage of BIPOC-owned objects in the collection.
Track the number of BIPOC and LGBTQ+ people or organizations I reached out or donated to, along with community organizations. While nothing may come of these attempts on my part to collaborate with them, I feel it's important to at least get in touch. And there are plenty of BIPOC and LGBTQ individuals and organizations that can use donations.
Ensure all exhibitions meaningfully represent BIPOC and LGBTQ+ individuals and brands, and if not, discuss why.
I think this sort of report card is more valuable than some bland diversity statement. Most of the statements I found lacked substance – they were just a bunch of jargon with no actionable steps outlined.
The Museum's diversity efforts are ongoing, of course. And I plan on tackling the related topics of social change and accessibility as future installments of MM Musings. But this is a beginning of a shift towards meaningful action. Thoughts? I'm off to create a report card for 2020 so I will have something to compare 2021 to.
It's the time of year where I babble on about things I want to tackle but most likely won't be able to. I reviewed last year's blog post ideas and out of the 30 topics I only managed to accomplish, let's see, 10. One-third of what I was aiming for. Sigh. As for exhibitions, I only did one and it wasn't all that cerebral. Anyway, no point in ruminating over what I should have done so here's a bit of an update.
In an effort to sort of narrow down the massive amount of exhibition ideas I have, I came up with a priority list of topics that might be doable in the 1-5 years (if the Museum is still in existence) and a secondary list for, well, I have no idea – eventually. I tweaked some of the descriptions as needed. Also, please keep in mind these are working titles. Hopefully I can think of better ones! Once again the husband came up with handy graphics.
Priority:
"Black and Blue: A History of Punk Makeup"
"Catch the Light: Glitter in Cosmetics from Ancient Times Through Today" – Aiming to have this up for holiday 2021, but it's a big one and I will need lots of help that I'm not sure I can get.
"The Life Aquatic: Mermaid Makeup" – I need to think of a better title soon because I want this to go up in June this year.
"Color History Through Cosmetics: Blue" – I decided to scrap the gold-themed exhibition in exchange for blue. I discovered so many fascinating things about blue makeup while pulling together some trivia on Instagram, there's definitely enough there for an exhibition.
"Ancient Allure: Egypt-Inspired Makeup and Beauty" - I did some polling on Twitter and Instagram and this one won as the next exhibition, so the tentative date is March 2021.
"Just Desserts: Sweet Tooth Revisited" – It might be good to revisit this on its 10-year anniversary in 2023.
"Aliengelic: Pat McGrath Retrospective" – Still a priority, but again, I will need lots of assistance and would strongly prefer having a makeup artist co-curate with me. Alternate title instead of Aliengelic: "The Mother of Modern Makeup".
"From Male Polish to Guyliner: A History of Men's Makeup" – I know that a new book on men's makeup will be released in June this year and it would be great to have the author as a co-curator.
"She's All That: Beauty in the '90s" – Oh, poor little neglected '90s makeup book and exhibition. You know I've been wanting to do a comprehensive exhibition and book since at least 2014, but just never seem to have the time. I do have the chapter outline but I think I need to make deadlines for each chapter and publish the drafts as blog posts, otherwise it's not getting done.
"Pandemic: Makeup in the Age of COVID-19" – Depressing but historically significant. I'll need to wait until the pandemic is safely behind us, but I am gathering bits of what will surely become history now.
"Ugly Makeup: A Revolution in Aesthetics" – I am so incredibly inspired by Makeup Brutalism and her other effort Ugly Makeup Revolution, I absolutely need to explore looks that completely shatter our notions of makeup's purpose. The exhibition would be a deep dive into how makeup is going beyond basic artistry and self-expression.
"Nothing to Hide: Makeup as Mask" – This was the other choice I included in the Twitter and Instagram polls. While respondents chose Egyptian-themed makeup over this one, the mask theme in makeup goes back centuries and would certainly make a rich topic, plus I could do a subsection on mask-wearing's effects on makeup in the pandemic.
Secondary list/things I'm not sure about:
"Queens: A History of Drag Makeup" – Amazing topic but overwhelming. Need much help!
"From Mods and Hippies to Supervixens and Grrrls: '60s and '90s Makeup in Dialogue" – In my opinion, cultural developments in both the late '60s and mid-1990s radically changed the beauty industry and gave birth to new ideas about how people view and wear makeup; there are many parallels between the two eras. I feel, however, that I'd need to do the '90s exhibition and book first so this would have to wait.
"Gilded Splendor: A History of Gold Makeup" – This is nice but the more I thought about it the more I didn't think it would be a priority.
"Design is a Good Idea: Innovations in Cosmetics Design and Packaging" - Another that I still like but not so much as to make it immediate.
"The Medium is the Message: Makeup as Art" – This will trace how makeup is marketed and conceived of as traditional art mediums, i.e painting and sculpture, and also how art history is incorporated into makeup advertising and collections. Consider it a comprehensive discussion of this post while working in canonical artists whose work has appeared on makeup packaging. My issue with it is that it's overwhelmingly white. The artists used in vintage ads such Lancome's are white and even collections today don't collaborate with many BIPOC artists, especially Black ones.
"Wanderlust: Travel-Inspired Beauty" - A rich topic and would be timely in light of the pandemic limiting travel for most, but honestly, I'm not that excited about it.
"By Any Other Name: The Rose in Makeup and Beauty" – I pitched this idea to the FIT Museum as a small add-on to their "Ravishing" exhibition. They weren't interested and now that the exhibition has passed I'm tabling it for now.
And now for blog posts!
MM Musings (2): FINALLY getting up the diversity and inclusion in museums post up this month after a year of working on it, and the other topic to tackle this year will be becoming a nonprofit organization.
MM Mailbag (2-3): Once again the MM mailbag overflowed in 2020 and most of the inquiries took a significant amount of time to research and answer. I'll see what might be feasible.
Brief histories (4-5): I still want to go ahead with histories of powder applicators, setting sprays and maybe colored mascara, color-changing cosmetics and how makeup language has evolved (for example, why we typically say "blush" now instead of "rouge" for cheek color.) The author of Cosmetics and Skin kindly suggested an article on copycats, i.e. how companies clearly ripped each other off and continue to do so today in terms of packaging, ad campaigns, etc. which is a great topic. I'm also interested in a history of Day of the Dead makeup.
Trends (1): Makeup brand merchandise and swag – another I didn't cover in 2020 as planned. I'm also very interested in the video game trend in makeup, but I'm hoping this amazing person writes about it instead!
Vintage (6): series of Dorothy Gray ads featuring portraits of well-to-do "society" ladies, '90s prom makeup, and wear-to-work makeup from the 1970s-90s, defunct '90s and early aughts brands (Benetton, Calvin Klein, Tommy Hilfiger, Nina Ricci and Inoui ID to start with), and a slew of other brand histories, especially Black-owned brands like La Jac and Rose Morgan. I'm also itching to write something about Black salespeople and customers in direct sales companies, i.e. Avon, Mary King by Watkins, Fuller, Artistry by Amway, etc. The company I hope to tackle this month if the objects I purchased on Ebay ever arrive will be Holiday Magic…the story is absolutely bonkers.
Artist collabs (5): As in 2020 I'm still trying to catch up on some of last year's holiday releases, including Fee Greening for Mikimoto and Cecilia Carlstedt and Morag Myerscough for Bobbi Brown. There are tons of others from previous years that I'm still thinking about, such as El Seed for MAC, Connor Tingley for NARS, the Shiseido Gallery compacts and lip balms, and a series on the artists whose work appears on Pat McGrath's packaging.
Book reviews (2): In the interest of saving time and also because my reviews tend to be badly written (even for me), I decided to do regular reviews only for some books and speed reviews of others, combining several books in a single post. Most of the ones I'm planning on are in the Beauty Library section of the website.
Dream Teams series (1-2): I did actually start this series last year, albeit without the mockups I had wanted to do. Stay tuned for more fantasy artist/makeup collabs. I especially want to focus on BIPOC artists and flesh out the idea I had back in 2016 for a Rrose Sélavy-themed collection.
Color Connections (5+): I returned to Color Connections last year but only once. They just take so much time. However, I've been toying with the idea of putting them as a dedicated series on Instagram separate from the Museum's regular account. That way it might make me accountable in terms of working on them more regularly.
Finally, there will be lots of other random things popping up, and I have so many people I want to talk to so I hope to nab some interviews and guest posts. 🙂
And here we have my book ideas. They're the same as last year. The first one is an alternate title for the '90s exhibition. The second one would basically be the accompanying catalogue for the Makeup as Art exhibition. I still want to do a coffee table book of pretty makeup, but my concern is that it won't be diverse.
Any of these topics interest you? Which ones would you like to read about/see first?
Despite my art history background and general love of art, I am less than eloquent when writing about it. Nevertheless I will continue soldiering forward with the Museum's Makeup as Muse series, the latest installment of which focuses on the work of Gina Beavers in honor of her recent show at Marianne Boesky Gallery. Beavers' practice encompasses a variety of themes, but it's her paintings of makeup tutorials that I'll be exploring. Since I'm both tired and lazy this will be more of a summary of her work rather than offering any fresh insight and I'll be quoting the artist extensively along with some writers who have covered her art, so most of this will not be my own words.
Born in Athens and raised in Europe, Beavers is fascinated by the excess and consumerism of both American culture and social media. "I don't know how to talk about this existence without talking about consumption, and so I think that's the element in consuming other people's images. That's where that's embedded. We have to start with consumption if we're going to talk about who we are. That's the bedrock—especially as an American," she says. The purchase of a smart phone in 2010 is when Beavers' work began focusing on social media. "[Pre-smart phone] I would see things in the world and paint them! Post-smartphone my attention and observation seemed to go into my phone, into looking at and participating in social media apps, and all of the things that would arise there…Historically, painters have drawn inspiration from their world, for me it's just that a lot of my world is virtual [now]."
But why makeup, and specifically, makeup tutorials? There seem to be two main themes running through the artist's focus on these online instructions, the first being the relationship between painting and makeup. Beavers explains: "When I started with these paintings I was really thinking that this painting is looking at you while it is painting itself. It’s drawing and painting: it has pencils, it has brushes, and it’s trying to make itself appealing to the viewer. It’s about that parallel between a painting and what you expect from it as well as desire and attraction. It’s also interesting because the terms that makeup artists use on social media are painting terms. The way they talk about brushes or pigments sounds like painters talking shop." Makeup application as traditional painting is a theme that goes back centuries, but Beavers's work represents a fresh take on it. As Ellen Blumenstein wrote in an essay for Wall Street International: "Elements such as brushes, lipsticks or fingers, which are intended to reassure the viewers of the videos of the imitability of the make-up procedures, here allude to the active role of the painting – which does not just stare or make eyes at the viewer, but rather seems to paint itself with the accessories depicted – literally building a bridge extending out from the image…Beavers divests [the image] of its natural quality and uses painting as an analytical tool. The viewer is no longer looking at photographic tableaus composed of freeze-frames taken from make-up tutorials, but rather paintings about make-up tutorials, which present the aesthetic and formal parameters of this particular class of images, which exist exclusively on the net." The conflation of makeup and painting can also be perceived as a rumination on authorship and original sources. Beavers is remaking tutorials, but the tutorials themselves originated with individual bloggers and YouTubers. And given the viral, democratic nature of the Internet, it's nearly impossible to tell who did a particular tutorial first and whether tutorials covering the same material – say, lip art depicting Van Gogh's "Starry Night" – are direct copies of one artist's work or merely the phenomenon of many people having the same idea and sharing it online. Sometimes the online audience cannot distinguish between authentic content and advertising; Beavers's "Burger Eye" (2015), for example, is actually not recreated from a tutorial at all but an Instagram ad for Burger King (and the makeup artist who was hired to create it remains, as far as I know, uncredited).
Another theme is fashioning one's self through makeup, and how that self is projected online in multiple ways. Beavers explains: "I am interested in the ways existing online is performative, and the tremendous lengths people go to in constructing their online selves. Meme-makers, face-painters, people who make their hair into sculptures, are really a frontier of a new creative world…It’s interesting, as make-up has gotten bigger and bigger, I’ve realized what an important role it plays in helping people construct a self, particularly in trans and drag communities. I don’t normally wear a lot of make-up myself, but I like the idea of the process of applying make-up standing in for the process of self-determination, the idea of ‘making yourself’."
As for the artist's process, it's a laborious one. Beavers regularly combs Instagram, YouTube and other online sources and saves thousands of images on her phone. She then narrows down to a few based on both composition and the story they're trying to tell. "I'm arrested by images that have interesting formal qualities, color, composition but also a compelling narrative. I really like when an image is saying something that leaves me unsure of how it will translate to painting, like whether the meaning will change in the context of the history of painting," she says. "I always felt drawn to photos that had an interesting composition, whether for its color or depth or organization. But in order for me to want to paint it, it also had to have interesting content, like the image was communicating some reality beyond its composition that I related to in my life or that I thought spoke in some interesting way about culture." The act of painting for Beavers is physically demanding as well: she needs to start several series at the same time and go back and forth between paintings to allow the layers to dry. They have to lay flat to dry so she often ends up painting on the floor, and her recent switch to an even heavier acrylic caused a bout of carpal tunnel syndrome.
But it's precisely the thick quality of the paint that return some of the tactile nature of makeup application. This is not accidental; Beavers intentionally uses this technique as way to remind us of makeup's various textures and to ensure her paintings resemble paintings rather than a photorealistic recreation of the digital screen. "The depth of certain elements in the background of images has taught me a lot about seeing. I think I have learned that I enjoy setting up problems to solve, that it isn't enough for me to simply render a photo realistically, that I have to build up the acrylic deeply in order to interfere with the rendering of something too realistically," she explains. Sharon Mizota, writing for the LA Times, says it best: "Skin, lashes and lips are textured with rough, caked-on brushstrokes that mimic and exaggerate wrinkles and gloppy mascara. This treatment gives the subjects back some of the clunky physicality that the camera and the digital screen strip away. Beavers’ paintings, in some measure, undo the gloss of the photographic image."
Beavers also uses foam to further build up certain sections so that they bulge out towards the viewer, representing the desire to connect to others online. "Much of what people do online is to try to create connection, to reach out and meet people or talk to people. That is what the surfaces of my painting do in a really literal way, they are reaching off the linen into the viewer’s space," she says. This sculptural quality also points to the reality of the online world – it's not quite "real life" but it's not imaginary either, occupying a space in between. Beavers expands on her painting style representing the online space: "It’s interesting because flatness often comes up with screens, and I think historically the screen might have been read like that, reflecting a more passive relationship. That has changed with the advent of engagement and social media. What’s behind our screen is a whole living, breathing world, one that gives as much as it takes. I mean it is certainly as 'real' as anything else. I see the dimension as a way to reflect that world and the ways that world is reaching out to make a connection. Another aspect is that once these works are finished, they end up circulating back in the same online world and now have this heightened dimensionality – they cast their own shadow. They’re not a real person, or burger, or whatever, but they’re not a photo of it either, they’re something in between."
Let's dig a little more into what all this means in terms of makeup, the beauty industry and social media. Beavers' work can be viewed as a simultaneous critique and celebration of all three. Sharon Mizota again: "[The tutorial paintings] also pointedly mimic the act of putting on makeup, reminding us that it is something like sedimentation, built up layer by layer. There is no effortless glamour here, only sticky accretion. That quality itself feels like an indictment — of the beauty industry, of restrictive gender roles. But an element of playfulness and admiration lives in Beavers’ work. They speak of makeup as a site of creativity and self-transformation, and Instagram and other social media sites as democratizing forces in the spread of culture. To be sure, social media may be the spur for increasingly outré acts, which are often a form of bragging, but why shouldn’t a hamburger eye be as popular as a smoky eye? In translating these photographs into something more physical, Beavers asks us to consider these questions and exposes the duality of the makeup industry: The same business that strives to make us insecure also enables us to reinvent ourselves, not just in the image of the beautiful as it’s already defined, but in images of our own devising."
This ambiguity is particularly apparent in Beavers's 2015 exhibition, entitled Ambitchous, which incorporated beauty Instagrammers and YouTubers' makeup renditions of Disney villains alongside "good" characters. Blumenstein explains: "So it isn’t protagonists with positive connotations which are favoured by the artist, but unmistakably ambivalent characters who could undoubtedly lay claim to the neologism ambitchous, which is the name given to the exhibition. Like the original image material, this portmanteau of ‘ambitious’ and ‘bitchy’ is taken from social media and its creative vernacular, and is used, depending on the context, either in a derogatory fashion – for example for women who will do absolutely anything to get what they want – or positively re-interpreted as an expression of female self-affirmation. Beavers also applies this playful and strategic complication of seemingly unambiguous contexts of meaning to the statements contained in her paintings. It remains utterly impossible to determine whether they are critically exaggerating the conformist and consumerist beauty ideals of neo-capitalism, or ascribing emancipatory potential to the conscious and confident use of make-up."
More recently, Beavers has been using her own face as a canvas and making her own photos of them her source material, furthering her exploration of the self. "Staring at yourself or your lips for hours is pretty jarring. But I like it, because it creates this whole other level of self,” she says.
This shift also points to another dichotomy in Beavers's work: in recreating famous works of art on her face, she is both critiquing art history's traditional canon and appreciating it, referring to them as a sort of fan art. "I think a lot of the works that I have made that reference art history—like whether it's Van Gogh or whoever it is—have a duality where I really respect the artist and I'm influenced by them, and at the same time I'm making it my own and poking a little fun. And so, a lot of these pieces originated with the idea of fan art. You'll find all sorts of Starry Night images online that people have painted or sculpted or painted on their body. It comes out of that. And I just started to reach a point where I was searching things like 'Franz Kline body art,' and I wasn’t finding that, so I had to make my own. Then it started to get a little bit geekier. I have a piece in the show where I am painting a Lee Bontecou on my cheek, that's a kind of art world geeky thing—you have to really love art to get it."
Ultimately, Beavers perceives the intersection of makeup and social media as a force for good. While the specter of misinformation is always lurking, YouTube tutorials and the like allow anyone with internet access to learn how to do a smoky eye or a flawlessly lined lip. "I think for a lot of people social media is kind of like the weather. We don't have a lot of control of it, it just is. It gives and it takes away. There's no doubt that it has connected people in ways that are great and productive, allowing people to find communities and organize activism, it can also be a huge distraction…I approach looking at images there pretty distantly, more as a neutral documentarian, and I come down on the side of seeing social media as an incredibly useful, democratic tool in a lot of ways," she concludes.
On the other side of social media, Beavers is interested on how content creators help disseminate the idea of makeup as representing something larger and more meaningful than traditional notions of beauty. "I was super fascinated with makeup and all of the kinds of costume makeup and things you can find online that go away from a traditional beauty makeup and go towards something really wild and cool…I also had certain paintings in [a 2016] show that were much more about costume makeup, that were going away from beauty. That’s the thing that gives me hope. When I go through makeup hashtags on Instagram, there will be ten or twenty beauty eye makeup images and then one that’s painted with horror makeup. There are women out there doing completely weird things, right next to alluring ones." In the pandemic age, as people's relationships with makeup are changing, "weird" makeup is actually becoming less strange. Beavers' emphasis on experimental makeup is more timely than ever. I also think she's documenting the gradual way makeup is breaking free of the gender binary. She says: "I mean with makeup, and the whole conversation around femininity and makeup—I think for a long time when I was making makeup images, there were people that just thought, 'Oh, that's not for me,' because it's about makeup, it's feminine. But it’s interesting, the culture is shifting. I just saw the other day that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez did a whole Instagram live where she was putting on her makeup and talking about how empowering makeup is for trans communities…some people see make-up as restrictive or frivolous, but drag performers show how it can be liberating and life-saving." Another point to consider in terms of gender is the close-up aspect of Beavers's paintings. With individual features (eyes, lips, nails) separated from the rest of the face and body and removed from their original context, they're neither masculine nor feminine, thereby reiterating that makeup is for any (or no) gender.
All I can say is, I love these paintings. Stylistically, they're right up my alley – big, colorful and mimicking makeup's tactile nature so much that I have a similar reaction to them as I do when seeing makeup testers in a store: I just want to dip my hands in them and smear them everywhere! I also enjoy the multiple themes and levels in her work. Beavers isn't commenting just on makeup in the digital age, but also self-representation online, shifting attitudes towards makeup's meaning, the relationship between painting and makeup, and Western art history.
What do you think of Beavers's paintings? If you like it I would highly recommend the monograph, which is lovely and fairly affordable at $40.
I’m doing the #Museum30 challenge on Twitter, and one of the recent prompts was “origin”. It got me thinking about the very first makeup museum. While I have no definitive answers, it seems the first cosmetics museum, at least in the U.S., dates back to the 1950s. And there were several others after that but before the Makeup Museum was established. So let’s take a quick peek into the origin of the makeup museum and the other spaces that have gone before (along with a a couple that came after).
In October of 1956 it was reported that the House of Cosmetics, a “cosmetics museum and gallery of fame as a historical repository and a tribute to the cosmetics industry”, would opening at the former Reed Company on Harrison Street in Newark, NY. It was financed and operated by Pitkin, a cosmetics manufacturer that distributed the Linda Lee line of cosmetics. Among other features, the museum would boast special sections for perfume, lipstick (“Lipstick Lane”) and powder (“Powder Puff Parade) , along with gigantic sculptures of a perfume bottle, lipstick and powder box on the roof that would light up at night. The collection consisted of objects donated from the public along with memorabilia from the Pitkin company archives. A perfume fountain at the entrance spouted a brand-new fragrance called Three Coins, created especially for the museum. Visitors would receive samples of the perfume.
House of Cosmetics Museum, Newark NY, December 1956
The odd thing about the House of Cosmetics is that it allegedly opened in December of 1956, but there is literally no mention of it after that. I could not for the life of me find any information on it following its grand opening, so I can only assume it wasn’t successful and quietly closed, perhaps because it was too commercial and focused mostly on Pitkin. The House of Cosmetics was not the vision of a passionate private collector, but that of the current president of Pitkin as a way to raise the company’s profile nationwide and celebrate the brand’s upcoming 50th anniversary in 1958. The space prominently featured current Pitkin products and it didn’t seem as though there were outside curators or historians involved, plus, only Pitkin employees served as tour guides. I know many argue that museums should be run like businesses, and it’s a conversation for another time, but I really do think that generally entrepreneurs should not be opening museums.
Fast forward to 1979* when the Pacific Cosmetics Museum, also known as the Museum of Cosmetics History, opened in Korea. While it was established by Pacific Chemicals founder Suh Seong Hwan as part of the company’s factory in Seoul, the collection reflects the passion and respect Hwan had for Korean cosmetics history.
With the help of museum director/curator Chun Wan-gil (Cheon Wan-kil), Hwan continued researching and building the collection, all the while becoming more interested in the cultural aspects of makeup rather than seeing them merely as a way to make money. Not only did Hwan support the museum, he funded research and publications related to Korean cosmetics history. According to AmorePacific biographer Han Mi-Ja, “Chun Wan-gil seemed truly to enjoy working for the museum. He poured all his energy and passion into helping Jangwon [Hwan] with it. As for Jangwon, he was amazed and thrilled to watch how the historic relics seemed to come to life after the hands of Chun Wan-gil touched them. With his guide, Jangwon was able to build his knowledge and awareness of the historic relics, and grew more committed to the cultural activities…Jangwon thought, learned, and discovered a lot while collecting historic relics, building a museum, and presenting the results of his devotion to the world. He was filled with a joy and sense of achievement, which were not the same as he had ever felt from his business.”
In 2009 the museum changed its name to Amorepacific Museum of Art (APMA) and showcases modern and contemporary art rather than cosmetics, although the website states that “it is an institution dedicated to the antiques and artifacts of cosmetics culture in Korea, as well as making a meaningful contribution to local community and education.” I really can’t tell whether makeup is actually on display there. Ditto for the Pola Museum – while it was established by a cosmetics company president in 1976 and has some makeup on display for specialexhibitions, I believe the museum focuses mostly on the founder’s personal art collection. So I don’t know if either of those really qualify as makeup museums now, but they were at least started that way.
Going back to the U.S., in 1984 the Max Factor Makeup Museum opened in Max Factor’s former studio at 1666 N. Highland Avenue in Hollywood, CA. Overseen by Bob Salvatore, a 23-year employee of Max Factor, the museum offered a veritable treasure trove of Max Factor objects and memorabilia. From then it’s not clear what exactly happened. Some articles state that the museum closed in 1992, some say 1996; I’m leaning towards 1996 as there are articles from 1995 advertising the museum at that location. In any case, a portion of the collection ended up at the Hollywood Entertainment Museum, which opened in October 1996 and was located at 7021 Hollywood Blvd. The collection remained there until 2004, when it landed at its original location, the old Max Factor studio. The famed Art Deco building had been turned into the Hollywood Museum in the summer of 2003. The Max Factor collection is still there so you can visit (well, maybe if the pandemic ever ends!)
During this time, Shiseido opened their corporate museum in Japan as a way to celebrate the company’s 120th anniversary in 1992. I’ve written about this one before so I won’t rehash it, but you can check out my post. A decade later, in 2002, an Alabama paper reported on the Avon Fan Club House of one Mira Dawson. Ms. Dawson was a top seller and avid collector of Avon memorabilia, even dressing like one of the company’s co-founders to greet visitors. She charged $2 for admission to her home, which functioned as the museum. Here’s to home-based museums!!
A year later, in November 2003 the Coreana Cosmetics Museum opened in Seoul. This was another one started by the company president; however, like the Pacific Cosmetics Museum, it seems to be far less profit-driven than the House of Cosmetics. The Coreana Cosmetics Museum showcases over 5,300 objects from all eras and seems to have curators and historians working there rather than relying on company salespeople. This tour from @travmagnet is fantastic!
Just a few years later, in 2006 the Beni Museum was established in Tokyo. I’ve posted about that previously too so I won’t go into it again, but you should really check it out as it’s fabulous. So that takes us to late 2007, when I registered the domain for the Makeup Museum. Interestingly, on Instagram I got to chatting with the previous owner of the domain! Oldschoolcosmetics had the idea of a makeup museum all the way back in the ’70s and registered the domain around 1995, but realized how difficult it was and ended up walking away from makeup entirely. Here’s what she had to say: “I first had the idea for a cosmetics museum in the 70s when I became really aware of makeup, brands and how quickly things disappeared from shelves. My dad had a museum background and my parents took me to museums on every vacation. I started to think seriously about it in the 90s and registered the domain then. There were no odd or new domains then, just .com, .org and .net. I don’t recall if I registered .com or .org or both, but definitely not .net. At the time there was a Max Factor exhibit in the LA area, and at least two active makeup schools there which specialized in special effects and Hollywood film work. I wasn’t as interested in that, but it became obvious that the industry was based in NY and LA, rent would be prohibitive, the industry giants could set up a museum faster than I could, would definitely do so after I started up, anything on display could be permanently ruined if there was a blackout or A/C malfunction, and the bulk of the work would be grant writing, networking and managerial. I abandoned the idea fairly quickly. Ignoring all other beauty like wigs, nails, skincare, fragrance, there was still too much for one building if you showed stage makeup, drag history, failed brands, etc. Back then there were less collabs, less brands, less releases a year, the world wide web was just starting and everything was still paper catalogs, in store displays, etc. Now a museum would have to cover cancel culture, influencers, indie brands, brand owners, many more foreign brands, etc. I used the domain for a private message board about makeup. I wanted to call it makeup mavens but someone had that name and a brand that used it. This was circa 1995? Eventually I got bored with the industry, the sheeple customers, products that disappointed, etc.”
So it was kind of a downer to hear, but that sort of brutal honesty is needed at times, plus it shows I’m not a total failure – it’s basically impossible to open a cosmetics museum without any investors or industry connections, or unless you’re independently wealthy. In any case, this person is enthusiastic about makeup again and supports the Makeup Museum. She has been extremely kind in talking with me about the challenges of opening a physical space and digitizing the collection, particularly as they relate to funding sources. She has given me quite a few excellent suggestions so hopefully I’ll be able to pursue them. Anyway, in August of 2008 I wrote my first blog post, so I usually consider that to be the Museum’s official birthday.
A little bit after the Makeup Museum was established, makeup artist René Koch opened his private collection of lipstick in Berlin to the public in 2009, naturally called the Lipstick Museum. This is still on my must-see list! Known as “Mr. Lipstick”, Koch was the head makeup artist for YSL for over 20 years and has amassed a spectacular collection of lipsticks and related memorabilia.
Finally, we have the London Cosmetics Museum, founded by makeup artist Xabier Celaya in 2015. Like the Makeup Museum, it’s an online-only pursuit for now. However, Xabier exhibits his collection at local universities, stores and cosmetology schools, and I’d be very surprised if he doesn’t have a public physical space shortly.
All of this goes to show there’s been an interest for many years in exhibiting and preserving makeup history and beauty culture. I certainly was not the first one to have the idea of a cosmetics museum, nor will I be the last – I know of several makeup artists who are actively trying to open their own spaces. However, if they follow in the footsteps of a certain other entity and claim to be the first, well, you know it’s a lie. 😉
I am so pleased to be posting a wonderful, albeit bittersweet story about the legendary Kevyn Aucoin today, as it commemorates the 21st anniversary of the date he filed for the trademark of his beauty line. A few months ago I received a very kind email from a makeup artist who actually had the opportunity to work with Kevyn and had an integral role in the launch of his brand. Amelia Durazzo-Cintron, an Emmy-nominated artist who currently works for PBS, generously agreed to allow me to share the impact Kevyn made on her career as well as her experience with helping to get his makeup line off the ground shortly before his untimely death. She also permitted me to use some her photos with the man himself and an incredibly special and Museum-worthy brush set that he bestowed upon her. Here is Amelia’s story in her own words.
“I was obsessed with makeup for as long as I can remember. My mother was born in Italy. She went to school for fashion design. I was always in awe of the way she put herself together. I don’t even think she owns a pair of jeans. She’s always impeccably dressed. Her hair and makeup is always on point. When I was a little girl, I used to watch her put on this cream eye shadow that came in a tube like lipstick. Once, when she was almost down to the end, she gave it to me to use for when I played dress up…and the rest is history. I used to study her Italian Vogue. I think that is where I first may have seen Kevyn’s work. He had a ‘style’ or look that was hard to imitate but immediately recognizable. A lot of the makeup back then was pretty garish, blush that looked like stripes, colors that didn’t seem to go well together, nothing was blended. Then there was Kevyn. Everyone he touched looked absolutely radiant. Although he was amazing at editorial looks his ability to bring out the natural beauty in women was unsurpassed. It was around that time that he collaborated on a collection for Ultima 2 called the Nakeds. He literally changed the industry with that launch. I think I bought every palette. Then came the Making Faces book. There is no better makeup book than that! He appeared as a guest on the Oprah Winfrey show to promote the book. They showed these amazing transformations he had done on several women.
“I became obsessed. I had to meet this guy. At that time, I had just started my career in the medical field. I wasn’t particularly happy but it was decent pay and good hours. Kevyn Aucoin changed my entire career path. I was always interested in makeup but I didn’t quite know how I would parlay that into a career. I decided to quit my job to work at Nordstrom as a part time beauty associate. I figured it was a good of a place as any to start a career in makeup artistry. My ex husband was not amused. But I knew I had to go with my gut. A few months later, Kevyn launched his second book Face Forward. The timeline is a little fuzzy but I believe it was also at this time that he started a soft launch of Kevyn Aucoin Beauty at none other than the beauty mecca at the time, Henri Bendel’s. The counter was placed front and center in the atrium, which was their prime real estate. His product line initially consisted of his mascara, lash curler and brush set.
“They also launched a new website. It had this amazing beauty chat room where fans, aspiring makeup artists, etc. could ‘meet up’ and discuss product faves, dupes, and anything Kevyn related. Every once in a while, Kevyn himself would pop in to interact with his fans. We would go nuts! We were actually chatting with Kevyn himself! I also met up with other fans from the beauty community (some of which I am still friends with). One day, Kevyn posted about a meet and greet at Bendel’s to coincide with the launch of his product line. [My friend] and I called one another and immediately made arrangements to meet up. As I recall there may have been a day’s notice. I remember having to change my schedule at work so that I could attend. There was no way I missing it! If the event was due to start at, let’s say 5PM, we arrived at 3. They hadn’t even started setting up yet. We were number one and two in line. You’ve probably heard of Troy Surratt of Surratt beauty. Well, Troy was Kevyn’s assistant at the time. He smiled at us as we watched him merchandise the products very carefully placed in a case at the front of the line. Everyone would have to pass through and have a look on their way to meet Kevyn. We fell into conversation (seeing as we were two hours early and staring at him) and he couldn’t have been kinder.
“Meanwhile as we were waiting for Kevyn to arrive, some celebs were being escorted into a separate entrance for what I assume to be a launch party. Mary Tyler Moore walked right past me and said hello. Her smile lit up the entire room. Then Gwyneth Paltrow…she literally had just won the Oscar for Shakespeare in Love. She brushed past me on her way into a roped off area, she came in looking pissed off and like she had smelled something bad. Her demeanor completely changed when she caught a glimpse of Kevyn and I saw them hug. I guess he had that effect on everyone.
“When Kevyn arrived he came right to the front of the line and said hello. He thanked us for coming and told us he had heard we waited for him for two hours. He seemed shocked by this. I would have waited two days! I’m telling you that the guy had an indescribable energy. I’ve met many celebs throughout my career but no one impressed me as much as Kevyn. He was warm and genuine and was so incredibly humble. I had brought a copy of his book for him to sign. While I had his attention, I told him it was my dream to work for him someday. I gave him a brief synopsis of my career path and how he had inspired me to become a makeup artist. Tears welled up in his eyes. He was truly touched. He told me that his plan was for him to launch at other department stores. I believe he may have mentioned Bergdorf Goodman or Barney’s as possible contenders. He would need motivated, knowledgeable and talented artists to work for his line. At that time, I was working for Prescriptives, a line owned by Estée Lauder. He said he loved Prescriptives artists because they were well trained in color theory. At the time, they were one of the most popular makeup brands. They were [one of] the first cosmetics line to offer custom blending for foundation and always offered exact foundation shade matching. I was elated hearing that Kevyn gave the brand his seal of approval! He then grabbed a piece of paper and handed me his personal email and told me to keep in touch. I nearly passed out. I was so ecstatic!! We began an email friendship that lasted until the week before he died. I wasn’t going to let this opportunity slip me by. I offered to help out in any way I could. At that time, Kevyn’s company consisted of just a handful of employees. Kevyn had sunk much of his life savings into the launch of his brand. A lot was riding on the success of the line. They couldn’t afford to hire additional staff so everyone he had on board at the time was a either a close friend or family member. Eric Sakas was the CEO and also Kevyn’s ex-boyfriend and best friend of many years. It was also at this time that the beauty board on his website took off. Just as YouTube is to the beauty influencer, the beauty board was for Kevyn Aucoin Beauty. It was an important marketing tool which they used to update fans about product launches and share tips and tricks from Kevyn himself, and other fun stuff like personal photos (as he was also an amazing photographer) and his must haves for his kit, etc. The beauty board took on a life of its own.
“His office manager Sarah was having a tough time dealing with the product launch, behind the scenes stuff, etc. and having to moderate the beauty boards wasn’t high on her list of priorities. We had gotten to know one another as Kevyn had her send me some mascaras to try. I also let her know of my interest in working for the company and sent her my resume for when they were ready to begin the hiring process. I wanted to be one of the first people to work as a makeup artist for Kevyn Aucoin Beauty! She was so kind. She promised to keep me in the loop…and she did, sending me freebies or as we say in the industry ‘gratis’ to try and sometimes giving me a sneak peek of things they were working on. She wasn’t a makeup artist so she appreciated the feedback. Back to the boards…they went from having a few hundred members to tens of thousands. Every once in a while, you would get your typical internet trolls trying to start shit and taunting some of the ‘regulars’…trying to get them to engage. This one particular day one of them posted the most awful statement about Kevyn being a junkie and that we were ‘worshipping a f*ggot drug addict’. I was horrified! I immediately called Sarah in a panic. She took the post down and thanked me profusely for helping them avert a potentially disastrous situation. Unbeknownst to me at the time, (it was only years later that I found out the truth) Kevyn had people in the industry trying to ruin his reputation. You may have watched his documentary. If you did then you’d know that he was dealing with an addiction issue related to the pain meds he took for his condition called acromegaly. As much as I love this industry, people can be very jealous and vicious. I suspect that there were rumblings at the time about Kevyn and his issues. Someone decided to go public, most likely to try to deter any potential investors. This only added to his stress and to that of his friends and family members.
“That’s when Sarah asked me if I would be interested in becoming an administrator for the website. They would give me the ability to initiate posts to get engagement and to delete and or block any offensive posts or individuals. She explained that they couldn’t afford to pay me, but that could pay me in gratis. I jumped at the chance!!!!! A few days later, I received a package in the mail, a huge box filled with mascara’s, lip glosses and lipsticks that had just launched, both of his books…and the holy grail.. my prized possession…A full set of Kevyn’s brushes complete with a custom mahogany box with an insert that fit all of the brushes inside. They only made a limited number. If memory serves me correctly, the set sold for $1000!
“I cried…Kevyn was so appreciative for the help I was providing to him and Sarah. He emailed me and said that he would continue to supply me with anything I needed. All I had to do was ask. I remember thinking how lucky I was. Friends of mine in the industry were floored. They were so excited for me. A makeup artist friend of mine said ‘you realize that your life is going to change’…and it did. But not the way I had hoped. Not long after I began my work with Kevyn (possibly less than two months later), I received a message from Sarah on my answering machine. Her tone seemed somber…not like her usual bubbly self. I immediately thought that perhaps they had another troll situation. I called her back as soon as I got the message. It was far worse than I’d imagined. Kevyn had passed away that morning. She didn’t want me to hear it on the news or read about it online as she was sure the news would eventually and inevitably end up on the message boards. I couldn’t even breathe from sobbing. I felt like my dreams were completely shattered. I was so despondent that I didn’t go to work for several days…and as predicted the beauty board was buzzing with incorrect information and downright cruel rumors from people who had no idea what they were talking about. Kevyn’s sister had to shut it down by telling people to please respect the privacy of the Aucoin family. I was deleting posts left and right. It got so out of hand that a particular troll threatened several of the members at which time I had to step in and block him. He proceeded to send me emails threatening to ‘cut my throat’. It all seemed like a bad dream.
“Then came the aftermath.. I don’t know a lot of what was going on but I do know that the investors they did have on board to help to expand the product line, head for the hills after Kevyn’s death. His entire estate was tied up in the line. Eric Sakas who I mentioned earlier was Kevyn’s former partner and closest friend. He made it his mission to ensure that Kevyn’s line would launch and align with Kevyn’s original vision. They were slated to launch Kevyn’s signature product which remains a cult classic to this day. The Sensual Skin Enhancer. It was already being sold at Bendels and now, they needed to put it up on the website. Eric and Sarah being the business minds of the company, neither of them knew how to properly describe the extensive shade range so that online customers would be able to determine which shade would match their skin tone. I was asked to help out. I sat there with Eric swatching prototypes (with Kevyn’s own handwriting on the boxes) coming up with proper descriptions of the shades ie warm, med, neutral, cool, etc. It took several hours, They were dealing with so much. I could see the stress and the sadness in their eyes. I just wanted to do whatever I could to help. After having been involved for two years after Kevyn’s death, the line was ultimately sold. Sarah had left the previous year. The message board was shut down due to lack of engagement (it was Kevyn’s presence there that encouraged people to hop on and interact). Things were moving fast in e-commerce and they had to update the site to give it a more streamlined look…they no longer had the need for a website administrator. Shortly after Kevyn’s death, his family decided to have a private memorial service. I was so touched when I had received in the mail a photograph of Kevyn that was handed out to the family and closest friends who attended the memorial service. His mother and father both took the time to write me a note thanking me for the work I did for his website, I was moved to tears.
“I didn’t give up pursuing my dream to become a makeup artist. I was hired as a trainer for the NYC Sephora market for Christian Dior. Kevyn was my motivation every step of the way. But the retail world was rapidly changing. The 2008 crash hit hard and my position with Dior, my dream job, was one of the first eliminated. I was back to square one, working freelance gigs on and off for several years, uninspired and unmotivated. Then a dear friend of mine called me one day asking if I would be interested in freelancing for a local TV station. He was the executive producer for a PBS News show. We had met at Nordstrom several years earlier when I was managing the Stila counter and he was going to school and working in loss prevention. I was intrigued but nervous, as I knew nothing about TV makeup. I had done makeup at Bryant Park, stage makeup for performances, magazine shoots, but never TV. I was scared shitless that first day I stepped into the studio. To add to my anxiety, the anchor of the news program I’d be working for was a well respected journalist with a career that spanned 40 years. She had been a network TV anchor, she was a guest (as herself) on the Murphy Brown show with Candace Bergen, she had been on the cover of People magazine..she was kind of a big deal. I did her makeup for the first time..my hands were shaking. All along I thought of Kevyn. As silly as it sounds I felt his presence that day. It calmed my nerves and I just did what I would normally do with anyone else. She loved it. I was so elated, relieved, and grateful for the opportunity. What started out as me covering for the studio’s full time artist, ended up with me landing a staff gig. Five years later…I’m still loving my job. This current situation has been especially hard on me. [But Kevyn] inspires me to continue honing my skills as an artist. I’m so proud to say that I was nominated for an Emmy in the NY market last year, I didn’t win but seriously…I could not have imagined it as a possibility! I owe everything to Kevyn.”
Thank you, Amelia, for taking the time to tell this amazing history! I am so honored that you chose the Makeup Museum to share it publicly. I also must thank Amelia for her generous (unrelated) donation to the Museum, which I’ll be covering later – so many people want to help build the Museum’s collection so I’m planning a rather large post on recent donations. Stay tuned…and in the meantime, if you want more on Kevyn, there are two documentariesavailable and a new book from Alcone showcasing his illustrations and face charts.
Let me preface this post by saying that I haven’t forgotten about the bigger issues regarding racism. Skin color is literally a matter of life and death in this country and has been for hundreds of years. But I want to address the lack of diversity, particularly Black representation, in current and vintage makeup, at the Museum. I also want to look at how, or even if, it can be remedied. That racism exists within the beauty industry both now and in the past is indisputable, and as both a feminist and makeup historian I considered myself well aware of these issues. But awareness isn’t enough. Before I dive in I also want to note that it’s Pride Month, and all of these ideas are applicable to the LGBTQIA+ community – more marginalized people that have not been adequately represented at the Museum.
Currently the Museum has only a handful of vintage items that came from Black-owned companies. There are about 200 makeup ads in the collection, roughly 150 of which feature models, and of those only 3 depict Black models. And of all the artist collaborations that have been featured over the years, only 3 of them (!) were with Black artists. In short, the Museum’s collection is overwhelmingly white and serves as a direct reflection of white supremacy. A key reason is obviously that Black-owned beauty companies or products for Black customers are few and far between; historically there simply weren’t as many beauty brands or products geared towards Black people and advertising primarily featured white models, both problems that still persist today due to institutional racism and implicit bias. It was much more difficult for a Black person to obtain a business loan to start their company, especially in beauty, as they’ve been told time and again the lie that there is no market for cosmetics that would actually suit the vast range of Black skin tones. However, while these are valid points, my own blind spots definitely play a role in the lack of representation in the Museum’s collection and content. Information on Black beauty brands and campaigns is without question difficult to find, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist or that I couldn’t do a more thorough job researching. Here are the explanations for not actively working towards including more Black makeup products and histories. These are just that – explanations, NOT excuses. I understand that I need to make more of an effort to diversify and that I am not totally helpless. These explanations really just boil down to white fragility, albeit a different flavor in my case. I don’t get defensive or angry when I acknowledge my privilege or when I’ve made a mistake (remember the Felicia the Flamingo debacle?), but boy am I fearful of doing the wrong thing. Not to mention I’m harboring a ton of white guilt.
It felt trite and tokenizing to be sharing the same Black beauty icons, the same few brands, the same few ads that we’ve seen before. Especially during Black History or Pride months – I seriously hate when companies post a quote from MLK in February or turn their logo into a rainbow in June and call it a day. The histories and contributions of Black people and the LGBQTIA+ communities should be recognized year-round. Anyway, I thought it wasn’t helpful to anyone to feature long-standing Black-owned brands that everyone knows about like Posner or Fashion Fair, or yet another history of Madam C. J. Walker. For example, would it be interesting or eye-opening at all to keep seeing the same 3 Black models when discussing ’90s makeup ads/looks? (Halle Berry for Revlon, Tyra Banks for Cover Girl and Naomi Campbell basically for everything else.) Nope. So I thought, well, I’ll dig deeper, I know there’s more information out there on Black makeup history that hasn’t been fully covered or unearthed yet. And there is! I found some pieces of Black makeup history that I haven’t seen a million times and am finding more now that I’m looking more closely.
But I still feel these are not my stories to tell or analyze. As noted previously I’ve never had to struggle to find a foundation match or flattering colors. And as a white person it makes me very uncomfortable to tell the story of a vintage Black-owned brand or ad campaign, that white-splaining would ultimately do more harm than good. Why is a white person sharing their unsolicited opinion on Black makeup brands or trying to cover Black history? Don’t we need more Black voices? Then I thought that I could ask Black historians to write guest posts on Black makeup history, or co-curate a whole exhibition. And for more current topics, I could invite Black people to share their stories that I could then compile into an online, downloadable publication and have print copies on demand, with all proceeds going to charity. But could they be considered contributions to makeup history or yet more work for Black people? Some white lady asking for the experiences of Black people sounds awfully demanding and possibly patronizing.
Along these lines, I am fearful of appropriating Black culture. Cultural appropriation is a topic I’m sensitive to, and I worry that it’s offensive for a white person to be including brands intended mostly for Black customers. Fenty and Pat McGrath are acceptable because while they are Black-founded and owned, they seem to cater to everyone. Smaller indie brands like Uoma and Juvia’s Place, on the other hand, appear to be primarily intended to meet the needs of Black customers. I loved the packaging for Uoma’s Carnival collection and wanted to add it to the Museum. I wanted to interview Uoma’s founder about the inspiration behind the collection and the packaging design. I understand everyone’s money is green, but I was afraid that adding these products to the Museum’s collection would somehow come off as appropriative.
To be honest, I feel odd sharing that I like any aspect of Black culture. White people have been appropriating it and exploiting it for years, can’t Black people just have something we wouldn’t take from them? And so I felt like buying the Uoma collection would be wrong, that it wasn’t intended for white people to have. The same goes for some amazing powder boxes made by tribes in Africa such as the Kuba people of the Congo, especially as the cosmetics they hold were sometimes used in rituals. On the one hand it’s necessary to share and promote Black-owned brands and various African cultures; on the other I question whether it’s appropriate for white people to do so.
So this leads to to a discussion of future Museum content and collection planning. Something as innocuous as round-ups of certain themes may actually be offensive, considering that many of them don’t feature anything but white-owned brands, ads with white models, etc. I think these sorts of round-ups are important for makeup history and I want to keep incorporating them. Ditto for objects that don’t come from Black-owned brands and artist collaborations. I purchase items for the collection based on their artistic, design or historical value; just because an object doesn’t come from a Black-owned company doesn’t necessarily negate its importance. But the lack of representation is really troubling, and I just don’t know what to do. Some examples: I was going to post a picture on IG of all orchid-themed products, but quickly realized that not one of them came from a Black-owned brand, and every single vintage ad featured white models exclusively. I was going to post the Too-Faced Quickie Chronicles on IG too – matching the pin-up artists to the Too-Faced palettes was a fun series to write…until I remembered that Too-Faced is white-owned, and all the vintage pin-up girls featured and the artists who created them are white. A post I had planned for the blog was an artist collaboration that I didn’t have a chance to cover last year when it was released, Connor Tingley for NARS. Guess what, both Mr. Nars and the artist he hand-picked for the collab are white dudes. Do I not share any of these, then? I don’t think all the whiteness can be balanced by the Black makeup history I’m able to access. So maybe I wouldn’t write about them, but I still think they’re important and need to be shared. Especially artist collabs, as they were one of the main reasons for the Museum’s existence.
I don’t know what the answers are. I firmly believe makeup and its history is for everyone, but that sentiment is not being reflected in the Museum currently, and I don’t know how to change that given that there are still so many barriers to racial and gender equality. I can do absolutely do a better job researching and have already come up with some ideas for future posts focused on Black makeup history, and I have many more books on my list about museums and diversity in general to educate myself further. Whether this will be enough, or even appropriate, remains to be seen. Thoughts in the meantime? (I think Disqus may be acting up so please feel free to email me if you can’t leave a comment, or DM me on Twitter or IG.)
“I want a case that glows with fashion. That has such fashion magic it transmits right through the lipstick and onto the faces of women. Makes them feel the beauty touching their lips.” – Charles Revson, January 13, 1954.
I know, more vintage Revlon lipsticks. But I promise it’s very interesting! There didn’t seem to be a comprehensive history of Revlon’s Futurama line so I thought I’d take a stab at it. Futurama was a collection of refillable lipstick cases designed by famed jewelers Van Cleef and Arpels for Revlon. The line was introduced in 1955 with much fanfare, especially its debut on the popular game show the $64,000 Question. But how did the collaboration between Revlon and Van Cleef happen? Who was responsible for the design? What is Futurama’s significance in makeup history? I can’t say I have answers to all of these questions, but I’ll do my best.
First, a quick background. Refillable lipsticks had been on the market since the 1920s and became more widespread in the ’40s as a way to save metal during wartime. Every last scrap was needed; the country couldn’t afford to have women wasting a used lipstick tube.
The notion of makeup as an additional accessory was reinforced by the fact that many compacts were sold in jewelry stores in addition to the jewelry section at department stores, with custom engraving and monogramming available.
Jewelry designers Ciner and Paul Flato also had their own compact and lipstick combinations in the late ’40s and early ’50s.
By and large, compacts and lipstick cases were already perceived as another item of jewelry thanks to companies like Van Cleef and Arpels leading the way. So what was new and special about Revlon’s Futurama cases?
There were two key factors that Revlon advertised as the differentiators: design and price point. The concept for the design is a fascinating story. As he explains in the book Business Secrets That Changed Our Lives, Revson was inspired by a business trip to Paris. “The candlelit room, the elegant service, the fine furnishings bespoke good taste and an appreciation of beauty. Next to me sat a chic and lovely woman. What interested me most about my dinner partner was not her beauty but a small object she had taken out of her purse. My eyes returned to it again and again, until finally, with an amused smile, she handed it to me saying, ‘I would not have expected an American man to be so interested in a lipstick.’ The beauty of the case, hand-engraved and diamond-bedecked, was one outstanding feature. What really caught my eye, though, was that the lipstick could be removed with a single click-in, click-out action in just one section. And because the lipstick was contained in its own cylinder, removal of it was not only easy, but smudge-proof. My dinner partner’s remark kept goading me-‘I would not have expected an American man to be so interested in a lipstick.’ Of course not! All that an American man ever saw was one of those undistinguished brass bullets!”2 Revson took a similar case back to the U.S. and less than a month later, on January 13, 1954, summoned Earl F. Copp into his office. Copp was Chief Operation Officer for Risdon Manufacturing Company, which had been making Revlon’s cases since 1947. Revson explained what he had in mind: “I want a case, a refillable case. You have to make it different from this one. This is too much like the others, refillable perhaps, but not elegant enough. I want to see luxury, fashion, expensive jewelry. No more bullets. Can you see what I mean? I want a case that glows with fashion. That has such fashion magic it transmits right through the lipstick and onto the faces of women. Makes them feel the beauty touching their lips…I don’t want just one case, but a whole line. So that women will want one for morning, one for evening, one for special occasions-all suitable for refills with whatever different colors they prefer.” While refillable lipsticks existed previously, the way Futurama was advertised suggested a totally new frontier. According to design historian Matthew Bird3, Lurelle Guild (1898-1985), a prominent industrial designer at the time, was brought on board to oversee the aesthetics of the cases. As another design scholar notes, Guild was the ideal choice to design a cutting-edge, futuristic lipstick case, as he had been responsible for other iconic ’50s styles such as Electrolux’s Model G vacuum, which sported “rocket-like fins”.4 While the cases were being advertised in 1955, Guild filed a patent in early 1956. Grace Gilbert van Voorhis, Raymond Wolff and Henrieta Manville are also named on the patents, with Manville’s name on the “utility” patent for the inner mechanism of the case. Based on census records, Manville most likely worked with Earl Copp at Risdon Manufacturing, while Wolff may have worked in Guild’s office. As for Van Cleef’s role, it appears they signed on in name only and let Revlon deal with the designs themselves; this seems especially likely given that none of the cases really resemble anything Van Cleef was making at the time.5
The designs on their own were modern for the time, but another aspect that Revlon claimed as new was the actual refill mechanism. While they weren’t quite the hardship Revlon’s Futurama ads made them out to be, earlier versions of refillable lipsticks could get a little messy and took a minute or two to change as compared to Revlon’s alleged 3 seconds.
Futurama’s “click in, click out” was certainly less involved than wartime lipstick refill instructions!
The second aspect that set Futurama apart from previous lipsticks was that customers were made to feel as though they were getting a luxury item by a brand name at an affordable price. “Like rubies and emeralds, a really luxurious lipstick case has seemed out of reach to most women…though Revlon’s new cases look loftily priced, some are a low $1.75, including lipstick. Besides which, women find Futurama a money-saver since refills only cost 90c.”
The cases themselves were presented as affordable, but Revlon also promoted the idea of the refillable lipstick as a cost-saving measure – once the customer “invested” money in a case, refills would be less expensive in the long term than buying a whole new lipstick.
You would think a company as large as Revlon wouldn’t take a chance with their reputation by participating in price fixing, but in 1958 their shady tactic of setting refill prices was admonished by the FTC, who cracked down on them for conspiracy. The author of the fabulous Cosmetics and Skin website explains: [Futurama] went on sale in 1955 after Revlon acquired the Braselton lipstick patents for lipstick cartridges in 1954. Revlon then entered into an agreement with Helena Rubinstein and Merle Norman – along with a number of container manufacturers, including Scovill and Risdon – to fix the price of lipstick refills, including non-patented lipstick inserts, until they were charged by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) with conspiracy.”
Even though it had been advertised previously, the breakout moment came when Revlon featured a commercial for Futurama on the game show The$64,000 Question, which they were sponsoring. (Revlon’s sponsorship of the short-lived quiz show is a fascinating history in and of itself.) It was during this commercial that viewers could witness in real time the ease and tidiness of Futurama lipsticks, making video even more critical than print ads. As Bird notes, “YouTube allows us to watch a vintage television ad and learn that the design separated the lipstick from the case, and saved money by offering refills. The line was marketed to women, but also to husbands and children as an affordable but seemingly luxurious gift. Without this TV advertisement, the design is easy to write off as mere decoration. With this added information, the design transcends mere aesthetics to address user needs, perceived value, material use, marketing, and problem-solving. Seeing the design in action gives it a life and sophistication not evident in the brutality of an elevation view patent drawing or two-dimensional photograph.”6
Overall, Futurama was presented as the wave of, well, the future. The case designs, particularly the elongated styles that were tapered in the middle and wider at the ends, were intended to reflect the modern era rather than mimic shapes of the past. Revson discusses the design selection process. “When the designs started to come in, it was an exciting and stimulating experience. Many shapes were proposed: prisms, octagons, ribbons and bows, pencils, thimbles and countless others. But the most inspired was the hourglass, a shape that four designers suggested independently. We experimented with many surface treatments, too: brocaded gold on silver, silver-plated with a gold spiral, wedding bands en circling the cylinder. With Bert Reibel, our packaging designer, I selected two basic shapes by the end of March, 1954. One group of cases, shaped like hourglasses, would retail at $2.50 or more; the other group, thimble-shaped, would be less expensive. Of all the samples submitted, only one surface treatment resembled that of expensive jewelry. We had to make arrangements with Fifth Avenue jewelers and designers, visit art museums and study color photographs of good-looking jewelry from the archives. Almost every major jewelry shop in Manhattan was visited, to study expensive, hand-designed compacts and cases. But we were still little closer to our goal. During the next eight months, we made up many thousands of designs and some five hundred actual models, each with a different surface or slightly modified shape. Parts were interchange able, so we could produce still different combinations. We invented our own special language: ‘belts,’ ‘skirts,’ ‘balances,’ ‘waistlines.’ Which ‘belt’ looked best with which ‘skirt’? Which ‘waistline’ went best with which ‘collar’? It got to be a joke that I was often awake all night worrying about a dimension of one-sixteenth of an inch. And it was true! The search for new surface treatments inevitably brought us face to face with the limitations of machinery. I had become intrigued by one finish we found on expensive compacts-‘Florentine’ by name-which was a texture of minute, finely etched lines. In 1954 no case manufacturer had the facilities or know how to produce it in volume…[Copp] finally, after long weeks of experimentation, had devised belts and grinding wheels that would simulate the ‘Florentine’ finish. To produce other finishes, he had to dispatch engineers to Switzerland and Italy before he could locate and buy the only turning machines on earth that could do a mass production job.”
You’ll notice there are very few scratches on this black case, which was the result of Revson’s insistence that all the finishes should last at least 2 years before showing significant wear. “Two coats of high-bake vinyl lacquer” did the trick. The longevity of the pavé settings on the tops of some of the cases was also difficult to ensure.
After nearly a year of design work, Revlon began working on the marketing, with Vice President Kay Daly (who had previously came up with the questions for Revlon’s iconic Fire and Ice quiz) leading the way. “Early attempts missed the boat because they emphasized the fashion element, but did not adequately sell the ‘refillable’ idea. The most frustrating task [Daly] undertook was the selection of a name for the cases. Hundreds were suggested, considered and rejected. l could not agree-no one could agree-on any of them. Finally, she hit on Futurama. To my mind, this suitably brought home the newness, the excitement, the fashionableness of the product…A market research organization reported that Futurama ‘is not a good name. It is too masculine. It sounds too much like General Motors.’…In the end, I had to make the decision. There was, of course, only one way to look at it: from the viewpoint of the American woman herself. I decided to rely on my original reaction that the name was good, and that it would appeal to the consumer I knew best.” The name was rumored to be taken from the Futurama exhibition at the 1939 New York World’s Fair and speaks to the post-World War II futurist trend in American design and technology. Additionally, Revlon declared both the economic practicality and new designs to be the most cutting-edge ideas in cosmetics, and any modern woman should want to join the party. “Are you ready for Futurama?” asks this 1958 ad.
If you weren’t on board with Futurama, you were getting left behind; the ads not so subtly implied that women who didn’t purchase Revlon’s latest offering were unfashionable and stuck in the past. According to one commercial, “The days of old-fashioned, un-style-conscious mothers are about as out-moded as old-fashioned brass lipstick…modern mothers may be old-fashioned on the inside, but they want to be the picture of glamour and style on the outside.”
By late 1957 Futurama had expanded to compacts, which were also refillable. While not as notable as the lipsticks, the compacts solidified Futurama as the most recognized line for Revlon at the time. Something that is of note, however, is the fact that Andy Warhol may have been involved in the design of at least one of the compacts. A while ago a private collector sent me some photos and surmised that Warhol might have been responsible for a Revlon Futurama compact featuring his drawing of an early 1900s style shoe. This is what she had to say: “I emailed Van Cleef and Arpels about who exactly designed these lovely creations and I actually got a call from a representative wanting to find out information on a specific compact I have that she called ‘the Warhol Boot’…It was supposedly one of 5 display/prototypes that went missing between 1959 and 1961. It was designed by Andy Warhol but rejected by Revson because it didn’t fit the ‘mood’ of the collection.” If this is true, what an amazing find! Take a gander at the second compact from the left in the second row.
I reached out to another collector whose father worked for Revlon, but she was unable to find any definitive proof that Warhol designed the compact. Still, it resembles his shoe illustrations.
Getting back to the lipsticks, Revlon’s competitors were just as cutthroat as they would be today in that several companies released jewelry-inspired cases of their own. Take, for example, DuBarry’s Showcase. Model Suzy Parker was featured in DuBarry’s ads – an unusual move given her appearance in Futurama ads. What is not surprising that the company doing this is DuBarry, who you might remember would go on to shamelessly rip off Revlon’s Fire & Ice lipstick with their Snowball of Fire shade in 1959.
Cutex was even more blatant in their plagiarism (but at least they used a different model, Sara Thom). In 1958 the company introduced their “designer’s cases” which were apparently similar to something one would find in a “Fifth Avenue jeweler’s window”. The notion of previous lipstick case styles as being “passé” was also copied from Revlon. I’m not sure these were refillable, but they were definitely lower priced than Revlon’s refills.
There was also this Avon clone making a series of “jewel-like” cases at a price “every woman can afford.”
Can you say “knock-off”? Then as now, this sort of plagiarism was rampant in the industry (more on that in another post). To my knowledge none of these brands had partnerships with actual jewelry companies the way Revlon did, but they were definitely capitalizing on the makeup-as-inexpensive-jewelry concept.
As of December 1960 Futurama was still being heavily promoted by Revlon. A vast array of designs had joined the original lineup, while the older styles received elaborate outer packaging to suit any occasion.
Something that I have not been able to confirm is the numbering of the cases. This one is listed in the ad as 9029, but engraved on the bottom is 587. I believe the numbers on the bottoms of the Futurama cases correspond to the lipstick shades, not the case model, but I can’t be certain.
Futurama was phased out by the mid-1960s, but its influence is alive and well today. Many makeup companies have collaborated with jewelry designers either for their permanent collection or limited edition collections. The idea of owning luxurious yet modestly priced jewels via makeup persists. As with the beauty lines of fashion houses or artist collaborations, if one cannot afford vintage jewelry or an original piece by a high-end designer/artist, makeup allows the customer to get a taste of the real deal. Here’s a quick list of some of the more memorable makeup/jewelry collaborations. I’m also keeping my eyes peeled for one of these Cutex lipstick bracelets, which were sold around 1955-1958.
Some high-end lines go the Cutex route by creating makeup that can actually be worn as jewelry. Dior, YSL and Louboutin have all released lip products in pendant form.
Refillable lipsticks with outer cases meant not only to last but also displayed are thriving in 2020, given the increasing demand for sustainable packaging. The most recently unveiled jewelry-inspired line, and probably the one most similar to Futurama besides Guerlain’s Rouge G, comes from fashion designer Carolina Herrera. “We wanted to give women an opportunity to wear their makeup like a piece of fabulous jewelry,” Herrera stated. The entire line is refillable and offers customization options in the form of detachable charms and a variety of case styles.
Would all of these examples have existed without Revlon Futurama? Sure, but Revlon did a lot of the heavy lifting. Despite the exaggerated tone of the ads, Futurama was groundbreaking in that it popularized the notion of attainable luxury within the cosmetics arena and simplified the lipstick refill process. The cases also serve as a prime example of the futuristic flavor of 1950s American design. These factors make Futurama a significant cultural touchstone on par with Revlon’s previous Fire & Ice campaign. At the very least, Futurama represents several key developments in cosmetics advertising and packaging that helped lay the groundwork for today’s beauty trends and shape consumer tastes.
Which Futurama design is your favorite? Would you like to see a history of refillable lipsticks or an exhibition expanding on the makeup-as-jewelry concept? I have to say I’d be curious to see what Revlon would come up with if they did another collab with Van Cleef…it would be awesome if Futurama 2.0 incorporated Van Cleef’s signature Alhambra motif.
1 Give yourself a crash course in learning the lingo for various makeup cases and the differences between them. Noelle Soren’s website is a treasure trove of knowledge!
2Revson elaborates on existing cases. “For a long time it had been bothering me that American women-so alert in many ways-had been content with that old smooth brass cylinder . It had no distinctive shape, color, finish or design. It looked like a cartridge case. They would buy them and discard them when they were used up, and then buy another…A number of cosmetics manufacturers had for years tried to make cases more distinctive. We had played around with the idea at Revlon. But all that any of us ever came up· with was an other version of the cartridge case. For one thing, all case manufacturers, including Risdon, had the same kinds of machines, with the same old limitations.” (“The Matter of Beauty: The Development of the Futurama Lipstick Case” in Business Secrets that Changed Our Lives, edited by Milton Shepard (1964), p. 294.
3 Matthew Bird, “Using Digital Tools to Work Around the Canon” in Design History Beyond the Canon, edited by Jennifer Kaufman-Buhler, Victoria Rose Pass, and Christopher S. Wilson (2018), p.114-117.
4 Through this paper I discovered that there are two folders worth of Revlon correspondence and sketches for lipsticks in the official Lurelle Guild papers, which are housed at Syracuse University. I have requested electronic copies of these but obviously since the library is closed due to the coronavirus I will have to wait to receive them and see if they shed any more light on the Futurama design process. I’m also still trying to figure out whether Van Cleef designed this beautiful jeweled case, as Pinterest is literally the only place I’ve ever seen it.
5 There is an ad in the January 1956 issue of Reader’s Digest that mentions Charles Revson “commissioning” Van Cleef and Arpels to design the Futurama line. Google, however, will not let me see the entire ad, and I’ve purchased 2 copies of that particular edition of Reader’s Digest to no avail – there was no Revlon ad in either of them. Either Google has the date wrong or, as one eBay seller noted, the ads differed between Reader’s Digest even if they were the same exact editions (i.e. same month and year.) If anyone knows how to access Reader’s Digest in full online, please let me know!
6 Matthew Bird, “Using Digital Tools to Work Around the Canon” in Design History Beyond the Canon, edited by Jennifer Kaufman-Buhler, Victoria Rose Pass, and Christopher S. Wilson (2018), p.114.
I have so many other books I'd like to review but so little time, and this tome had been sadly collecting dust on my nightstand for ages, so here's a quick review for a quick read.* Lipstick: A Celebration of the World's Favorite Cosmetic by Jessica Pallingston was released in 1998, just a few months prior to Meg Cohen's Read My Lips: A Cultural History of Lipstick which I reviewed in 2015 and vowed to compare it to Pallingston's book shortly thereafter (in other words, I'm a mere 5 years overdue for that task. Sigh.) Anyway, I found the two books to be more or less the same in terms of content. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I think if you were looking for a basic history of lipstick you could choose one or the other and not feel like you're missing out.
The introduction left a bit to be desired, as it placed emphasis on lipstick as a tool to either "empower" women or lure men; there was no mention of playing with color as a means of self-expression. I also think, as I did with Cohen's intro, that the fetishization of lipstick and the overblown description of its alleged power were a bit much. Lipstick can be life-changing, yes, but proclamations like "Lipstick is a primal need" made me roll my eyes.
Like Cohen's book, the first chapter is a brief overview of the cultural significance of lipstick throughout history, starting with ancient times and ending with the 1990s. Not a bad summary, but since I've been doing this a long time there was little earth-shattering news. This isn't the author's fault, however, as the book was released over 20 years ago so this sort of information wasn't as ubiquitous as it is now. Containing the standard tidbits about ancient Greek prostitutes and the patriotic duty lipstick served during World War II, the chapter is a tidy summation of how lipstick was worn through the ages. But the section on the '90s penchant for brown lipstick nearly made my eyes pop out of my head, as I had never come across theories about why brown lipstick (and brown in general) was so popular. This will definitely inform my research for my '90s beauty history book!
Chapter 2 presents no fewer than 14 theories outlining why lipstick wields more impact than other cosmetics. I found them to be slightly lacking, as I believe the "lipstick as phallic object" or "painted lips mimicking sexual arousal" theories rather tired at this point, not to mention sexist. Ditto for the idea that children feel more protected if their mother leaves a lipstick print as they kiss them goodbye before school, lipstick application as oral fixation, or as a rite of passage for teenage girls. There was some truth to the theory about lipstick as a sort of armor or camouflage, but seeing no mention of how lipstick fits into the larger notion of makeup as a means of self-expression was disappointing. And I would have liked to see more about makeup's transformational power, but the only theory about lipstick as metamorphosis came in the form of fairy tales, i.e. one's wildest dreams come true through makeup and one will magically become "pretty" if they wear it: "When I put on lipstick I am as pretty as Cinderella" was one of the quotes included. (Why is the author quoting a literal 5 year-old?)
Chapter 3, appropriately titled Lipstick Freud, delves into pop psychology as Pallingston takes us through the various lipstick shapes that are the result of one's unique wear pattern (which obviously also depends on the shape of one's lips), along with what various application methods say about the user and something called lip reading. Much like astrology and palm reading, they're fun but not necessarily accurate or based on hard scientific data.
Chapter 4 was my favorite, as it provided a list of bite-sized anecdotes about lipstick as well as a lipstick-by-the-numbers section. I miss Allure's by-the-numbers feature tremendously and am dying to include something similar in exhibitions.
Chapter 5 gets into the nitty gritty of lipstick – the complete process of how it's produced and a lengthy list of ingredients, which is good information to have on hand. This chapter also includes sections on colors and names, both of which I believe warrant their own books. (There is actually an entire book on red lipstick, which I hope to review sometime this year.) You can definitely see how times have changed, since black and grey aren't mentioned at all and blue and green are discussed as having solely negative connotations of illness or death. These can be accurate, mind you, but as someone who has now fully embraced non-traditional lipstick colors (especially grey – I own no fewer than 9 shades), I found myself chuckling at the idea that blue or green lip colors used to be mostly associated with bad health. There are incredibly vibrant blue and green shades on the market these days – what could possibly be more a reminder of rebirth and growth than something like Menagerie's Juniper lipstick, for example, or capture the vitality of a hot summer day like MAC's Blue Bang? Anyway, while it was a nice read, it may have been good to include a section on different lipstick finishes and textures. But once again, this is really just part and parcel of this book being released in 1998, when liquid and glitter lipsticks weren't absolutely everywhere.
The naming section was notable for its inclusion of shade names from Renaissance England: apparently Beggar's Grey, Rat and Horseflesh were all listed as lipstick colors.
Chapter 6 gives some tips on how to navigate choosing and buying a lipstick in-store. With the advent of online shopping and swatches, this is largely obsolete and the advice itself was pretty basic. One unusual tip was to try swatching a lipstick on the inner wrist. I'm personally a fan of trying colors on fingertips since they are allegedly closer to your natural lip color, but if you want to find out how the color will look next to your overall facial skintone, the wrist is the place to swatch. Chapter 7 was more of the same, a list of lipstick application and color-coordination techniques that aren't anything you couldn't find online or in any beauty magazine.
Chapter 8 is probably the only chapter that is not in need of a major update, as it provides recipes for making your own lipstick that are still totally doable today. Even as technology and customization options evolve, there will always be a subset of the population who like to DIY their lipstick for various reasons – ingredient preferences, cost, or just because they like experimenting. Chapter 9 continued with recipes, but they were really intended more as a joke to show what people did throughout history to make lipstick. "From the medieval glamour guides, here's a recipe for making lipstick at home: Go outside. Get a root. Dry it. Pulverize it. Add some sheep fat and whiteners to get desired color. If you are upper class, go for a bright pink. If lower class, use a cheaper earth red. If you are having trouble being pale, and have the money to pay for it, get yourself bled. If you're alive during the Crusades, wait for the Crusaders to come back, as they'll bring some glamorous and exotic dyes, ointments and spices, and you'll be able to experience the makeup golden age of the Middle Ages." LOL.
Chapter 10 was a mishmash of suggestions for alternative uses of lipstick and a list of famous art history and pop culture lipstick moments. Most of the suggestions were good ideas, but some, like no. 21, made me cringe. Yikes.
But I did love all the artist references, for they included two I plan on writing about for Makeup as Muse (Rachel Lachowitz and Sylvie Fleury) and Claes Oldenburg's Lipstick (Ascending) on Caterpillar Tracks which I covered back in October. The final chapter (if you can even call it that, as it's only a page and a half) sings the praises of lipstick yet again, and honestly, probably wasn't necessary.
Overall, Lipstick is a nice book for those in need of a primer on lipstick, but if you're in the mood for something more academic or a thorough feminist analysis of lipstick, this is not it. As noted previously, if you're looking to purchase a book on lipstick history I would go with either this or Read My Lips, but I don't think both are necessary for a beauty library (unless you're like me, who obsessively hoards makeup books in addition to makeup itself). Lipstick has sound sources, although by now they are a bit dated and I believe are mostly the same as Cohen's. I will say that the advantage of Cohen's book over Pallington's is the inclusion of photos, which were non-existent in Lipstick. So it just depends on whether you want a glossier tome with more eye candy or one with less visual frills and more anecdotes, as the information in both is basically identical.
Have you read this one? I'm really hoping someone will write an updated cultural history of lipstick, as after reading this I think one is sorely needed.
*Another reason I chose to review this book first instead of the others I have planned is that I was recently interviewed by a journalist who is writing a brand spankin' new cultural history of lipstick, so hopefully in the next year or so we will have an updated version (and hopefully I will be quoted!) Stay tuned. 😉
I love when I get an inquiry to which I can actually give a solid response. A gentleman sent in this picture he had of an old lipstick and asked if I could identify it and provide any sense of its monetary value.
I recognized it immediately as one of the Revlon Couturines doll lipsticks released between 1961 and 1963. But which one? The only one I recognize off the top of my head is Liz Taylor as Cleopatra, since it's pretty obvious.
Fortunately the Revlon Couturines appear in Lips of Luxury (which I highly recommend for any beauty aficionado – check out my review here and in-person pics here.) According to the photos in the book it's not Marilyn Monroe.
Or Ava Gardner.
So it must be one of these ladies.
Aha! Looks like it's Jackie Kennedy (last one on the right.)
What's fascinating to me about the submitter's photo is that his doll appears to be wearing a little fur stole around her neck, whereas in the photo from the book she doesn't have one. As for the value, Revlon Couturines can fetch a pretty hefty price. Even though the photo is blurry, the one submitted to me looks to be in excellent condition. And given that she has a stole, which I'm assuming is original (the original Marilyn Monroe figurine has neckwear as well, which isn't shown in the picture in Lips of Luxury), that would probably increase the value. I think a fair asking price would be $150-$250. At the moment I don't even see any Jackie figurines for sale.
What do you think of these? This post reminds me that I really need to track down at least one for the Museum – I can't believe I don't own any. Another one (or 8) to add to the old wishlist.
Update, 2/6/2020: It only took 5.5 years, but I finally procured a few of these lovely ladies for the Museum!
I am sorry to say that I can confirm these are not cruelty-free. As a matter of fact, Revlon made it a point to highlight the "genuine" mink, fox and chinchilla used. How times have changed. I'm also wondering whether all the ones listed for sale over the years as having brown mink are actually fox fur, as indicated in the ad below. Then again, this was the only ad I saw that referenced fox fur, so maybe the brown ones are mink as well.
The white mink one is not in the best shape – there's a little bit of wear on the paint on her lips and discoloration around her "waist" – but she does have the original box. I'm suspecting the black mark is remnants of a belt, as shown here. (Apologies for changing the background in these photos but I was shooting across several days and was too lazy to retrieve the paper I had used originally.)
The chinchilla-clad lady, however, is basically new in the box. One hundred percent museum quality!
From what I was able to piece together from newspaper ads, the ones without animal fur were advertised as "mannequins" and originally released in 1961, while the chinchilla, fox and mink ones were referred to as "girls" and debuted during the holiday season of 1962. Both series fell under the Couturine name.
There were originally 12 designs, according to this ad. Of course, you paid a little more for the Mannequins with hats and jewelry.
Most of them were similar but had a few details switched up. This is especially true for the Girls series. For example, the brown mink/fox one I procured has the same color velvet at the bottom and one pair of rhinestones, but the one in Lips of Luxury has pink velvet and 4 rhinestones. The colors of the velvet and type of fur were also mixed and matched.
But one question remains. I'm wondering where Jean-Marie Martin Hattemberg, whose book Lips of Luxury I referenced earlier, retrieved his information. Obviously I don't think he just made up the idea that each Couturine was intended to be a replica of an actress or other famous woman. But I'm so curious to know how he came to that conclusion since I've never seen them advertised or referred to that way anywhere other than his book. Perhaps he knew someone at Revlon who designed them? Or maybe they were marketed differently outside of the U.S.? In any case, there's no mention of the chinchilla Couturine and several other of the original 12 dolls in Lips of Luxury, so I'm not sure who they're supposed to be. Hopefully one of these days I'll solve another makeup mystery. 😉
Save
As I did back in January of 2016, I feel the need to discuss some ideas I've had rattling about in my head for quite some time. I could basically copy and paste from that post since I didn't make any progress, but perhaps 2020 is the year I actually start tackling some of the bigger Museum projects I've wanted to pursue for so long. Or not. I'm not putting pressure on myself, especially since, as I've noted countless times, the necessary resources – research materials, time and money – are lacking. The point of this post is to simply get down some ideas so that they can temporarily stop taking up so much room in my head and to possibly start prioritizing them.
First, let's talk exhibitions. Four years ago I had ideas for 15 of them. The number hasn't changed, although the topics for some of them have. Here's what I'm thinking about, along with working titles. I'll reiterate the disclaimer I had with the Stila girls exhibition: if/when these are completed, they won't be executed anywhere near how I envisioned, but they will be something to start with.
"Black and Blue: A History of Punk Makeup" – A subject so near and dear to my heart deserves a solo show.
"Catch the Light: A History of Glitter Makeup and Beauty" – I think this would be perfect for a holiday exhibition.
"The Medium is the Message: Makeup as Art" – This will trace how makeup is marketed and conceived of as literal art. Consider it a comprehensive discussion of this post.
"Wanderlust: Travel-Inspired Beauty" - I cannot for the life of me believe how many travel-inspired makeup collections there are. This exhibition would examine those and discuss the idea of makeup intended for travel. Who wants to see some vintage train cases?
"Design is a Good Idea: Innovations in Cosmetics Design and Packaging" - I'm hoping this would be co-curated with two fashion/design scholars that I met on Instagram.
"Taking Flight: Makeup as Metamorphosis" - I'm still a little fuzzy on the details, but I know I want to have a whole section of makeup packaging featuring winged creatures (butterflies, fairies, etc.) and makeup looks inspired by them. Anchoring the exhibition would be an emphasis on the transformative nature of makeup.
"Gilded Splendor: A History of Gold Makeup" – Another good holiday exhibition topic.
"Ancient Allure: Egypt-Inspired Makeup and Beauty" - While I like this topic, it's necessary to be mindful of the rampant cultural appropriation.
"Just Desserts: Sweet Tooth Revisited" – Like a rich dessert, this topic is too good not to have another bite of. I might also expand it to include non-dessert food-themed beauty, and maybe this very talented writer could co-curate with me.
"Aliengelic: Pat McGrath Retrospective" – Oh, how I'd love to do an exhibition devoted to Pat McGrath, with a stunning catalogue that would double as a coffee table book. Alternate title instead of Aliengelic: "The Mother of Modern Makeup".
"By Any Other Name: The Rose in Makeup and Beauty" – I pitched this idea to the FIT Museum as a small add-on to their upcoming "Ravishing" exhibition. They weren't interested but I might just do it anyway.
"From Male Polish to Guyliner: A History of Men's Makeup" – this will be huge. Various writers have discussed it previously, but I want to go really in-depth with it.
"She's All That: Beauty in the '90s" – This is also the subject of the book on '90s beauty I've been wanting to write since at least 2014. Not a great message in the film She's All That, but I would hope the premise of the exhibition/book will explain why I chose it as a title. Or I might rework it to something totally different, I don't know. And while I know I'll run into the same problems I did with trying to launch this exhibition previously, I figured I need to start somewhere.
"From Mods and Hippies to Supervixens and Grrrls: '60s and '90s Makeup in Dialogue" – In my opinion, cultural developments in both the late '60s and mid-1990s radically changed the beauty industry and gave birth to new ideas about how people view and wear makeup.
The last one is rather interesting in that it's the first exhibition topic suggested to me by an independent curator. I don't want to reveal too much since we haven't really talked through it, but I can say it would be incredibly out of the box and involve '80s makeup.
The husband made a super duper handy graphic of my exhibition ideas.
And now for all the other ideas that I'm going to try to get through on the website in 2020. Here's another graphic to help wrap my head around what topics I want to tackle this year. As you can see it gives the general categories and the number of articles in each category.
Some details:
MM Musings (3): Several huge topics, including the definition of a museum, inclusive museums, and an exploration of the process of a private collection going public.
Makeup as Muse (3): the next artists on my list are Sylvie Fleury, Rachel Lachowitz and Gina Beavers.
MM Mailbag (2-3): Too many inquiries to list! I'm still only at about 50% "solved" rate…good thing I'm not a real detective. But there were some really interesting questions in the past year or so, including ones about the history of Corn Silk powder and a travel set by Madam C.J. Walker.
Brief histories (4): zodiac-themed beauty, crystal-inspired beauty, makeup setting sprays, and how drag makeup techniques became mainstream and/or co-opted. Possibly something on colored mascara.
Vintage (5): Feature on Revlon Futurama lipstick cases, research on a series of Dorothy Gray ads featuring portraits of well-to-do "society" ladies, a roundup of ads depicting women looking at their reflections (sort of a follow-up to my lipstick mirror post), a comparison of Benefit's Glamourette and Platé's Trio-ette compacts, and a history of face powder applicators.
Artist collabs (5): Only 5 so far but I'm sure there will be more! Currently I'm trying to catch up on some of last year's releases, including Brecht Evens for Mikimoto, Connor Tingley for NARS, Yoon Hyup for Bobbi Brown, and a staggering amount of Shiseido Gallery compacts and lip balms (there are 12, yes, 12 artists in all so I will have to combine several of them in one post.) Oh, and I want to start a series on the artists whose work appears on Pat McGrath's packaging.
New series (3): I've been thinking about this for years, ever since I did my fantasy Broad City makeup collection. This would be a series discussing artists whose work I want to see on makeup packaging, complete with mock-ups. The reason I haven't done it yet is because I lack the technical skills to make said mock-ups, but hopefully I'll figure out a work-around.
Color Connections (?): I'd love to return to Color Connections. It's such a fun, albeit time-consuming series.
I'm sure there will be some surprises along the way – I think some guest posts and interviews will make an appearance here.
Finally, my book ideas. These are not new…I do hope to find some time to start writing all three. I have outlines and chapters for each but that's about it. The first one is an alternate title for the '90s exhibition. The second one you can find a description of in this post. And the last one, well, I still want to do the damn coffee table book of pretty makeup. We're going on 14 years that I've been wanting to publish it!
So those are all the ideas I have swirling about in my brain at the moment. They are subject to change as I'm sure I'll think of more but at least I've laid out the current ones. Please let me know in the comments which exhibitions and topics you want to see first! And if you'd like to help with any definitely let me know. Book-writing tips are especially needed. 😉
Let me just say up front that the timing of this post has nothing to do with the Capitol insurrection that took place a few weeks ago, or the fact that Black History Month starts in two days. This is something that's been in the works for over a year, as it's extremely important to the Museum's mission and to me personally. After giving myself a crash course in diversity and inclusion, I feel as though I'm finally ready to write something a little more in-depth than the thoughts I jotted down back in June 2020. One of the Museum's primary goals is to present makeup and its history differently than what currently exists, and a big part of that is sharing previously undiscovered or underrepresented stories. So many of them concern BIPOC and LGBTQ+ histories, and it's important to tell them not just for diversity's sake but for history more generally.
