Good tone: How the standards of office makeup have changed
American Allure says you can wear bright blush and shiny shadows to the office. However, it recommends brown instead of black pencil and generally advises to highlight the eyes with bronze shades: they also accentuate the look, but they will not be too challenging. However, the editorial office does not deny the right to wear bright colors at work and suggests decent red lipstick and stein (bright lips are really the fastest way to increase morale).
Not all employers are positive about obvious makeup. They are not alone here: from time immemorial society generally prefers women not to be painted - or painted so that cosmetics are not noticeable. Lisa Eldridge in her new book "Face Paint" traced this trend since the days of Ancient Rome. With the exception of Persia and Ancient Egypt, where black kayal and greenish shadows were considered to be an excellent combination, bright make-up almost throughout the entire history of the eye was forgiven only by prostitutes and actresses. Surprisingly, this attitude persisted until the XIX century: despite the popularity of white and blush in modern times, the artists captured women with an almost natural make-up. Taking into account that the cosmetics of that time didn’t fit perfectly, we can assume that the artists flattered the heroines of the paintings and made their skin whiteness natural, and the blush natural.
The twentieth century was crucial. True, not at one moment. At the beginning of the century, the actresses became a role model for all social circles, and their beauty, accentuated by makeup, suggested to women that it was cool to be painted. These moods were picked up by cosmetics manufacturers, who began to publish a manipulative (and sexist, of course) advertising in women's magazines. One of the most striking examples of this is the Palmolive poster with the question "Would your husband marry you again?" - addressed, apparently, to women who do not use Palmolive.
Eldridge examines several no less illustrative examples of advertising at the time, in which the word convey the actresses. The general meaning of the speeches is that it is possible to use cosmetics for a decent woman, but stage make-up is for the stage, and in normal life the blush and lipstick should be invisible. The First World War also influenced the attitude towards cosmetics: women, taking on new, first male responsibilities, should also look good so that, in the words of Helena Rubinstein, "radiate optimism, as patriotism requires." To do this, the entrepreneur offered English women cold cream, a remedy for redness, and even a device to reduce the double chin. It is noteworthy that Rubinstein sold decorative cosmetics to the more relaxed American women around the same time.
The Second World War provided women with millions of jobs and specialties that were previously impossible to reach. At the same time, they were still required from them, even if not always in plain text, of a pleasant appearance. With the promotion of universal labor, social advertising of the time looked combat women in work clothes, who had time to tint the eyelashes and make a manicure. A familiar example is the poster "We Can Do It!" (although, contrary to popular opinion, he did not call for new women to work, but had to maintain the mood already hired).
By the beginning of the forties, there were noticeable changes in the make-up: it was noncommercial to pull out eyebrows into a thread and use shades and lipsticks of dramatic shades. Instead, vitality and self-confidence were in vogue, so that red lipsticks, rouge, eyebrow pencils (they made thicker eyebrows), shadows and everything else that allowed to emphasize facial features were used. Cosmetics manufacturers had different views on how customers should be painted: Max Factor believed in color types, and Elizabeth Arden half a century ago believed that makeup was limited only by imagination.
By the way, liquid tights also became popular at the same time: the appearance of bare legs seemed to be considered taboo at about that time. There was already a similar trick: in the same 20s, when the fashion came for dresses with an open back and arms, cosmetics manufacturers started selling and began to sell creams for these particular body parts. The changes also affected the manicure: then the Revlon brand flourished, and its founder Charles Revson got the idea to sell varnishes and lipsticks of the same color (he was one of the first who managed to mix a dense, quick-drying varnish). The trick, as we know, came to taste, and only recently it was no longer considered the rule.
After two world wars, many women continued to work, the younger generation followed up with them. True, even in the 60s, their career paths were severely limited: it was secretly believed that a woman could not cope with "male" work, but with the duties of a secretary - completely. One way or another, the "female" professions were mainly related to communication, which means that the workers should look attractive. Makeup also obeyed this rule: everything that allowed to fit the face under the canons of natural beauty was approved.
At this in the history of office makeup can put an end. For more than half a century, his standards have not changed: strict clothes are still welcomed at work, and restraint is expected from working makeup fifty years ago. It can be said that his standards have become even tougher: red lipstick remains the personification of pronounced femininity, and in modern offices it has no place (I would like problems of gender discrimination to be solved as easily as lipstick change, but not). In addition, in the red lipstick, many see sexual overtones, which in the working environment is also unacceptable. Take a look at the advertisement of a bank: a bunch, even tone, tinted eyelashes and a transparent lip gloss - this is how the employee looks in 2015. There is no reason to expect that bright makeup in “ordinary” offices will fall under the dress code: his very idea contradicts uniforms.
Of course, the office’s office is different, and there are places where workers should comply with the latest fashion trends, and some companies regulate the appearance of female workers up to the length of nails (“French manicure is the best option for business,” says the internal order of Gazpromneft). And despite the fact that women now have more freedoms, most offices solely because of their function cannot be a platform for self-expression. In society, tectonic shifts have just begun to occur, and people began to understand that women should not decorate the situation (this was not previously called into question) - this means that the lack of cosmetics on the face will sooner or later become as familiar and accepted as natural makeup or bright.
Photo:The Library of Congress, Paramount Pictures, Castle Rock Entertainment
