trinityvixen: (Default)
[personal profile] trinityvixen
I'll happily stay ugly.

Yes, symmetry is important, but our appreciation of beauty is as much about the differences and oddities and the stark contrasts as it is about perfection. I don't think a single one of the slideshow photos makes the person in it look more beautiful. More cookie-cutter "pretty" perhaps. (The woman at the start of the article is positively a different person with the manipulation and not more beautiful for it.)

I'm also weirded out that James Franco looks almost the same in his "after" as he does in his "before." I've honestly never thought about him in any context of "beauty." Mostly because his defining feature for me was determined when my former roommate called him "Johnny McSquinty" after we saw Spider-Man. I suppose he is very classically beautiful. I don't think he's striking (not like Paul Newman, say, who is another called "classically" beautiful). Perhaps that solidifies my thesis that beauty is deviance from the golden mean of perfect symmetry. James Franco has never provoked me to heights of ecstatic slut-itude. Not like this guy, or this guy, or this guy. (Or even this guy, and I only just started watching his show!) It's sort of the same as my reaction to Denzel Washington. I read in People magazine ages ago, that he had the closest to a perfectly symmetrical face of just about any star in Hollywood. I agree. Denzel Washington is gorgeous. But he doesn't do it for me.
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

Profile

trinityvixen: (Default)
trinityvixen

February 2015

S M T W T F S
1234567
89 1011121314
15161718192021
22232425 262728

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Mar. 30th, 2026 08:16 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios