[hijab flutter ~ Muslema]
Verbage Note: A really good article on how we worship beauty.
As I am in the midst of reading Max Weber’s The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, I thought it appropriate to resurrect this essay I wrote back in 2005 after my first brief encounter with the modeling/fashion industry. As Weber so ably demonstrates, it is not the forms of production that shifted so drastically with the onset of the capitalist revolution, but rather the “ethos,” or “spirit” of labor and acquisition, which came to be seen as moral goods in and of themselves. This radical change took natural human qualities like greed and acquisitiveness and channeled them into a new controlled, disciplined approach to work in which increasing efficiency and production was a goal in and of itself – a benchmark of a person’smoral development. This precipitated a change in the relationship between consumers and producers, and indeed in the way capital was managed. As Weber says, “Wherever this spirit becomes active and is able to have an effect, it acquires the money reserves to be used as a fuel for modern capitalism’s activity – not the other way around” (2009, 82).
It struck me that the same “capitalization” of labor and profit could be applied to the way society sees beauty. Like seeking profit, worshiping female beauty is nothing new, but never in history has it been so commodified. It is no accident that Weber sees the “spirit of capitalism” emerging from a religious ethos – as profit became god, so did its spinoffs like fame and beauty. We now have an arsenal of celebrities who are famous for being famous, and women who are famous for being beautiful. The latter, I argue at the end of the essay, are indeed deified, especially by legions of insecure and fragile young women. Similarly, they strike fear into the hearts of many insecure men, who believe their unattainability reflects the unattainability of women in general – again reinforcing the equation of “woman” with what is seen and desired. I would much appreciate any of your comments and feedback.
It seems that the otherworldly “alien” look is what fashion moguls want; take for instance the well-known cases of Kate Moss and Gemma Ward. The same extraterrestrial standards apply to body as well as face: superfine bone structure, the only curve permissible being in the hips when the body is viewed from the front, and in the buttocks when viewed from the side. The stomach should be concave.
Forget being 5′10 with a 24″ waist – our culture’s beauty ideals have become, quite literally, inhuman.
Regrettably, being American and European (which is even worse in this regard – Europeans are far less forgiving of fat in women and girls than are Americans), I have internalized many of the fashion industry’s beauty standards (though Moss is still a stretch). At this point there appears to be very little I can do about it. It’s like a drug habit that I’ve tried several times to kick, only to relapse upon seeing any magazine in which fashion models are featured. Designers claim that what they want from models is a blank canvas on which to paint, a hanger-like body on which clothes become the most apparent aspect of the ensemble. But I think we all know that the fashion industry is as much about designing people beauty as it is about designing beautiful clothes. And even if they don’t do it self-consciously, it most certainly is the case de facto.
And let’s face it: 99% of women will never ever look like models, nor will they have their pictures taken with teams of people working to make them look as good as possible. And with the ready availability of pictures of these stunning women (perhaps “mermaids” or “goddesses” would be more accurate, since, as I’ve been saying, the human resemblance is stretched), what’s to keep men interested in us day to day females besides our proximity and the unattainability of models? It’s a question many women, subconsciously or consciously, ask themselves.
