|
For several years, my readers have been asking for makeup guides for each of the 63 style types. I started doing the research necessary to create these guides in 2017, and I'm finally done!  Your makeup's color palette comes from your color season. But two women with the same color season won't apply makeup the same way to look their most beautiful. Have you ever wondered why certain makeup trends -- a matte lip, a cat eye, contoured cheeks -- just don't work for you, even when you know that the colors you're using harmonize with your skin? The reason is that the lines of your face, which determine your style type, harmonize with certain makeup looks and not others. Not everyone looks harmonious with fuller lips. Not everyone looks harmonious with contoured cheekbones. Not everyone looks harmonious with a smoky eye. Not everyone looks harmonious with delicate, plucked brows. Here are two pics of me in two different makeup looks. In both pics, I'm wearing Soft Autumn colors. But I think you'll agree that I'm lovelier in the pic on the right than the pic on the left.  My style type is Ethereal Natural, and the pic on the right shows me in an Ethereal Natural makeup look. The pic on the left is a look with elements of Classic, Romantic, and Dramatic -- all essences that are unimportant for me. On the right, my skin finish is less powdery and matte, my eyebrows are less intense, I'm not wearing foundation, my makeup's overall level of contrast is lower, and my overall impression is less made-up. These are all features of an Ethereal Natural makeup look. Now, if I were a Romantic-Dramatic-Classic, chances are I would look gorgeous in a more matte, more made-up, higher-contrast look. Angelina Jolie is a Romantic-Dramatic-Classic, and that kind of makeup look is gorgeous for her:  It's interesting to note that Jolie and I both have the same Soft Autumn color palette. Yet because the geometry of her face is Romantic, Dramatic, and Classic, her best makeup look is much more sexy, intense, and traditionally feminine than mine. My best makeup look combines Natural's no-makeup aesthetic with Ethereal's lightness and delicacy. The makeup guides are about 30 pages long. Here's what each guide includes:
 Since I expect a high volume of initial orders, please allow UP TO A WEEK for your makeup guide to be delivered by email. All guides will eventually be instant downloads; at that point, you won't have to wait. :-)
55 Comments
Scarlett Johansson, Renee Zellweger, Cynthia Erivo, Florence Pugh -- what did you think of their Oscar looks? Here, I share my thoughts about their color and style choices. I didn't even think about separates before I knew my style type. But how you put separates together actually has a big effect on the impression you make. Romantics, Ethereals, Classic, and Dramatics are each best in a head-to-toe look. If you think about it, this makes sense, because all four of these types are formal and grown-up in their own way: the Romantic is mature womanly sexiness, the Classic is a "ladylike" adult woman, the Dramatic is a powerful ruler, and the Ethereal is an immortal being. None of these pure types is youthful or casual enough to look her best in an obvious use of separates.
Another easy way to do a head-to-toe look is to just wear a dress. Ethereals, Romantics, and Classics have a lot of great dress options.
Speaking of which: the message a Natural sends with her use of separates is, "I own nothing but separates, and I basically just throw them together because that's how confident I am, but the effect is never weird, because I can't be bothered to put in enough effort to make it deliberately weird, because that's how casual I am."
A Gamine's use of separates says, "I deliberately combine separates no one else would dare to put together, because that's how fun and quirky I am. I want you to notice!"
If you're a blend of two or three types, as most women are, and you manifest Natural, Gamine, or Ingenue through your use of separates, you'll want to lean a bit more heavily on your other essence (or two) to balance the effect. So, for example, A Natural-Classic-Ingenue combining separates in a casual, Natural way would take extra care to bring in Classic and Ingenue in other aspects of her look. If you're not sure of your style type, try the Style ID Calculator! A reader writes, "Your guides have been incredibly helpful to me. However, there is one part of your guides that confuses me. What exactly does it mean for a piece of clothing to be "constructed" or "unconstructed"?" Great question! Constructed garments have a defined shape that's not simply the shape of the body underneath the garment. You can't easily ball up a constructed garment in your hand; it wants to hold a shape.
The way a garment is sewn can give it a defined shape. This is easier with heavy, stiff, or crisp fabrics. Manufacturers also use lining, padding or interfacing to make garments have a defined shape.  Interfacing makes sections of garments more stiff. Dramatics and Gamines are flattered by sharp-cornered squares and rectangles. These aren't the shapes of the human body, so Dramatics and Gamines usually need constructed garments to create those shapes.
Romantics, Ethereals, and Naturals all look their best in unconstructed clothes. For Romantics, this means sexy draping that appears to hug the body. For Ethereals, this looks like floaty, trailing garments that seem about to take flight. For Naturals, this looks like garments that are supremely comfortable and unfussy.
It's not as easy to find constructed clothes as it was 100 years ago. As a society, we've all mostly agreed to dress like Naturals most of the time. Which is great for us Naturals, but a challenge for everyone else. Garments that are tailored into defined shapes are usually more expensive than unconstructed garments, because that kind of sewing is labor-intensive. If your style type calls for construction, you may choose to spend the money on those more expensive items. You might also save some money by focusing on clothes that are stiff not because of their tailoring but because they're made from stiffer fabrics. If you're willing to buy second-hand, you'll find that a lot of vintage clothes are more structured than what you typically see in stores today. Also, consider using spray starch to give your garments more stiffness! You don't hear much about it these days, because fashion is mostly so unconstructed, but clothing starch is still a thing. Here are hairstyle ideas for the two-identity blends. For each blend, the suggestions are jumping-off points. Use them as inspirations. If you're a blend of three identities, try combining suggestions from the different two-ID blends that apply to you. For example, if you're a Romantic-Ethereal-Natural, take a look at suggestions for Romantic Ethereal, Romantic Natural, and Ethereal Natural. Don't know your style identity? Try the Style ID Calculator!  Romantic Ethereal: Aphrodite Try: Soft & flowing. Asymmetry. Fullness and height at the crown. Long, luscious and full. Side parts. Low side pull-backs. Touchable curls or waves. Soft, sexy updos with lots of free curls.
 Ethereal Gamine: The Sprite. Try: Spunky, diaphanous, floaty, boyish, tousled. Short and wispy. Choppy waves. Cute or witty "period" looks. Playful, unexpected braids.
This post first appeared in January of 2016. Dramatic is a style type I am always delighted to encounter in a virtual analysis.
Women with a lot of Dramatic tend to have strong jaws, strong brows, strong cheekbones, intense, narrow eyes, and an overall powerful energy. These women can pull off avant-garde clothes that most of us can't; in fact, they require extreme minimalism, sharp corners, and straight lines in their ensembles in order to appear as the gorgeous women they are. Clothes that are unstructured, very detailed, or noticeably feminine tend to exaggerate the masculine aspects of Dramatic features in an unlovely way. To wrap my head around style types, I find it helpful to use visual thesauri and word association tools.  . "Striking" is already a word I use when I think about Dramatic types, but "spectacular' is new. I love "spectacular" for Dramatics in its literal sense -- having the quality of a spectacle. Dramatic clothes beg to be looked at. (What's ironic is that when a Dramatic wears them, we're more likely to notice her and not her face, because her face is exactly as spectacular as the clothes are.)   . "Large" and "big" are definitely important for Dramatics. In a Dramatic look, everything gets turned up to 11.  Dramatic clothes are thrilling on the runway or on the hanger. And, of course, they are merely correct on a Dramatic woman. (This is an interesting corollary to Classic clothes, which can be boring on a hanger but sensational on a Classic woman. There's a version of this for every style type: On a Natural, sloppy clothes aren't sloppy; on a Gamine, weird clothes aren't weird; etc.)  . "Striking" leads us to "strike," which is fitting, because Dramatic energy feels like it's hitting you. Dramatics and Ethereals can be easily confused, because they both have sculpted, unusual-looking features, but one way to distinguish them is that Dramatic energy "strikes" you with its forward-moving, aggressive energy, whereas Ethereal energy feels like it's floating away. Here are some more fun words associated with "dramatic":  Of course, there are many associated with the theater; Dramatic clothes, by themselves, are performances. I like here also "decisive" (nothing about Dramatics is wishy-washy!) and "sharp." Here are some additional adjectives I commonly use for Dramatic looks:
You might be a Dramatic blend with a gentle, peaceful nature. Rest assured that your sharp, intense, attention-getting clothes will look at home on you, and you'll stand out less than if you wear the clothes that are all wrong for you.  The lines on the right are much more extreme than the traditionally feminine lines on the left, but in which picture does model Hailey Baldwin look most like herself? For me, it's the one on the right. I'm not thinking about that edgy red top; I'm just looking at her face. :-) Whereas on the left, I keep getting distracted by that ostrich trim and those hair. She doesn't have enough Ethereal to look normal in those delicate feathers, and her beauty is not feminine enough to be really flattered by those waves. She has a lot of Dramatic, and looks her best in strong, straight lines and little detail.
(I've said before, but should probably mention again, that masculine beauty and feminine beauty are both wonderful, and it's no slight to a woman to notice that her beauty is masculine rather than feminine. Most supermodels have strongly masculine beauty.) Not sure of your style type? Try the Style Identity Calculator, or consider investing in a Virtual Analysis. Your palette seems inherently gentle and graceful. Yet your Dramatic or Gamine Style Identity calls for a bold use of color. Can you do that? Sure you can! Definitely wear your Light Spring colors. But wear them in solid blocks, rather than in watercolor or ombre effects. This would not be so good for a Dramatic or Gamine:  This use of Light Spring blue is excellent for an Ethereal blend, but not so fitting for a style type with a more aggressive energy. A use of Light Spring color more like this , below, would be more appropriate for a Dramatic or Gamine:  The color is in solid blocks, not gently blended. It's still the Light Spring palette, but on a person with Light Spring skin, the effect will be bold.
Even better, consider doing head-to-toe charcoal, vanilla, or raspberry (Light Spring's versions of black, white, and red) to create a Dramatic effect. Or try unusual combinations of your palette's "primaries" and "secondaries": ocean blue with popsicle orange, butter yellow with grape purple, and so on. Your seasonal coloring does play a small role in your style identity -- people with highly contrasting coloring tend to make a more intense visual impression, and people with very low-contrast coloring tend to make a more gentle physical impression. But your coloring isn't determinative of your Style ID. Light and Soft seasons are definitely represented among Dramatic and Gamine style types. Hope this helps! :-) First published November 2017 One of the variables that differ from style type to style type is the amount of detail that is most flattering to that type. Some of us look beautiful with a ton of detail; some of us look beautiful in a minimalist context; and some of us can pull off both high-detail and low-detail looks. But what does "amount of detail" actually mean? The best way I have come up to explain "amount of detail" is this: Imagine that your image in the mirror is a pencil sketch. "Amount of detail" is the number of pencil strokes you'd need in order to accurately render that sketch.
A shift dress can be rendered with relatively few lines, while a dress with a sweetheart neckline, a pleated skirt, pleated sleeves, and sequins would require literally hundreds of pencil strokes. A flat piece of fabric is extremely low-detail. As soon as you gather that fabric into pleats or drapes or ruching, the image becomes much more detailed. Not coincidentally, pleats, draping, and ruching read as feminine. Detail always reads as feminine. I have a couple of theories about why this might be. One idea is that we view detail as feminine because detail holds the eye, and throughout history we have seen women, not men, as the sex that exists to be looked at. Another idea is that we associate detail with femaleness because a curving line is "busier" (more detailed) than a straight line, and the lines of female bodies, on average, curve more than the lines of male bodies. A third idea is that we associated a highly detailed ensemble with femininity because creating a highly detailed ensemble takes time and effort, and women, not men, are traditionally expected to put time and effort into their appearance. Regardless of why it's so, a high level of detail adds femininity, and minimalism adds masculinity. Women whose style types are mostly androgynous/masculine will usually find that too much detail makes them look mannish. Women whose style types are mostly feminine will usually find they are less pretty in minimalist looks. I'm an Ethereal Natural with tiny smidges of a few other essences. My feminine-masculine balance is about 60-40 in favor of feminine elements. If my fabrics are rough and my colors are restrained, I can handle quite a bit of detail, but if my fabrics and colors are already very feminine, I can easily get overwhelmed with detail, and end up looking mannish. My curly hair by itself adds a ton of detail (imagine making a pencil sketch of it!), so if I'm wearing my hair down I don't have a lot of room to add more detail. Most of my garment choices are pretty simple.  Those curls add about as much detail as I can tolerate before I start to look mannish. I usually skip earrings, and I wear a *lot* of tank tops. This sharply tailored suit could be drawn with very few pencil strokes. It's low-detail.  Alison Williams is stunning in it because her striking, masculine beauty calls for a very low amount of detail. (I think Williams is highly Dramatic.) Jennifer Aniston is another celebrity who looks her best in very low-detail looks. She has a ton of Natural (which, along with Dramatic, is a masculine style type that asks for very little detail.)  See how much better Aniston is in the low-detail dress on the right than she is in the high-detail dress on the left. For a strongly Natural woman (like Aniston and myself), a low-detail context, which is masculine, actually makes her look more feminine.
Most off-the-rack fast fashion is low in detail. If you're a predominantly feminine style blend, shop for items with more detail built in, like pleats, complicated lapels, visible stitching, and a sheeny finish (which adds visual detail as a result of the play of reflected light.) If your clothes are simple and you need to add detail, the easiest way to go is to add highly detailed accessories: for example, profusely detailed earrings, necklace, and scarf. Stripes can be Natural. They're especially likely to be Natural if they are irregular, or various in size, or if they read as relaxed, not aggressive. Vertical stripes, which elongate the vertical line, are usually better than horizontal stripes (which are good for Gamines.)  Irregular stripes.  Irregular stripes.  These striped feel relaxed, mainly because the garment itself is unstructured. Checks and plaids can be Natural if they read as something you would find on a fleece -- they should look farmer-ish, not preppy. (Preppy plaids are Classic.)  These checks feel country, not preppy.  This feels like a farmer plaid, not a preppy plaid. Large, stylized, somewhat abstract nature motifs read as Natural, as long as they're not aggressive-looking (which would add Dramatic) or neatly repeating (which would add Classic).  Nature prints that are more photorealistic read as Gamine or Ingenue. (The youthful essences get more literal images.) Nature prints that feature flowers will automatically bring in Romantic (if they're larger and stylized) or Ingenue (if they're smaller and more realistic.) Paisleys are often Natural, because they're stylized nature motifs that read as a little "tribal" (which is a word I don't love; what's a better word?)  Stylized nature patterns are often Natural, so that includes many paisleys. A paisley that's very tiny or very detailed is less likely to read as Natural. Prints with abstract geometrics that seem to be randomly distributed and are largeish in size can be Natural. Go for blunt-edged geometrics; sharp-edged geomtrics will read as Dramatic (if they're large) or Gamine (if they're small.)  An oversized, abstract, blunt-edged print. (Notice the stylized nature motifs mixed in too.) Prints you find in textiles of indigenous peoples are often Natural. Again, the print is more likely to read as Natural if it's large and not incredibly detailed. A Natural print will not fee aggressive or high-energy.  Large shapes and a neutral color palette make this otherwise somewhat busy print read as rather Natural.  A print or pattern, by itself, adds a lot of detail to a look. And Natural style calls for a very low level of detail. So if you're a pure Natural and you're going for a print, keep your silhouette and garments extra simple, and your other details very, very plain.
Women who are pure Natural and Natural blends, what prints and patterns have you found work for you? If you're not sure of your style type, try the Style Identity Calculator or consider a Virtual Analysis.
Yet we live in an era of casual fashion. What used to be called "sportswear" is the expected everyday clothing for most of us. Dramatic asks for stiffness and tailoring, but most of what's available in department stores is unconstructed and soft, and the stiff, tailored pieces are expensive! Dramatic asks for avant-garde pieces, but some women who are Dramatic blends aren't comfortable with those looks, or don't have access to those items.  Dramatic asks for an aggressive energy, but some Dramatic types don't feel comfortable channeling aggression.  So if you are a Dramatic blend Dramatic, what are your easy options for creating a Dramatic impression?
You can buy pieces as a set... or you can create a visually unbroken line by simply matching your bottoms to your top. If the color is continuous, people will perceive the line as being elongated. The monochromatic look is also visually intense, which reads as Dramatic.
 Women who are Dramatic blends: what are some quick tips and tricks you can share for implementing Dramatic in an everyday wardrobe?
Not sure of your Style ID? Try the Style ID Calculator, or consider a Virtual Analysis. Almost a decade ago, just before the beginning of the new school year (I teach, as many of you know), I went to the mall with my credit card and spent several hundred dollars on new clothes. This was a carefully considered decision. It had been years since I'd bought myself actual new clothes. And I had calculated that I would be able to pay off the balance plus interest over the next 12 months. In the years prior to that shopping trip, I had bought and thrown away a lot of thrift-store clothes. I felt unable to make myself look beautiful, and I knew I was wasting money. I thought if I spent some serious money on really nice clothes, I'd feel and look different. I'm a grown-up and a professional, I told myself. It's not unreasonable for me to make a financial investment in my wardrobe. I was right about that last idea, I think; it makes sense to spend money on clothes you know you'll be wearing for years. Yet I don't own any of those clothes anymore. The reason for that, as you may have guessed, is that I had a style analysis not long after that shopping trip, and discovered that most of the expensive shopping-trip clothes were wrong for me. I had chosen mostly Classic and/or Dramatic pieces -- very stiff, structured, sharp-edged items. I think on some level I believed that the dignity of the clothes would automatically elevate the impression I made. Yet my style analysis revealed that Ethereal and Natural garments, which are completely unstructured, were actually more dignified for me. They made my somewhat otherworldly and somewhat rough-hewn features read as noble and magical. In Dramatic and Classic lines, by contrast, my face looked a bit coarse and a bit weird... like, out of place. (You don't put Mother Earth in a suit, right?) I was able to return, resell, repurpose, or gift most of the brand-new clothes, thank goodness. My style analysis cost $350. That's a fraction of what I spent on the wardrobe that was all wrong for me. And that's more than I've spent on any shopping trip for myself in the years since then. In fact, I rarely shop for clothes these days. Many of the items in my current wardrobe are several years old; when I find an Ethereal Natural garment, I keep it until it wears out, because it works for me every time I put it on. For example, I'm on my third pair of these sandals:  They last about two years. (Thin soles!) I wear them all summer. When they wear out, I order another pair. I've had this skirt, in off-white, for about six years. (I used scissors to cut off the highest ruffles, the ones at the hip -- I needed a narrower silhouette.)  Most of the clothes currently in my wardrobe are thrift store finds. Knowing my style ID means I zoom in on the items that will work for me, and ignore everything else, so shopping is a fast and easy process. It also means that I look better, now, in a shirt I paid seven dollars for, than I looked in anything I bought before I knew my style ID. I spend so little time and money on clothes now. And I feel really confident when I leave the house, every day. My hair is a similar story. I've had the same basic hair for years now. I spend zero time agonizing about what hair style looks best on me, or worrying about whether I should change my style, because I know that what looks good in my clothing also looks good around my face: layers, sinuous lines, rough edges, and a lot of length. Basic Ethereal Natural. Some people really enjoy changing their look every season. And some people really enjoy spending hours trying on clothes. For those people, a style analysis would be a waste of money. But if you're like me, you don't have the time or patience for all of that. You want to know, once and for all, and have it settled, so you can get on with the more important parts of your life. (I work crazy hours, and I have two jobs and two kids, for goodness' sake. I'm guessing you're as busy as I am.) And this is my point: if you love feeling beautiful, but you hate wasting time and money, a style analysis is a good investment for you. Your virtual style analysis comes with a report that describes the process by which I arrived at your result. It also includes specific percentage recommendations for lines lengths, shape sizes, construction/draping, and your masculine-feminine balance. You'll receive your Visual Style Guide and your What Not to Wear as well. At $279, it's kind of a lot of money. I get that. But it's an investment in your future and your peace of mind. And I expect you'll recoup that investment, as I have recouped mine. (Originally published August 2016.) This is a revolutionary new way of thinking about style. All of the advice you've received, all of your life, has been about how to dress your body. "If you're petite, avoid long pants. If you're curvy, emphasize your waist. " As far as I can tell, every other style system advises you to dress primarily for your body. But your body isn't what people are mainly looking at. They spend the vast majority of their time looking at your face. And dressing for your body at the expense of your face means you end up looking all wrong. Let me offer you several examples to demonstrate this phenomenon. Here's Ellie Kemper:  You might know her from "The Office" or "Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt." She's adorbs, right? If you're guessing that she has a lot of Gamine and a lot of Ingenue (and maybe some Classic?), I'd agree with you. Those stripes are cute on her. (The palette is a separate issue, but never mind.) Another pic of her looking fantastic:  The headband! The bangs! The cardigan! The tiny earrings! The Nancy Drew hair! So, so right for her. So much Gamine and Ingenue. (And maybe some Classic.) Here, tiny ruffles, tiny necklace, yoke emphasis -- so Ingenue, and so good:  And here: adorable, face-framing curls, small geometric print, simple, round neckline, high waist -- again, lots of Gamine and Ingenue, very good:  Just a few more images of her looking awesome with lots of Gamine and Ingenue (and some Classic):
But let's imagine that Ellie Kemper's going to get style advice that considers her body as a significant factor. I don't know if you noticed, but Kemper actually has a super-curvy, very Romantic body.:
Most style systems will assign Ellie Kemper a style type that dresses her for her curvy body. But that would be all wrong. See how uncomfortable, how not-herself, this Gamine Ingenue (or Classic-Gamine-Ingenue) looks in Romantic styles:
Thank goodness Kemper (or her stylist) usually understand that she needs to dress for her face, not her body. Here, Kemper's waist is obscured and her bust is unemphasized. And it's sooo much better!  (Jenna Fischer, also from "The Office," is another example of a woman with a Romantic body but a very youthful face. Like Kemper, Fischer looks all wrong in overtly sexy clothes. By contrast, Mindy Kaling of "The Office" has quite a bit of Gamine, like Kemper and Fischer do -- but she also has enough sexy Romantic in her face to totally pull off figure-emphasizing clothes. ) "If you got it, flaunt it" is not a thing. Let it go. Only emphasize your curvy body if it also harmonizes with your face. Dress for your face. Other celebrity examples of dressing primarily for one's face, not one's body:
A rather Ingenue face (tiny chin, high forehead, big eyes.)  Is she better in Ingenue or Natural? Ingenue bows, ruffles, puff sleeves, cap sleeves, high waist, feminine hair, midi length skirt: so good.
Natural t-shirts, layers, separates, shaggy hair, undefined neckline, geometric shapes -- not great.
Jane Krakowski is lovelier when she dresses her face, not her body. I'm not saying to totally disregard your body. There are individual tweaks your body may call for that are consistent with a style your face doesn't manifest. For example, Jane Krakowski is flattered by open necklines; they elongate her rather short neck. That's consistent with Natural, not with Ingenue. But her open necklines are best when they're adorned with ruffles or bows. True Natural necklines are wrong for her.
 extremely tall, mostly Dramatic body. Christie is so tall -- 6'3" -- and relatively narrow, most style systems would require her to dress as a Dramatic, or a Dramatic/Natural blend. But that's really wrong for her. Mostly Dramatic, and so not great:
Much more feminine, and so much better for her:
Even more celebrity examples:
To sum up: 1. Identify your style identity based primarily on your face. 2. Make a few tweaks in the direction of a different style identity if you know your body calls for it. Dress for your face! A woman for whom I recently did a virtual analysis offered to write a customer testimonial for me. Now that I'm in my 40s, one of my personal goals is to become more comfortable tooting my own horn. So here it is. :-)
* * * Why get a Style Analysis from Rachel? After all, can’t you just figure out this stuff yourself? I mean, it costs money, and all that. I can give you one great reason: Rachel’s gift is magical. Her style analysis is spot-on, objective, and exact. She nailed it. Like most of us, I have been rather haphazard about my style choices. While I like to think of myself as a smart woman, I have a hard time filtering out the style and fashion noise that bombards us daily. Many of us find the process too difficult to navigate, so we opt out. Many just wear sweats and flip flops, unless heading to work. Others, like me, try and try again, spending countless dollars testing out theories and never quite getting it right. Both extremes can justify these choices with the idea that we are not going to be victims of consumerism, or that we can reinvent ourselves as the occasion demands. And many are satisfied with that. I am not. Like most, I have a lot of demands on my time and money, so I want to make sure I maximize both. These days, at least, image is important, so making the most of that image without breaking the bank is, to my mind, a worthy goal. I have educated myself about image matters, at least minimally. According to many media sources, I should, at my age, “know what works for me.” I’ve spent more than 50 years as a female marketing target in the United States, though. And I know I am not alone in being more confused about what works for me than ever. Let’s face it: we are constantly being told that we can control or create our image. We can even live virtually behind an avatar, if we choose. This image thing is NOT easy. Meaningful style analysis was (and is) an elusive target. When I first started spending my own money on clothes, style analysis was limited to the passing reference to types in the back of the Color Me Beautiful books: Dramatic, Classic, Romantic, Natural, and for a small number of people, Ingenue. I never felt drawn to any of those pure types. Based on the offhand comments of family and friends about how small I am (5’4” on a good day, and very short waisted), or how I should look for my various life roles (work, wife, mom) I always distorted the self-test results away from the Dramatic looks that appealed to me. I am too short to pull those off, I would think. High fashion is not for women like me. I persevered, though. I did not resort to sweats. I watched makeover shows. I bought fashion books. I pinned all the pins about face shape and how to put on makeup for my eye shape. I wore the Lilly Pulitzer dress that matched the pink dress my daughter loved. I wore the Land’s End quilted jacket all the moms were wearing. I developed a utilitarian basic work wardrobe that required no effort on hectic mornings. My image functioned, but it wasn’t great. And it wasn’t cheap. Trying the latest fad, or buying clothes just for the right color, gets expensive. So does purging your wardrobe of clothes you love because they supposedly don’t work with your angular shoulders. Because, you see, I would focus on individual features of my image without having a vision for the whole. But Rachel has hit on something the shows, books, blogs, and advice columns won’t tell you: there are parts of your image you can’t change. As she says, your combination of facial features and body parts, the curves and lines they create, give off an impression. Whether you like or accept them, it is good to know what they are. When I started reading Rachel’s blog a few months ago, I tried to self analyze. I had never heard of the Kibbe types, so I read and looked on Pinterest. I read Rachel’s research on facial typing, and I realized that I probably did not have the discipline to apply this information to myself accurately. I had never heard of Ethereal as a style type. Flowy clothes were always either Romantic or Natural, but the supernatural Ethereal look is distinct from the others. Gamine is similarly distinct from Ingenue as a youthful look and from the other masculine types. And it makes so much sense to have this symmetrical division from Dramatic on the masculine end to Ethereal on the feminine, with Classic in the middle. My self analysis wasn’t trustworthy. Years of fashion industry static has made me doubt my eye and my instinct. What’s more, I sometime confuse my mischievous side with a visual style: in short, I saw myself in all of the types. I am small, so I could argue the Ingenue or Gamine essences, but I don’t like the fussiness they need. I am not symmetrical enough to be a Classic, but I do like proportion. I have some rounded features, so maybe there is some Romantic in there. I have some rather average features, and earth tones work for me, so maybe a Natural. Dramatic and Ethereal really appealed to me, but I could not see whether I was coming forward (Dramatic) or receding (Ethereal). And those can’t be right because I am short. I needed help. Enter Rachel. For me, Rachel’s style analysis, like all truths, has set me free. I am a Dramatic Ethereal Classic (50% Dramatic!). I felt drawn to this type, but had talked myself out of it! Again, I had failed to see that my whole was greater than the sum of my parts. This type makes sense of all of my conflicting signals. I am no longer afraid of my dark coloring: it fits. I am no longer trying to soften the things about my appearance others find intimidating: the Ethereal elements in my style can do that for me without being cutesy, overly casual, or overly ornate (all things I have tried). The Classic part gives proportion to my shortness. On Rachel’s recommendation, I am trying hairstyles some of the online experts would disapprove of, like no bangs on my long face. I am trying styles that are supposed to be wrong for me, like boatnecks for my broad shoulders. AND THEY ARE WORKING. I have gotten compliments from random co-workers for each of these small experiments. The people who have seen Rachel’s recommendations for me have unanimously approved. Here is the best part: I am not afraid of growing into this image. I can look back and see that these elements have always been part of me, and knowing that, the future looks so much brighter! Is Style Analysis worth it? With Rachel it is. Thank you, Rachel, for helping me find myself! * * * This customer's words made me so happy. More than anything, I want to help women feel authentically beautiful. If you're interested in a virtual analysis for yourself, book it today! :-) And keep in mind that many women do find success using the very affordable Style Identity Calculator on their own. :-) Last week, I explained that Romantic, Natural, Ingenue, and Gamine characteristics come from physical traits that actually distinguish women from men and adults from children. I didn't address Ethereal and Dramatic, though. That's because those beauty archetypes don't arise wholly from what's true about actual human women and men. I believe that the archetypes of Ethereal and Dramatic arise instead from our fantasies of supernatural or inhuman women and men. More specifically, I propose the following:
Ethereal: The Feminized SupernaturalI believe our idea of the Ethereal quality derives from the feminine physical qualities that we project onto onto imaginary, superhuman beings we see as peaceful or helpful. The most obvious example is our idea of an angel. But this archetype also shows up in saints, aliens, and deities; whether they're male or female, we tend to give them feminized physical traits. Our fantasies of such creatures generally depict them physically as having narrow and smoothly ovoid faces; high foreheads; large, widely spaced, oval eyes; high, rounded eyebrows; long noses; unearthly but low-contrast coloring; narrow jaws; and small, tapering chins.
The overall physical impression of these beings is rather feminine, but some traits that characterize average human women, such as a relatively round face and relatively small nose, are missing. These are feminine faces, but it's an imagined femininity, not a mortal, "estrogenized" femininity. From this imagining, I believe, emerges the archetype of Ethereal beauty. See the similarities between the faces above and the Ethereal faces below. Faces are elongated and oval-shaped, gently sculpted but without harsh angles. Eyes are penetrating, wise, and peaceful, more almond-shaped than round, and often heavy-lidded. Noses are long and narrow. Lips are a bit fleshy and feminine, but not voluptuous. Eyebrows are narrow, long, and gently arched. Foreheads are high. The hairline is rounded.
|
    |    |
(It's not a coincidence that predatory animals often have close-set and angled eyes, heavy brows, and overall narrow and sharply chiseled features. I think these features of nature's predators actually serve as part of the inspiration for our fantasy of supernatural masculinity.)
 |  |
The overall impression of all of these creatures is masculine, but some features, such as prominent cheekbones and somewhat narrow chins, are not characteristic of average human men. These are masculine faces, but it's an abstracted masculinity, not a human, "testosteronized" masculinity.
And it's from this archetype of "inhuman + intimidating," I believe, that we derive our idea of Dramatic beauty.
See the similarities between the faces above and the striking beauty of strongly Dramatic people: Faces are elongated and sharply sculpted. Cheekbones are prominent. Noses are long, prominent, and flared. Brow ridges project out over the eyes. Eyebrows are prominent and sharp, or rather horizontal. Eyes are piercing, narrow, and often close-set. Mouths are rather horizontal. The hairline is horizontal or sharply peaked.
Compared to Ethereal, the face overall is more sharply chiseled and more square or rectangular, with few circle or oval shapes.
    |     |
Dramatics are incredibly striking, and more likely to be called "beautiful" or "stunning" than "cute" or "adorable." But, of course, that doesn't imply that they're evil, any more than pure Ethereals are good. They simply resemble, in their geometry, the intimidating creatures of the human imagination. The heart of the Dramatic is power, and power can be frightening.
It's probably obvious to you at this point that Ethereals and Dramatics actually have some overlap. I think this is because there are certain features -- facial elongation in particular -- that read as "otherworldly," whether they're masculine or feminine.
A key distinguisher between Ethereal and Dramatic may be your answer to the question, "Does this beauty feel pacific and still, or active and intimidating?"
Some amazing people, such as Tilda Swinton, possess a good bit of both:
It's probably obvious to you at this point that Ethereals and Dramatics actually have some overlap. I think this is because there are certain features -- facial elongation in particular -- that read as "otherworldly," whether they're masculine or feminine.
A key distinguisher between Ethereal and Dramatic may be your answer to the question, "Does this beauty feel pacific and still, or active and intimidating?"
Some amazing people, such as Tilda Swinton, possess a good bit of both:
Is she approaching or receding? Will she hurt you or help you? It's hard to say. That's the combination of Ethereal and Dramatic. It's no coincidence that Swinton has been cast as a madonna, a deadly angel, a witch, a vampire, and an immortal sorcerer.
So, to synthesize this week and last week:
Our ideas of Romantic, Natural, Gamine and Ingenue beauty derive from real, human physical characteristics that signal biological sex and age.
Our ideas of Ethereal and Dramatic beauty derive from gendered fantasies of inhuman or unearthly beauty: Ethereal represents an archetype of supernatural beauty that's feminized and benevolent, while Dramatic represents an archetype of supernatural beauty that's masculine and dangerous.
* * *
A final comment that I really hope doesn't need to be made, but that I will make anyway, just in case:
By noticing that angels and aliens are generally rendered as feminine, while devils and dragons are generally rendered as masculine, I am in no way saying I think it's right that femaleness is identified with virtue and purity, while maleness is identified with malevolence.
Description is not prescription.
Personally, it drives me nuts when people trot out that tired old idea of women as the gatekeepers of morality.
Plenty of women are evil. Plenty of men are good. Almost all of us are a mix of both.
If I could wave my magic wand, we'd live in a world where "feminine" =/= gentle and passive, and "masculine" =/= aggressive and predatory.
Alas, that's not our world, and these archetypes do exist.
For the purposes of helping all of us look amazing, I see it as my job to accurately describe the archetypes.
For better or worse, "Dramatic" features read as masculine and intimidating, and look the most beautiful with sharp, straight, intimidating clothes.
For better or worse, "Ethereal" features read as feminine and peaceful, and look the most beautiful with long, sinuous, delicate lines.
If you're not sure of your Style Identity, try the Style Identity Calculator, or consider investing in a virtual style analysis.
So, to synthesize this week and last week:
Our ideas of Romantic, Natural, Gamine and Ingenue beauty derive from real, human physical characteristics that signal biological sex and age.
Our ideas of Ethereal and Dramatic beauty derive from gendered fantasies of inhuman or unearthly beauty: Ethereal represents an archetype of supernatural beauty that's feminized and benevolent, while Dramatic represents an archetype of supernatural beauty that's masculine and dangerous.
* * *
A final comment that I really hope doesn't need to be made, but that I will make anyway, just in case:
By noticing that angels and aliens are generally rendered as feminine, while devils and dragons are generally rendered as masculine, I am in no way saying I think it's right that femaleness is identified with virtue and purity, while maleness is identified with malevolence.
Description is not prescription.
Personally, it drives me nuts when people trot out that tired old idea of women as the gatekeepers of morality.
Plenty of women are evil. Plenty of men are good. Almost all of us are a mix of both.
If I could wave my magic wand, we'd live in a world where "feminine" =/= gentle and passive, and "masculine" =/= aggressive and predatory.
Alas, that's not our world, and these archetypes do exist.
For the purposes of helping all of us look amazing, I see it as my job to accurately describe the archetypes.
For better or worse, "Dramatic" features read as masculine and intimidating, and look the most beautiful with sharp, straight, intimidating clothes.
For better or worse, "Ethereal" features read as feminine and peaceful, and look the most beautiful with long, sinuous, delicate lines.
If you're not sure of your Style Identity, try the Style Identity Calculator, or consider investing in a virtual style analysis.
The Style Identity Calculator asks you to compare your face to many, many pictures of clothes, and to notice whether or not those clothes flatter your face. Here are some tips to help you make that determination.
- Use a Happy, Forward-Facing Head Shot
When I analyze other people, I find that the type of picture used affects the results quite a bit. Over time, I've found I get the most accurate results with a happy face. I think this is because our best clothes complement our authentic selves, and our authentic selves are happy selves. "Happy face" doesn't have to mean an ear-to-ear grin, although it may; I suggest using the smile that you feel most flatters you.
It's important to use a photo of yourself looking directly into the camera. Most of us don't find this our favorite type of picture; we prefer ourselves at an angle. (I think that's because it narrows our jawline.) But a photo of a face at an angle distorts the dimensions of the face. A head-on photo reveals what you actually look like, and will give the most accurate results.
And do use a photo, not a mirror. Selfies are more trustworthy than a mirror; for some reason, it's much easier to objectively evaluate a frozen image of ourselves.
- Try to See Yourself Objectively
I hate to be yet another voice telling women not to trust their instincts! We get so much of that, don't we? Yet, for the sake of truthfulness, I have to say that many of us don't have an unerring instinct for what looks good on us. I suspect that most of us are drawn to color and style analysis because we realize we often aren't objective about ourselves.
Really seeing oneself is a challenge, absolutely. When you're able to do it, you're in a state of mind where you're viewing yourself rather dispassionately, as a visual image you're responding to on an aesthetic level, but not on a personal level, or with value judgments.
- Your Body Can Tell You When You're Seeing Beauty
The aesthetic reaction you're listening for inside yourself is a sense of liking or not-liking, attraction or lack of attraction. I personally sense this feeling in my chest: something in there warms and lifts when I'm seeing visual harmony.
To feel this reaction, you might try this: put your picture next to one garment that you're absolutely certain complements you. In another screen, put your picture next to a garment that you're certain is awful for you. Then flip back and forth. As you flip back and forth, pay attention to what changes inside you. You should notice a switch that goes on and off, or a feeling that flows and ebbs. *That's* the feeling you should have when you're seeing yourself next to your best clothes.
I also make a habit, if I'm feeling stuck, of going away from a picture for a day or so, then coming back to it. Seeing a picture with fresh eyes can help me notice my aesthetic reaction.
:-)
- Use a Happy, Forward-Facing Head Shot
When I analyze other people, I find that the type of picture used affects the results quite a bit. Over time, I've found I get the most accurate results with a happy face. I think this is because our best clothes complement our authentic selves, and our authentic selves are happy selves. "Happy face" doesn't have to mean an ear-to-ear grin, although it may; I suggest using the smile that you feel most flatters you.
It's important to use a photo of yourself looking directly into the camera. Most of us don't find this our favorite type of picture; we prefer ourselves at an angle. (I think that's because it narrows our jawline.) But a photo of a face at an angle distorts the dimensions of the face. A head-on photo reveals what you actually look like, and will give the most accurate results.
And do use a photo, not a mirror. Selfies are more trustworthy than a mirror; for some reason, it's much easier to objectively evaluate a frozen image of ourselves.
- Try to See Yourself Objectively
I hate to be yet another voice telling women not to trust their instincts! We get so much of that, don't we? Yet, for the sake of truthfulness, I have to say that many of us don't have an unerring instinct for what looks good on us. I suspect that most of us are drawn to color and style analysis because we realize we often aren't objective about ourselves.
Really seeing oneself is a challenge, absolutely. When you're able to do it, you're in a state of mind where you're viewing yourself rather dispassionately, as a visual image you're responding to on an aesthetic level, but not on a personal level, or with value judgments.
- Your Body Can Tell You When You're Seeing Beauty
The aesthetic reaction you're listening for inside yourself is a sense of liking or not-liking, attraction or lack of attraction. I personally sense this feeling in my chest: something in there warms and lifts when I'm seeing visual harmony.
To feel this reaction, you might try this: put your picture next to one garment that you're absolutely certain complements you. In another screen, put your picture next to a garment that you're certain is awful for you. Then flip back and forth. As you flip back and forth, pay attention to what changes inside you. You should notice a switch that goes on and off, or a feeling that flows and ebbs. *That's* the feeling you should have when you're seeing yourself next to your best clothes.
I also make a habit, if I'm feeling stuck, of going away from a picture for a day or so, then coming back to it. Seeing a picture with fresh eyes can help me notice my aesthetic reaction.
:-)
If you're a Bright Spring or a Bright Winter, you've probably been advised to go for super-shiny finishes and sparkly jewelry.
But if your style identity consists only of Natural, Dramatic, and/or Gamine, you know that these masculine essences ask for matte finishes. (Sparkly and glittery finishes read as feminine.)
How do you reconcile these two realities?
Bright seasons need, above all, an overall impression of brightness and high contrast. Blingy jewelry is of course one way to achieve that, but it's not the only way – – otherwise Bright season men, who generally very very little jewelry, would never be able to fully manifest their Bright selves! Right?
You can stick with matte and enamel finishes in your jewelry and still look amazingly Bright by focusing on value contrast (light-dark contrast) and color contrast in your clothes and accessories.
Here are some examples of women and men in Bright-looking ensembles with little or no shiny jewelry. I hope they inspire you!
But if your style identity consists only of Natural, Dramatic, and/or Gamine, you know that these masculine essences ask for matte finishes. (Sparkly and glittery finishes read as feminine.)
How do you reconcile these two realities?
Bright seasons need, above all, an overall impression of brightness and high contrast. Blingy jewelry is of course one way to achieve that, but it's not the only way – – otherwise Bright season men, who generally very very little jewelry, would never be able to fully manifest their Bright selves! Right?
You can stick with matte and enamel finishes in your jewelry and still look amazingly Bright by focusing on value contrast (light-dark contrast) and color contrast in your clothes and accessories.
Here are some examples of women and men in Bright-looking ensembles with little or no shiny jewelry. I hope they inspire you!
It can be hard to know which Style Identity category a given outfit falls into. Here are some unexpected questions you can ask yourself to help you narrow it down.
"Could I do a walking tour in this?"
The essence of Natural style is relaxation, freedom, and uninhibited movement. If an outfit is something you could wear for a walking tour of a hilly European city, it probably has a lot of Natural. Clothes you could comfortably take a nap in are also usually Natural.
"Could I do a walking tour in this?"
The essence of Natural style is relaxation, freedom, and uninhibited movement. If an outfit is something you could wear for a walking tour of a hilly European city, it probably has a lot of Natural. Clothes you could comfortably take a nap in are also usually Natural.
"Do I have an irresistible urge to touch this?"
Romantic fabrics often beg to be touched. This absolutely relates to the fact that Romantic style is the embodiment of feminine sexuality. If you can't wait to run your fingers across a fabric, chances are it's part of a Romantic ensemble.
Romantic fabrics often beg to be touched. This absolutely relates to the fact that Romantic style is the embodiment of feminine sexuality. If you can't wait to run your fingers across a fabric, chances are it's part of a Romantic ensemble.
"Does this scare me a little?"
Dramatic ensembles are avant-garde, outside the norm -- and we humans are naturally intimidated by stuff that's outside the norm. If an outfit makes you feel like taking a step backward, it likely has a strong Dramatic influence.
Dramatic ensembles are avant-garde, outside the norm -- and we humans are naturally intimidated by stuff that's outside the norm. If an outfit makes you feel like taking a step backward, it likely has a strong Dramatic influence.
"Can I imagine this on a girl in a Norman Rockwell painting?"
Ingenue style is an archetype of traditional girlishness. Almost anything that's Ingenue looks as if it emerged from a Norman Rockwell painting -- or from the closet of Sandy in "Grease." (Before her makeover at the end, LOL!)
Ingenue style is an archetype of traditional girlishness. Almost anything that's Ingenue looks as if it emerged from a Norman Rockwell painting -- or from the closet of Sandy in "Grease." (Before her makeover at the end, LOL!)
"Could a little boy wear this?"
Gamine style is boyish. If an ensemble looks like something a little boy could conceivably wear to school without raising eyebrows, it probably has a lot of Gamine.
Gamine style is boyish. If an ensemble looks like something a little boy could conceivably wear to school without raising eyebrows, it probably has a lot of Gamine.
"In a movie, would someone ascend into heaven wearing this outfit?"
That may sound ridiculous, but Ethereal styles make the wearer look as if she can take flight.
That may sound ridiculous, but Ethereal styles make the wearer look as if she can take flight.
"Would I wear this to my first day at my Wall Street job? (Or to the boss's barbecue the following weekend?)"
Whether formal or casual, Classic ensembles always look conservative and rich. In a Classic outfit, you'd never be embarrassed to run into the C.E.O. of your company. There's never anything attention-seeking, objectionable, or out of place in a Classic look. You're above reproach.
Whether formal or casual, Classic ensembles always look conservative and rich. In a Classic outfit, you'd never be embarrassed to run into the C.E.O. of your company. There's never anything attention-seeking, objectionable, or out of place in a Classic look. You're above reproach.
Not sure of your style identity? Try the Style Identity Calculator, or get a Virtual Analysis.
If your Style Identity consists solely of Natural Dramatic, and/or Gamine, and you've purchased your What Not To Wear guide, you've probably seen that your skirt no-no section is really long.
If you think about it, it makes sense -- all three of these essences are masculine, and, in our culture, skirts are iconically feminine garments.
So what skirts do you get to wear?
What I'm going to say next may sound weird, but it's really good advice to understand which skirts will look best on you:
Anything skirt-like that a man could pull off will probably work for you.
All around the world, throughout history and continuing today, men do wear skirt-like garments -- and they make them work!
If you think about it, it makes sense -- all three of these essences are masculine, and, in our culture, skirts are iconically feminine garments.
So what skirts do you get to wear?
What I'm going to say next may sound weird, but it's really good advice to understand which skirts will look best on you:
Anything skirt-like that a man could pull off will probably work for you.
All around the world, throughout history and continuing today, men do wear skirt-like garments -- and they make them work!
Dramatic, Natural, and Gamine women, men's skirt shapes are our skirt shapes.
Now, I know that this may be a difficult idea for some of us to accept, because we want to feel pretty, and we are invested in the idea that pretty = feminine.
But it's my goal to destigmatize "masculinity" for women, so that we can accurately acknowledge those features in ourselves.
In style analysis, see, "masculine" and "feminine" are not two discrete groups at opposite poles of a binary.
Instead, there are "masculine" features and "feminine" features.
Many, but not all, men have predominantly "masculine" features.
Many, but not all, women have predominantly "feminine" features.
Most of us have some of both. And we look awesome!
Check out models: the most gorgeous female models often have a lot of masculinity in their features, and the most gorgeous male models often have a lot of femininity.
  |   |
If you're a strongly Natural, Dramatic, or Gamine woman, you have masculine elements in your appearance. Own it and love it! :-)
- - - - - - - - - -
Anyway... for us women with a lot of Natural, Dramatic, or Gamine, the skirts that complement "masculine" features are the skirts that will look great on us.
- - - - - - - - - -
Anyway... for us women with a lot of Natural, Dramatic, or Gamine, the skirts that complement "masculine" features are the skirts that will look great on us.
So, what features define "men's" skirts?
Masculine skirts are almost always very straight, sharp-cornered, and simple.
Masculine skirts are almost always very straight, sharp-cornered, and simple.
Masculine skirts are usually very long, which fits wiith the fact that Dramatic and Natural are elongated essences. They can occasionally be very short, and very short skirts work for both Naturals and Gamines.
 |  |
The outline of a masculine skirt will always resemble a rectangle, square, or trapezoid.
If there is draping, it's elongated and subtle. If there are gathers, they are similarly subtle -- there's never a bouffant effect at the hips. And if there are pleats, they are large and sharp, like kilt pleats.
If there is draping, it's elongated and subtle. If there are gathers, they are similarly subtle -- there's never a bouffant effect at the hips. And if there are pleats, they are large and sharp, like kilt pleats.
Masculine skirts are typically low in detail.
It seems clear to me that humans all over the earth independently arrived at the same conclusion: straight lines and minimalism flatter masculine features. Interesting, isn't it? I believe this aesthetic response is hard-wired.
It seems clear to me that humans all over the earth independently arrived at the same conclusion: straight lines and minimalism flatter masculine features. Interesting, isn't it? I believe this aesthetic response is hard-wired.
Not sure of your style identity? Try the Style Identity Calculator, or consider a virtual analysis.
Over the years, so many of you have asked for shopping guides for each of the 63 Style Identities.
I have been working on them for a long time.
Finally, I am ready to offer them to you.
Each of these multi-page guide tells you which specific items you should look for when you shop.
It includes sections for wardrobe essentials such as tops, pants, skirts, dresses, sweaters, and shoes.
It also includes sections for special items such as hats, bags, jewelry, and swimwear.
In addition, I describe what you should look for in fit, fabrics, waist treatment, prints, shapes, and use of color.
It's comprehensive!
I will be sending these out beginning November 1st.
I'm offering them for $24.99.
But if you pre-order today, you'll get yours for $19.99.
I'm so excited to finally offer a tool that provides visual examples of how to wear your Style Identity!
The Style Identity Calculator helped you figure out your Style Identity.
But it can be difficult to know how to translate that Style ID into an ensemble each morning.
The new Visual Style Guides help solve that problem.
Each guide shows three different women dressed as your Style Identity. Annotations explain each element of the ensemble.
The Style Identity Calculator helped you figure out your Style Identity.
But it can be difficult to know how to translate that Style ID into an ensemble each morning.
The new Visual Style Guides help solve that problem.
Each guide shows three different women dressed as your Style Identity. Annotations explain each element of the ensemble.
Detail of the Ethereal Dramatic guide.
The guide is a one-page PDF, so you can print it and hang it in your dressing area, and also pull it up on your phone when you're shopping.
You deserve this!
(A thoughtful and affordable holiday gift idea: Analyze your loved ones with the Style Identity Calculator, and then surprise them with a Visual Style Guide.)
You deserve this!
(A thoughtful and affordable holiday gift idea: Analyze your loved ones with the Style Identity Calculator, and then surprise them with a Visual Style Guide.)
I want to introduce the seven pure style identities by starting with Dramatics.
People whose style identity is purely Dramatic create an overall visual impression of dignity, intensity, and theatricality.
They may remind us of big cats, or birds of prey.
People whose style identity is purely Dramatic create an overall visual impression of dignity, intensity, and theatricality.
They may remind us of big cats, or birds of prey.
 |
The physical features in a woman that tend to create this impression include:
- A narrow body that's tall (often over 5'8")
- Sharp-edged bone structure
- A long or narrow face
- Prominent cheekbones
- A long or prominent nose
- Tilted or feline eyes
- Close-set eyes
- Thin lips
- A sharp jawline
- Extreme, unexpected or vivid coloring
- Erect, dignified posture
- An aloof or intense manner
But don't get wrapped up in trying to figure out the style essence of each discrete body part.
In other words, it's not about whether or not your nose is Dramatic.
It's about whether your overall impression - the gestalt of your parts and manner - is unusual, intense, and even intimidating.
Dramatic energy is generally called "yang" energy. Belle Northrup originated this use in the 1930s, I suspect because she sensed women wouldn't want to identify with an energy described as "masculine."
But can we get real here and cut the euphemisms for a moment?
Dramatic women look masculine.
And they are stunning.
 Brigitte Nielsen |  Jenny Shimizu |
 Grace Jones |  Anjelica Huston |
Dramatics look good in sharp-edged, man-tailored clothes because those clothes repeat the stunning masculine beauty of the physical appearance.
Now, Dramatic woman, this doesn't mean that your personality is masculine or theatrical or intense. The idea that appearance = personality is bull***.
Inside, you might be a wallflower, or a fairy princess, or a clown.
 Cher |  Alek Wek |
When there's a contrast between the truth of your exterior and the truth of your interior, the contradiction just makes getting to know you even more delightful.
* * * *
If you're a Dramatic, you probably look great with your hair pulled back severely from your incredible face.
If you're a Dramatic, you probably look great when you're not smiling.
If you're a Dramatic, we can probably see your cheekbones even when you're not smiling.
Pure Dramatics don't look innocent.
Pure Dramatics don't look traditionally sexy, though they are gorgeous. Their eyes don't say "Come hither;" they say "Watch out."
Pure Dramatics don't come across as approachable. (Though they might be the sweetest people you'll ever meet.)
Pure Dramatics are, by all accounts, rare. Please let me know if you can think of some.
:-)
Update:
I've given copies of the tool to about a hundred people. I'm not giving away any more at this point; I need to take a day or two to read all of the excellent feedback I've received and use it to improve the tool.
I know a lot of people still want it! The good news is, I currently intend to offer it at a price point that most of you will find very reasonable.
Stay tuned!
I have been attempting to flesh out definable archetypes for three-way style identities.
Initially, I thought it would be impossible. But I'm actually finding it very doable.
For example, I'm thinking of Romantic-Ethereal-Classic as "Elegant Aphrodite."
Other examples of three-way combo archetypes in progress:
Romantic-Natural-Classic = "Alluring L.L. Bean."
Dramatic-Gamine-Ingenue = "Girlish Punk Rocker."
Classic-Gamine-Ingenue = "Darling Prep Schooler, a.k.a. Cher from 'Clueless.' "
My Pinterest boards for each three-way combo are still secret, but I aim to make them public soon. When I do, I'll add info about the trifold combos to this site.
In total, we'll have 63 style identity options:
7 pure essences + 21 doubles + 35 triples.
Do you have ideas about particular three-essence archetypes? Share them in the comments!
Edited to add:
I've made all of the above-mentioned Pinterest boards public. You can see them here:
https://www.pinterest.com/coloranalysis/
Initially, I thought it would be impossible. But I'm actually finding it very doable.
For example, I'm thinking of Romantic-Ethereal-Classic as "Elegant Aphrodite."
Other examples of three-way combo archetypes in progress:
Romantic-Natural-Classic = "Alluring L.L. Bean."
Dramatic-Gamine-Ingenue = "Girlish Punk Rocker."
Classic-Gamine-Ingenue = "Darling Prep Schooler, a.k.a. Cher from 'Clueless.' "
My Pinterest boards for each three-way combo are still secret, but I aim to make them public soon. When I do, I'll add info about the trifold combos to this site.
In total, we'll have 63 style identity options:
7 pure essences + 21 doubles + 35 triples.
Do you have ideas about particular three-essence archetypes? Share them in the comments!
Edited to add:
I've made all of the above-mentioned Pinterest boards public. You can see them here:
https://www.pinterest.com/coloranalysis/
This is an excellent tool if you already know what looks good on you, but you don't know how that translates into a coherent Style ID.
It's also great for analyzing friends, family, and celebs.
To use it, you'll need internet access and a PC with Microsoft Excel.
The Style ID Calculator was fantastic! Turns out I'm a Natural-Ingénue-Classic. - R.G.
It's also great for analyzing friends, family, and celebs.
To use it, you'll need internet access and a PC with Microsoft Excel.
The Style ID Calculator was fantastic! Turns out I'm a Natural-Ingénue-Classic. - R.G.
About Me...
I'm passionate about helping people become their most authentic and beautiful selves.
I'm a Soft Autumn and an Ethereal Natural. Find out your color season and style type!
Categories
All
Bright-spring-color
Bright Spring Colors
Bright Winter Colors
Celebrities
Classic Style
Color Analysis
Color Analysis Theory
Dark Autumn Colors
Dark Winter Colors
Dramatic Style
Ethereal Style
Figuring Out Your Season
Fragrances
Gamine Style
Hair
Ingenue Style
Jewelry
Light Spring Colors
Light Summer Colors
Makeup
Men
Natural Style
Romantic Style
Soft Autumn Colors
Soft Summer Colors
Style Types
True Autumn Colors
True Spring Colors
True Summer Colors
True Winter Colors
Videos
RSS Feed