“素顏風(fēng)潮”席卷時尚娛樂界，各大娛樂時尚雜志紛紛以明星“素顏”出鏡為賣點。繼法國版《Elle》雜志2009年4月號的主題“鉛華洗盡”之后，美國版《Harper’s Bazaar》2009年9月號亦策劃了一期名為“實實在在的美麗”的主題。這場“素顏革命”引發(fā)的不僅僅是對“本色回歸”的討論，更是滿足了眾看客的偷窺欲——鉛華褪盡，明星還美麗嗎?會不會如狗仔隊偷拍的那些“妝后”照片那樣，讓人既驚又喜?——驚于化妝技術(shù)之高超，喜于明星也并非美得無懈可擊。其實，無論是天然雕飾下，出水芙蓉般的素顏，抑或是濃墨重彩下，堪與桃花相映紅的俏顏，真正讓時尚娛樂界為之傾倒的，是名叫“美麗”的東西。

——Mac

1)Elle’s no makeup issue， an all-black issue of 2)Vogue， a shift toward healthier runway models and a demand for older models 3)evince the fundamental changes underway in the beauty industry.

April’s issue of French Elle featured eight well-known European stars without makeup or retouching. The Stars Without Makeup issue embraces the beauty of the women without their makeup， rather than pointing out their flaws， as is common practice in U.S. 4)tabloids.

But the claims of “no 5)airbrushing，” “no makeup，” or “no photoshopping” are not without controversy. Claiming to feature models without makeup or 6)touch-ups can 7)put advertisers in the hot seat if doubts arise. As for the stars without makeup issue of French Elle， the political blogger Matthew Yglesias expressed his point: “In some ways， I think this might actually be a step back.”

“A lot of people have done a lot of work over the years to get people to understand that images you see on magazine covers are not images of actual human beings. They’re complicated collaborations between photographers， hairstylists， makeup people， and digital image-retouchers that use real people as an important element of source material. The results have an extremely vivid8)hyperreal quality to them that we intuitively respond to as if we’re just looking at pictures of people， but we can come to understand what’s really happening and that nobody ought to 9)beat themselves up over not looking like a computer-retouched image.” He writes in his blog.

The fact remains that we are living in an incredibly visual culture， and the majority of visuals we’re bombarded with continue to be of “perfect，” 10)unblemished women who have11)lucked out in the genetic lottery department and have been worked on by a team of experts: A trainer， a 12)dermatologist， a makeup artist， a hair stylist， a photographer with assistants in lighting， a photo editor to choose the best shot and an art team to digitally 13)manipulate that picture into the “image” that ends up being printed. So how is showing “stars without makeup”—and not in a cruel， tabloidy way—a step back? Isn’t any opportunity to question the 14)artifice we’re subject to a step forward?

Of course， then there’s the question of what the viewers， really want out of a magazine. While the ladies on French Elle are indeed beautiful without makeup， would you still be interested in the magazine if they were not pleasing to the eye? Don’t we require our “stars” to indeed be “heavenly”—more beautiful than we are， with fewer flaws and that certain something that sets them apart? Otherwise， why are they stars? Why 15)elevate them?

Yglesias writes， “At a time when public awareness of the fakeness of magazine covers is growing， we get a new artifice presented as 16)unadorned reality.” But certainly we’re aware that French Elle’s “reality”—stars without makeup—is not a feat of 17)photojournalism or a documentary. It’s still a fashion magazine. But in the context of other， more manipulative publications， it does 18)shake things up. And think about this: If all magazines suddenly did away with artifice， would you miss it? Do you open a 19)glossy magazine hoping to see glamour， stunning makeup and 20)sumptuous clothes? How much more “real” are you actually willing to get?

Tabloids in the States love pointing out 21)cellulite on 22)candid photos of celebrities at the beach， and most magazine covers feature heavily made-up， heavily airbrushed photos of models or celebrities. But the attitude of U.S. consumers may be on the move toward a more realistic model and star.

23)Baby Boomers in the United States have changed the type of models in demand， looking for faces and bodies in advertising that more accurately reflect their own self-image. Models such as 24)Naomi Campbell (39)， 25)Christy Turlington (40) and26)Claudia Schiffer (38) are preferred to 20-somethings for campaigns aimed at more mature women.

With retouching once a very expensive last resort option， it is now commonplace in the fashion world. But more and more stars have chosen to pose without the security blanket of makeup or retouching. In 2009 People Magazine did an entire photo feature of celebrities looking great without makeup; some stars were invited to do the photoshoot without makeup: 27)Eva Mendes， 28)Cindy Crawford， 29)Claire Danes and 30)Amanda Bynes.

As one of the stars invited to the photoshoot， Crawford， the supermodel says “I think 10 years ago it would have been harder for me to do this picture. But as I’ve gotten older and my life has changed， I wear less makeup. I’m just more comfortable with myself now. My husband gives me confidence， too， because I don’t feel like I have to put makeup on to look beautiful to him. And my kids don’t like makeup at all because when I put it on， they think I’m going to work. To me， a bad face day means a bad night’s sleep. Even makeup does not make you feel better.”

《Elle》雜志有一期專題為“鉛華洗盡”，《Vogue》雜志出了一期只用黑人做模特的“全黑”號，外形更健康的T臺模特日益受寵，大齡模特也有市場，所有這一切都表明，時尚產(chǎn)業(yè)出現(xiàn)根本轉(zhuǎn)變。

法國版《Elle》雜志四月號專題是拍攝八位著名歐洲女星的素顏，并且沒有對她們的照片做任何潤飾，這期“鉛華洗盡”展現(xiàn)的是女性的素顏美，而不是像美國小報的一貫做法——直指她們的瑕疵。

但是“不加潤色修飾”、“素顏”或者“不用電腦PS”這些主張，并不是沒有爭議的。如果對模特“素顏”或“零潤色”上鏡的主張的質(zhì)疑聲音響起，那么廣告商就會如坐針氈。對于法國版《Elle》該期“鉛華洗盡”的主題，政評博客主馬修·依格雷西亞斯評論道:“從某些方面看，我覺得這實際上很可能是一種倒退。”

“這些年來，很多人做了大量努力讓大眾明白雜志封面上的人物形象并非真實的人像。這些雜志上的人物形象都是攝影師、發(fā)型師、化妝師和電腦修圖高手以真人為原始素材，經(jīng)過繁復(fù)的合作而創(chuàng)造出來的成果。這些成果對他們來說都具有極度逼真的超現(xiàn)實感，而我們也直觀地認為我們看到的就是人物相片，但是我們還能認識到照片背后的故事，明白到我們不應(yīng)該因為自己的外貌不如這些電腦潤色過的形象那樣靚麗而自責(zé)?！币栏窭孜鱽喫乖谧约旱牟┛屠锶缡菍懙馈?/p>

事實依然如此:我們生活在一種強大的視覺文化里，而在每天轟炸我們視覺的影像中，絕大部分的女性形象仍是“完美”、“零瑕疵”的。這些女性本來就是在基因方面中了頭彩的幸運兒，“天生麗質(zhì)”之外還有一組為其修飾的專家:私人健身教練、皮膚專家、化妝師、發(fā)型師、攝影師和數(shù)名燈光助理、能挑選出最佳相片的圖片編輯，還有利用數(shù)碼技術(shù)把相片修飾成最終刊登在出版物上的“完美形象”的美編組。那么，怎可以說展現(xiàn)明星素顏的一面——并非以小報的那種殘酷的展現(xiàn)方式——是一種倒退呢?對我們一直屈從的這種“人工修飾”的手段提出質(zhì)疑，這何以不算是個進步?

當(dāng)然，還要考慮到觀眾到底想從雜志中得到什么。無可否認，法國版《Elle》上的那些素面朝天的明星確實漂亮，但是如果這些明星一點都不賞心悅目，那么你還會有興趣看這本雜志嗎?我們不是都要求明星“美若天仙”——比我們更美，瑕疵更少，且有某些方面使她們與眾不同嗎?否則，為什么她們能夠當(dāng)明星?為什么要捧她們?

依格雷西亞斯寫道:“當(dāng)公眾越來越覺得雜志封面很虛假的時候，我們看到了一種展示“真實”，對圖片不加修飾的新手段?！比欢?，我們當(dāng)然還是知道那期法國版《Elle》展現(xiàn)的“真相”——素顏女星——跟圖片新聞或者文獻紀(jì)錄的不一樣。它依然是一本時尚雜志。但是從其他方面來看，與其他大加修飾的刊物對比，這期《Elle》確實有震撼力。再想想:如果所有的雜志都突然不用修飾技術(shù)了，你會不會懷念以前的雜志?當(dāng)你翻開一本服裝雜志時，是否會希望看到美艷的妝容和奢華的衣服?你到底能接受多“真實”的形象?

美國的小報都喜歡刊登明星在海邊被偷拍的照片，對他們身上的一團團贅肉指指點點，而大多數(shù)雜志都采用濃妝艷抹的模特或明星經(jīng)過電腦潤飾的照片做封面。但是美國的消費者可能漸漸傾向于更真實的模特和明星。

美國二戰(zhàn)后“嬰兒潮”時期出生的一代人改變了市場對模特類型的需求，他們在廣告里尋找著能夠更真實反映他們自我形象的人物。對于面向成熟女性的廣告活動，納奧米·坎貝爾(39歲)、克里斯蒂·特林頓(40歲)和克勞蒂亞·雪佛(38歲)這些模特比那些二十來歲的模特更吃香。

用電腦來潤色修飾，從前因價格高昂而作為“最后的選擇”的這項技術(shù)，現(xiàn)在在時尚界已經(jīng)非常普及。但是越來越多的明星選擇舍棄“化妝”這種讓形象具有安全性的方式，也不要電腦潤色。2009年的《人物》雜志刊登了一系列的名人主題照片，這些照片上的名人不施脂粉仍漂亮悅目。被邀請拍這一組素顏照的明星包括:伊娃·門德斯、辛迪·克勞馥、克萊爾·丹斯，以及阿曼達·拜恩斯。

超級模特克勞馥也是被邀請拍照的明星之一，她說:“我想要是十年前的話，讓我拍這種照片比較難。但是隨著年齡的增長和生活的改變，我的妝沒有那么濃了。現(xiàn)在我對真實的自己感覺更加舒服。丈夫也給了我信心，因為我不會覺得我必須化妝他才會覺得我漂亮。而且我的孩子也一點都不喜歡我化妝，因為我化妝，他們會以為我要外出工作。對我來說，夜晚睡眠質(zhì)量不好就意味著早上臉色不佳，即使化妝也不會讓你感覺好起來?！?/p>