The term `plastic surgery` is full of curiosity. There are a couple of possible different meanings it could be invoking. Probably in some sort of slippery way, I'm sure, at least two of these are implied in this common phrase. I'm thinking of the sense of plastic as an actual chemical product, but also "plastic" in the slang jargon of our time, referring to something as cosmetic, artificial or even phony.
Plastic, the chemically derived product, certainly is used often enough for such surgeries. Defining the surgery in this way is though a bit dubious, as it is not the ideal material. Skin grafts taken from other parts of the body are the preferred option when possible. So this name is a little misleading.
And, as to plastic in the aesthetic or ethical sense, the truth is that most reconstructive surgery is not even cosmetic. But there is something about the association of such surgery to the celebrities trying to hang onto their glamour and appeal that leads so many of us to thoughtlessly let the description roll glibly off the tongue. Perhaps it is something like this subtle disapproval of the celebrities that use it that explains the widespread fascination with examples of celebrity plastic surgery gone wrong.
We are certainly intrigued by the picture of the charmed who have fallen from grace; the rich who apparently are unable to find or maybe even afford a competent surgeon; the beautiful who paid the price for their deal with the Lucifer's scalpel. As though there is some subliminal retribution for the years of our admiration and sense of inferiority. The tables are suddenly turned and the beautiful now have become mere frogs. Princes and princesses into frogs, the fairy tale in reverse. So seems to be the comeuppance for celebrities and a faint sense of redemption and vindication for many of us who have viewed them from afar.
Or, you might want to think of it another way, slightly more stylized: those who have lived by the charms of beauty shall die by the charms of beauty. You understand we're speaking metaphorically, here! Surely though at some level, even if only unconscious, there is some kind of poetic justice being relished.
But wait, consider a further possibility. Maybe there's something even more sinister and dark at the heart of it all. This possibility was brought to mind recently when recalling that popular FX television show of the beginning of the century, Nip/Tuck. If you're unfamiliar with it (shame on you), it told the story of a couple of superstar plastic surgeons to the rich, famous and beautiful. Interestingly, though, the pilot episode of that show was not focused on the rich, famous or beautiful, but rather on a mercy mission to save a man with a horribly disfigured face.
The episode though took a surprising turn at the end. Only once the surgery was completed did the protagonist surgeons discover that their patient was a pedophile. Without any realization of the consequences of their actions, they eliminated the one natural obstacle that had previously hindered his capacity to draw children into his influence. It was indeed a dark and striking choice for the pilot show of a series that would focus so much on the beauty-pursuit of the rich, famous and handsome.
I find myself wondering if that story captures some primordial suspicion about plastic surgery: do we suspect, even if only unconsciously, that such surgery is an exercise in duplicity? Is something that is true, yet darker, being concealed? Even possibly something sinister? It may well be that the fascination with celebrity plastic surgery gone wrong does tap into just these kind of primordial suspicions. The dark intuition that a deep ugliness is being concealed. That the princess or prince has always been a frog and only now we have the opportunity to see the truth. And someone is trying to hide the truth.
Maybe I`m just making a lot out of nothing, but it is a thought worth contemplating. Might the fascination with celebrity plastic surgery gone wrong say something about the very concept of celebrity and about us.
Plastic, the chemically derived product, certainly is used often enough for such surgeries. Defining the surgery in this way is though a bit dubious, as it is not the ideal material. Skin grafts taken from other parts of the body are the preferred option when possible. So this name is a little misleading.
And, as to plastic in the aesthetic or ethical sense, the truth is that most reconstructive surgery is not even cosmetic. But there is something about the association of such surgery to the celebrities trying to hang onto their glamour and appeal that leads so many of us to thoughtlessly let the description roll glibly off the tongue. Perhaps it is something like this subtle disapproval of the celebrities that use it that explains the widespread fascination with examples of celebrity plastic surgery gone wrong.
We are certainly intrigued by the picture of the charmed who have fallen from grace; the rich who apparently are unable to find or maybe even afford a competent surgeon; the beautiful who paid the price for their deal with the Lucifer's scalpel. As though there is some subliminal retribution for the years of our admiration and sense of inferiority. The tables are suddenly turned and the beautiful now have become mere frogs. Princes and princesses into frogs, the fairy tale in reverse. So seems to be the comeuppance for celebrities and a faint sense of redemption and vindication for many of us who have viewed them from afar.
Or, you might want to think of it another way, slightly more stylized: those who have lived by the charms of beauty shall die by the charms of beauty. You understand we're speaking metaphorically, here! Surely though at some level, even if only unconscious, there is some kind of poetic justice being relished.
But wait, consider a further possibility. Maybe there's something even more sinister and dark at the heart of it all. This possibility was brought to mind recently when recalling that popular FX television show of the beginning of the century, Nip/Tuck. If you're unfamiliar with it (shame on you), it told the story of a couple of superstar plastic surgeons to the rich, famous and beautiful. Interestingly, though, the pilot episode of that show was not focused on the rich, famous or beautiful, but rather on a mercy mission to save a man with a horribly disfigured face.
The episode though took a surprising turn at the end. Only once the surgery was completed did the protagonist surgeons discover that their patient was a pedophile. Without any realization of the consequences of their actions, they eliminated the one natural obstacle that had previously hindered his capacity to draw children into his influence. It was indeed a dark and striking choice for the pilot show of a series that would focus so much on the beauty-pursuit of the rich, famous and handsome.
I find myself wondering if that story captures some primordial suspicion about plastic surgery: do we suspect, even if only unconsciously, that such surgery is an exercise in duplicity? Is something that is true, yet darker, being concealed? Even possibly something sinister? It may well be that the fascination with celebrity plastic surgery gone wrong does tap into just these kind of primordial suspicions. The dark intuition that a deep ugliness is being concealed. That the princess or prince has always been a frog and only now we have the opportunity to see the truth. And someone is trying to hide the truth.
Maybe I`m just making a lot out of nothing, but it is a thought worth contemplating. Might the fascination with celebrity plastic surgery gone wrong say something about the very concept of celebrity and about us.
About the Author:
The Celebrity Plastic Surgery Gone Wrong promo YouTube video is stirring up all kinds of controversy.
