Category Archives: Aesthetics

UPDATE III: Beauty And The Beast (The Cranium)

Aesthetics, Celebrity, Hollywood, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Sarah Palin

Purely from an aesthetic point of view, Julianne Moore has no business playing Sarah Palin. I thought the idea of film was mimicry—be as true as possible to the reality portrayed (that was, admittedly, before activism replaced acting). Moore is unattractive, an attractive version of Sarah Ferguson, the Duchess of York.

Moore, moreover, looks like she suffers Flat Head Syndrome or Plagiocephaly. The head at the back is flat, the forehead slopes, the mouth—the entire face—is unbelievably weak. The eyes are lifeless. The hair is okay. That’s all. As for her acting; she’s merely passable.

Whatever your opinion of Sarah Palin, it is undeniable that she is a beauty, who has become better looking with age. Her head and face are beautifully shaped. Her jaw is well-sculpted. Her brow is lovely. The nose: wonderful; the eyes alive. I’m not a fan of her political appearances, but in physicality, Palin is stunning. What’s more, hers is a strong face. Moore’s is a weak mug.

See for yourself.

The beauty:

And the beast:

UPDATE I (March 15): George, about the linked tribute to Moore’s eyes (she ain’t a beautiful woman): This is an airbrushed, well made-up image. Most women can look good under photo-shop. And if you want the greenest, most glorious eyes that never needed falsies and eye-shadow, I would think Vivien Leigh was your lady. Here is that goddess in the masterpiece, “Gone With the Wind”:

I took it down to Moore’s cranium; her badly shaped head and weak face. The skin is nothing to write home about either. Sarah has a glorious skin. You can scrub Palin’s face clean, and yes, as all woman who wear make-up will tell you—you will not recognize her. But you’ll still see a fine bone structure. Moore happens to be a scumbag, who made such disparaging comments about Palin’s vacuity that one would think she, Moore, were some brainiac herself. Palin has mastered the intricacies of energy production and policy, to which I have always thought she should have stuck. Moore is a left-liberal scumbag who can’t think beyond leftist sloganeering. Nothing like her insipid face to remind one why Hollywood left-liberals are always and everywhere the enemy. On the other hand, Kardashian is a plain, apolitical idiot, but the girl has wonderful eyes, and glorious hair and skin. Just being objective about aesthetics here.

What is wrong with the men on this blog? Can’t you see the passion and life in the eyes of the two, non-Moore women? Can’t you see the dead, fish-eyes of The Moore?

UPDATE II: Posted below is a prime example of The Cranium. The chin; that forehead. Oy! Awful!

UPDATE III (March 16): My thoughts EXACTLY, Nick! Jodie Foster is a classic beauty and a good actress. Those strong featured; the eyes. To die for. Have you seen her in “The Brave One”? Unbelievable.

UPDATED: Slimy Sex Trail Leads to Chicago

Aesthetics, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Morality, Politics, Pop-Culture, Propaganda, Racism, Republicans, Sex

Ann Coulter provides some good shoe-leather reporting, absent from US mainstream media, as she tracks the slimy trail of Herman Cain’s accusers back to … Chicago. And, if you want the exact GPS (Global Positioning System) coordinates, the breadcrumbs lead straight to “David Axelrod’s apartment building at 505 North Lake Shore Drive,” where “Cain’s latest accuser, Sharon Bialekhe” resided.

What does it say about the workplace that someone who looks and sounds as Bialekhe does has held respectable position’s in various industries? And she’s only 50; so ugly and lined despite all the obvious plastic panel beating her face has endured. In answer to the question of how to stay young, I always reply: When you get to your late 40s, what’s inside begins to manifest on the outside. You can’t hide ugly insides.

UPDATE: The Real Rush has it that the media’s extra-hideous attack on Cain is because, “Herman [is] Cain more of a threat than the other GOP contenders: He could win. So, neither the Obama administration, the Democrat National Committee, nor the liberal GOP leadership wants him to secure the Republican nomination. Blacks would vote for him. The guilted white fools who voted for Obama would vote for him. Conservatives would vote for him. Evangelical Christians would vote for him. Is there anyone left?

Sure there is. But you get the picture: With Cain versus Obama, it’s Cain in a landslide.”

MORE.

UPDATED: Princess Ameerah Al-Taweel

Aesthetics, Business, Celebrity, Classical Liberalism, Economy, Etiquette, Feminism, Free Markets, Islam, Middle East

Is Princess Ameerah Al-Taweel the most beautiful woman in the world? Indisputably. Her face is simply exquisite. Poise and manners are perfect too. Mrs. Al-Taweel’s simple, rich-girl solutions to endemic unemployment sound more left-liberal than classically liberal, but her heart is pure and she is bright. Married to “Buffett of Arabia,” Ameerah Al-Taweel is also terrifically wealthy. I hope she does not pick up any ho-like mannerisms while in America.

Ameerah Al-Taweel’s Interview With CNN’s Piers Morgan

UPDATE (Sept. 25): It would seem that Princess Al-Taweel is a “micro-credit cultist.” The role of the NGO, as she see it, is to encourage economic growth by doling out loans to plucky people who want to start a business. Her belief in the “Micro-Credit Cult” is understandable. Saudi Arabia is a rentier state, where an aristocratic, authoritarian upper-class manages the country’s vast natural resource of oil. In the Saudi situation, this custodian class is probably more benevolent than a democratic despotism would be.

UPDATE II: Jackie Kennedy: enchantress (Style & Substance)

Aesthetics, America, Art, Critique, Etiquette, History, Human Accomplishment, Music, The State

Jacqueline Kennedy’s dowdy daughter Caroline Kennedy has released “never-before-heard audio recordings of interviews conducted with the former first lady in 1964, shortly after her husband’s assassination,” together with a book, “Jacqueline Kennedy: Historic Conversations on Life With John F. Kennedy.” We know Jackie Kennedy for her style, sophistication, sense of history, and love and knowledge of music and art. We now know something about her well-formulated opinions and astute observations, delivered in dulcet tones and exquisite English. (The other day I used “hermetically sealed,” which was common usage when I was, well, much younger. My husband wanted to know why I was using a term used in engineering!)

Discussions with the late historian Arthur Schlesinger reveal Jackie to be not only a dazzling conversationalist, but a forceful, if ever-so feminine personae.

Especially appreciated is Jacqueline Kennedy’s opinion about the sainted Martin Luther King (whose real worldview I discuss briefly—and unfavorably—in my book). All the more so given how irreverent she is in coming out and dissing a legend in the making. PC was not an issue back then. My book also quotes Kennedy on affirmative action: the man was conservative as few conservatives are today.

From a performance of Pablo Casals in the White House to Beyonce’s bump and grind: how far we’ve fallen. To be fair, Bush was also without class and culture.

UPDATE I (Sept. 16): STYLE & SUBSTANCE. Myron Pauli: Like many a libertarian, you refuse to address issues of culture. A comment such as mine, dealing with an impressive, classy lady—Jackie was certainly mistreated by her husband, but never responded like a tawdry tart, as is the custom nowadays—is reduced to the problem of statism. In a universe in which everything is reduced to the state, is there any place for observations about culture, human accomplishment, personality, etc?

I suggest to you that things would not be so bad if more women today had the class and classical education of a Jackie O. At the very least, women with a similar frame of reference would not feel so obsolete and voiceless.

UPDATE II: “Go, Jackie,” writes Lew Rockwell:

Funny how the media are trotting out Mrs. Kennedy’s daughter, Caroline, to try to smooth over her mother’s taped views: that LBJ was an integral part of the assassination plot (of course, but not mentioned in this article), that she didn’t admire Martin Luther King, FDR, or Churchill, that she rejected feminism, etc.