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.
And, indeed, it could be put another way, slightly more stylized. For, at the point of such distressing surgical outcomes, one might well intone that those who live by beauty shall die by beauty. Metaphorically speaking, you understand! This may well be the ultimate poetic justice.
But before we can say the final word on these gloomy reflections, consider a further possibility. Consider in fact if there may well not be something still darker and even more sinister. I first started pondering this scenario when recalling the popular FX television show that had a nice run last decade: Nip/Tuck. It is the story of a couple of superstar plastic surgeons, serving the rich, glamorous and gorgeous. However, the intriguing thing for me about this show is that the pilot episode was not focused on the pampered and prime clientele, but rather on a mercy mission to surgically save an unfortunate man with a 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.
And, indeed, it could be put another way, slightly more stylized. For, at the point of such distressing surgical outcomes, one might well intone that those who live by beauty shall die by beauty. Metaphorically speaking, you understand! This may well be the ultimate poetic justice.
But before we can say the final word on these gloomy reflections, consider a further possibility. Consider in fact if there may well not be something still darker and even more sinister. I first started pondering this scenario when recalling the popular FX television show that had a nice run last decade: Nip/Tuck. It is the story of a couple of superstar plastic surgeons, serving the rich, glamorous and gorgeous. However, the intriguing thing for me about this show is that the pilot episode was not focused on the pampered and prime clientele, but rather on a mercy mission to surgically save an unfortunate man with a 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:
Mickey Jhonny, in addition to contributing to Celebrity Plastic Surgery Gone Wrong, also writes for the blog Celebrities with Eating Disorders. To see his most recent article, click here .
No comments:
Post a Comment