The term `plastic surgery` is an interesting one. It can be taken a couple of different ways and, indeed, probably in some sort of slippery semantic sense both ideas are implied. Referred to here is both the sense of plastic as an actual material produced by the chemical industry, but also plastic in the colloquial sense as fake, artificial or even phony.
As a general rule, though the chemically based material called plastic is used, plastic isn`t really so much the ideal ingredient. Skin grafts from other parts of the body generally provide a better effect. So its not inaccurate to call it plastic surgery in this sense, it is a little misleading.
The persistent popularity of that idea, though, probably has something to do with the more insidious implications of the other meaning of the term plastic applied to such surgery. Yet, the truth is that most reconstructive surgery is not done for cosmetic reasons. And yet, somehow, the notion lingers. Something about the association of such surgery to celebrities perceived as clinging on to past beauty and glamour draws so many of us to a judgment which invites the term to roll glibly off the tongue. A kind of subtle disapproval pervades the use of this term, as we raise a leery eyebrow in regard of those celebrities that employ such surgical methods. When we observe celebrity plastic surgery gone wrong we're seeing more than just the outcome of a failed operating procedure.
So intriguing is the picture of the powerful who have fallen; the wealthy seemingly unable to find or afford a competent surgeon; the gorgeous who paid the price for their deal with the devil's scalpel. It's almost as though we enjoy some vindication for the years of feeling our inferiority compared to their glamour and charisma. When the tables are suddenly turned those whose beauty once made us look like geeks now has them looking like frogs. A reverse fairy tale, princes and princesses into frogs. There almost seems to be something redeeming in it for us.
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 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 punch line, if you will, was that it was only after the surgery was complete that the surgeons learned that their patient was in fact a pedophile. They had unwittingly eliminated the one obstacle to his capacity to lure innocent children into his devices. It was an interesting choice for a first episode in a series that would primarily indeed focus on the rich, famous and beautiful clientele.
Does that story capture a more primordial suspicion about plastic surgery: that maybe it`s hiding something dark? Something sinister? Perhaps the fascination with celebrity plastic surgery gone wrong actually taps into a suspicion that something true has been revealed. That a disguised ugliness has been unveiled. That the princess or prince was always secretly been a frog and only now we finally see the truth.
Am I making too much out of this? Possibly, but I think it's something worth reflecting upon. That the fascination with celebrity plastic surgery gone wrong says something about the very concept of celebrity and about us.
As a general rule, though the chemically based material called plastic is used, plastic isn`t really so much the ideal ingredient. Skin grafts from other parts of the body generally provide a better effect. So its not inaccurate to call it plastic surgery in this sense, it is a little misleading.
The persistent popularity of that idea, though, probably has something to do with the more insidious implications of the other meaning of the term plastic applied to such surgery. Yet, the truth is that most reconstructive surgery is not done for cosmetic reasons. And yet, somehow, the notion lingers. Something about the association of such surgery to celebrities perceived as clinging on to past beauty and glamour draws so many of us to a judgment which invites the term to roll glibly off the tongue. A kind of subtle disapproval pervades the use of this term, as we raise a leery eyebrow in regard of those celebrities that employ such surgical methods. When we observe celebrity plastic surgery gone wrong we're seeing more than just the outcome of a failed operating procedure.
So intriguing is the picture of the powerful who have fallen; the wealthy seemingly unable to find or afford a competent surgeon; the gorgeous who paid the price for their deal with the devil's scalpel. It's almost as though we enjoy some vindication for the years of feeling our inferiority compared to their glamour and charisma. When the tables are suddenly turned those whose beauty once made us look like geeks now has them looking like frogs. A reverse fairy tale, princes and princesses into frogs. There almost seems to be something redeeming in it for us.
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 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 punch line, if you will, was that it was only after the surgery was complete that the surgeons learned that their patient was in fact a pedophile. They had unwittingly eliminated the one obstacle to his capacity to lure innocent children into his devices. It was an interesting choice for a first episode in a series that would primarily indeed focus on the rich, famous and beautiful clientele.
Does that story capture a more primordial suspicion about plastic surgery: that maybe it`s hiding something dark? Something sinister? Perhaps the fascination with celebrity plastic surgery gone wrong actually taps into a suspicion that something true has been revealed. That a disguised ugliness has been unveiled. That the princess or prince was always secretly been a frog and only now we finally see the truth.
Am I making too much out of this? Possibly, but I think it's something worth reflecting upon. That the fascination with celebrity plastic surgery gone wrong says something about the very concept of celebrity and about us.
No comments:
Post a Comment