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.
Generally of course the chemically based material called plastic is used for such surgeries. All else being equal, though, it is not the preferred element. Skin grafts from other parts of the body provide a far superior effect. Calling plastic surgery by this name, in this sense, then can be a bit 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.
Or, to put it another way, slightly more stylized, those who live by beauty, die by beauty. Metaphorically speaking, of course! It may 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.
There was though a troubling twist at the end of the episode. Only once the procedure was complete did the surgeons discover that their patient was in fact a pedophile. Unwittingly, with all the best of intentions, they had eliminated the one obstacle which had previously stood in the way of his ability to lure innocent children into his devices. A dark story line it was indeed. And, wouldn't you agree, an intriguing choice for the inaugural episode of a series primarily focused 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.
Possibly I'm making a mountain out of a molehill. It is something to think about though, don't you agree? Could it be that the widespread fascination with celebrity plastic surgery gone wrong actually says something rather significant about the very concept of celebrity and about us.
Generally of course the chemically based material called plastic is used for such surgeries. All else being equal, though, it is not the preferred element. Skin grafts from other parts of the body provide a far superior effect. Calling plastic surgery by this name, in this sense, then can be a bit 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.
Or, to put it another way, slightly more stylized, those who live by beauty, die by beauty. Metaphorically speaking, of course! It may 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.
There was though a troubling twist at the end of the episode. Only once the procedure was complete did the surgeons discover that their patient was in fact a pedophile. Unwittingly, with all the best of intentions, they had eliminated the one obstacle which had previously stood in the way of his ability to lure innocent children into his devices. A dark story line it was indeed. And, wouldn't you agree, an intriguing choice for the inaugural episode of a series primarily focused 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.
Possibly I'm making a mountain out of a molehill. It is something to think about though, don't you agree? Could it be that the widespread fascination with celebrity plastic surgery gone wrong actually says something rather significant 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.
No comments:
Post a Comment