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.
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 so intrigued by the image of the great who have fallen; the rich who apparently couldn't find a competent surgeon; the beautiful who paid the price for their devilish deal with the surgeon`s scalpel. It's almost as though ee gain some payback for the years of our inferiority-in-admiration, to coin an awkward phrase, when the tables are suddenly turned and those whose beauty once made us look like munchkins now has them looking like the frogs. Indeed, princes and princesses into toad, the fairy tale in reverse for celebrities, would seem to be the moment of redemption and vindication for many of us.
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 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.
And so I find myself wondering if that story actually captures a deeper truth. Or, at least, a more primordial suspicion about plastic surgery: might we suspect, even if only secretly, that it hides something true? Something dark and sinister? Perhaps the popular fixation on celebrity plastic surgery gone wrong actually taps into a suspicion that something real has been revealed. Has a disguised ugliness been duly disclosed? Might we believe on a deeper level that the princess or prince was always, in some way, really 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.
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 so intrigued by the image of the great who have fallen; the rich who apparently couldn't find a competent surgeon; the beautiful who paid the price for their devilish deal with the surgeon`s scalpel. It's almost as though ee gain some payback for the years of our inferiority-in-admiration, to coin an awkward phrase, when the tables are suddenly turned and those whose beauty once made us look like munchkins now has them looking like the frogs. Indeed, princes and princesses into toad, the fairy tale in reverse for celebrities, would seem to be the moment of redemption and vindication for many of us.
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 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.
And so I find myself wondering if that story actually captures a deeper truth. Or, at least, a more primordial suspicion about plastic surgery: might we suspect, even if only secretly, that it hides something true? Something dark and sinister? Perhaps the popular fixation on celebrity plastic surgery gone wrong actually taps into a suspicion that something real has been revealed. Has a disguised ugliness been duly disclosed? Might we believe on a deeper level that the princess or prince was always, in some way, really 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