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.
As to that other sense of "plastic" that is used more in an aesthetic, or sometimes even ethical sense, the fact of the matter is that the majority of reconstructive surgery is not even cosmetic. And yet, isn't there something about the association of such surgery to celebrities, trying so desperately it seems to cling to past glamour and popularity that leads many to have the description roll glibly off the tongue. Possibly might there be some subtle disapproval of the celebrities that use the surgery that explains the popular fascination with those examples of celebrity plastic surgery gone wrong which attract so much attention and scrutiny?
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.
Consider though an even bleaker possibility: something more sinister yet may lie at the heart of it all. This prospect came to my attention recently in recalling that popular FX television show, Nip/Tuck. If you don't know it, you should. It was the story of a pair of superstar plastic surgeons, serving the rich, famous and beautiful. A fascinating fact though is that the pilot episode was not actually focused on the rich, famous or beautiful. Rather its story revolved around a mercy surgery to relieve 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.
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.
As to that other sense of "plastic" that is used more in an aesthetic, or sometimes even ethical sense, the fact of the matter is that the majority of reconstructive surgery is not even cosmetic. And yet, isn't there something about the association of such surgery to celebrities, trying so desperately it seems to cling to past glamour and popularity that leads many to have the description roll glibly off the tongue. Possibly might there be some subtle disapproval of the celebrities that use the surgery that explains the popular fascination with those examples of celebrity plastic surgery gone wrong which attract so much attention and scrutiny?
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.
Consider though an even bleaker possibility: something more sinister yet may lie at the heart of it all. This prospect came to my attention recently in recalling that popular FX television show, Nip/Tuck. If you don't know it, you should. It was the story of a pair of superstar plastic surgeons, serving the rich, famous and beautiful. A fascinating fact though is that the pilot episode was not actually focused on the rich, famous or beautiful. Rather its story revolved around a mercy surgery to relieve 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.
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:
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