Makeover = Hair Cuts = WHY?

I like makeover shows :-) . Even the times I feel I would've done something differently than the makeover crew did, it's fun to see how different a new haircut and outfit can make a person look. I guess it's kind of the whole "Cinderella" idea, of being made to look so different no-one will know you, and the idea of the totally new chance that might follow. . . The only thing I'm concerned about is, honestly, if your life sucks before the makeover, it's likely to be just as bad after. So the people who go in expecting their life to change completely because of one new outfit and haircut are going to be terribly mistaken.

> Anyway I went in for a cut and was talked into getting some non> dramatic highlights. The stylist who was assigned to me was> practically pissed that's all I wanted to do and treated me like I> was a waste of time.Regina,What a horrible story! The real tragedy here is that these youngstylists-in-training are either (a) developing an arrogant attituderegarding what they believe their clients "ought" to accept, or (b) arenot having their already-arrogant attitudes checked (eliminated) by theinstructors. These students seem to have too conveniently forgottenthat there is a sensient being attached to the hair, with a mind andfeelings.A very sorry situation.Thanks for sharing your story, Regina.Dave

> The stylist who was assigned to me was practically> pissed that's all I wanted to do and treated me like I> was a waste of time.Doesn't this drive you nuts?! Ridiculous! I stopped going to a hairdresser who prides himself on being "exclusive" because we was always harping on me to get highlights -- "You'd look so fantastic!" Well, thanks, but I'm not padding his wallet anymore and I happen to think my hair looks better without them!I'm sorry you had to deal with this!> Anyway, this women came in and the stylist who took> her totally talked her into doing something drastic.> She came in with shoulder length dirty blond hair and> left with an Annie Lennox cut and her hair was> practically fuschia! The woman didn't look too upset> but I think I would have died!I agree with you -- I would have flipped! Fuschia?!

I have read this thread with interest, but now I'm compelled to make a few comments. For the record, I have been a stylist for quite a few years (more than I care to acknowledge) My styling efforts now are of a part-time nature since my primary career has changed. While my client mix varies, currently more than half of my regular clients have shoulder length or longer hair.I have been often asked to do "makeovers" on various individuals. I generally refer to what I do as a "makeunder".The process begins with a consultation with the person requesting a significant change. If she is a regular client we discuss what she wants to change and why. A newcomer spends much more time with me because I need to know a little about the person and their wants and desires. I also ask about their lifestyle and family. I try to gauge their dexterity with styling tools as well.I believe that any change must comply to the person's time constraints, work situation, styling ability and general personality. A style doesn't work if it can't be replicated the next day by the wearer. After we get to know one another, then we discuss what we will do.If the request is for a major change, I send the client home to think about it for at least a day (no charge for the consultation). The one thing I don't want is a client leaving in tears because she changed her mind in mid stream (when it is too late to stop). I often encourage small changes at first with the promise to do more at no or a reduced cost, if they are unhappy with the small change.If a consultation client returns after the agreed "cooling off" period, I cut the hair the way she desires, and upon which we have agreed, whether it is a little or a lot of change. This method has made the "one time" client fairly rare in my practice.TV Makeovers:TV makeovers are an exercise in making as big a change as possible.The models are presented with no styling done to their hair, no makeup (or in one instance I heard about, unbelievably gaudy makeup), and dressed very poorly.The models return with strikingly different 'do's, perfectly applied makeup and stylish clothes. Although not always happy, the models try to put on a good show. It should be noted that most of the models are solicited for the show (often it's a friend or relative who wrote in to recommend their friend for a makeover). The referring person and the model are usually paid a "talent fee" for appearing on stage. (The fee is currently about $400. per person for speaking appearances.)But the thing I find most appalling is that the hosts of these shows take great pride in waving hanks of shorn hair around on camera.First, that is objectifying a "trophy" which I personally dislike strongly.Second, it takes away from any legitimate efforts that have been made to "beautify" the person.Third, it smacks of cheap, sensationalism ( I can get that by buying a supermarket tabloid, where I know what I'm getting).And, fourth, it cheapens the profession of hairstyling, I don't know of too many good stylists who would be pressured into such cheap theatrics. Although I can think of lots of HACKS, (some very well know and sought after) who thrive on such stuff.Please accept my apologies for the length of this response, I'll get off my soapbox now.Mike

> It is as if the stylists' competition amongst themselves> has them taking the atttitude of "well, MY makeovers are> more dramatic than YOURS!"Yeah, I have seen this kind of thing. Some of the so-called "stylists" are just bums with scissors: no real artistic talent at all, just a desire to keep chopping away...YUCK!> instead of by "what can I do with what the client HAS to> make her look as beautiful as possible?" Were that the> case, I should think that the majority of the client's> hair would be allowed to remain attached to the client's> head to assist in the beautification of their client's> appearance.Well, I have to part with you here: a well-done precison haricut, done with consideration of the person's needs and looks, is often very good it the end outcome.It is just that on these "makeover shows" the desired result is the "dramatic change" for the camera, not an actual precision quality haircut for a client.I just think there is ample room for short hair or a good stylish precision cut, but I don't think that one should use these "makeovers" as examples of why all haircuts are bad inherently.Long does not always equal good, short does not always equal bad.Ciao!

> but then> again, it's really a showcase of their> "talents" (a term I use loosely considering> some of the makeovers I've seen on TV lately!) and> perhaps they believe the more dramatic the makeover,> the more people will flock to their salon. Yikes!Hi H.Taylor,I understand and agree with your perspective on the issue.It is as if the stylists' competition amongst themselves has them takingthe atttitude of "well, MY makeovers are more dramatic than YOURS!" It'sas if the measure of the value of their services is defined by the extentto which the client's appearance can be changed, instead of by "what canI do with what the client HAS to make her look as beautiful as possible?"Were that the case, I should think that the majority of the client's hairwould be allowed to remain attached to the client's head to assist in thebeautification of their client's appearance.Dave

Have you also noticed that they always straighten peoples hair? I have yet to have seen a make-over either on tv or in a magazine where a curly head emerged and a curly head in the end. Weird.Regina

> Perhaps not directly. But some are victims of coercion,> be it subtle or not-so-subtle pressure from> family/friends/colleagues to cut their hair.Granted that this does take place, but people have to deal with subtle pressures all the time. I still think that calling women "victims" who choose to undergo such a "makeover" on TV is a little extreme.> Have you ever received such pressure to cut your long> hair?Yeah, when I was a kid I used to go to summer camp for a month every summer. I had hair that was pretty much longer than most of the kids. The counselors did not approve. They encouraged the other kids to try to tell me I was a "hippie" and that I needed a haircut. I never did. Of course, that was about 30 years ago!> Why, yes I would. I think any number of women would> freely state that suits are very becoming on men of all> ages.Yeah, but even styles in men's suits changes, and the regular men's suit is the bastion of conservatism. Even so, styles change over the years.I just cannot imagine either a man or a woman having the same hairstyle for decades...there is just something about it that I think is kind of boring. Of course, if that is what they want to do, then it is OK for them!> Whoever said that those among us who dissent would try> to "force our will" onto others? Most people in the> "western" world have the freedom to express dissent,Expressing dissent is great when it directly affects your own person or interests. But, when you start dissenting to what others choose to do to their own person or property, then it becomes coersion.> What I don't understand, George, is why so many people> with short hair try to force their short-hair will> onto those with long hair.Agreed. This is exactly what I meant in the previous paragraph.> Perhaps it's because they've been emboldened by TV shows> that "feature" these drastic makeovers.That is stretching it a little, IMHO.

> Yes, the resultant change is dramatic, but the idea of> making rapid changes seems overvalued.It just depends on the individual and the situation. Lots of women cut their hair during a life crisis, lots of other do it just because they are ready for a change or they are just tired of their old style. Sometimes, change is GOOD.> They also put the victims, oops, I mean "makeover> candidates,"These women are there by choice, and have a right to do with their hair what they choose. They are not victims.> but removing lots of hair IMO does not serve to> enhance their appearance.Your opinion, you are entitled to it. Others may believe otherwise.>Is not hair considered a beauty asset?Yes, hair is a beauty asset, probably the single most important...why else do people spend literally billions of dollars each year on styles, products, and colors? BUT,this does NOT mean that making changes is taboo. IMO, keeping the same old, tired, long hair for years and years is not making the most of your "beauty assets". Would you keep on wearing the same style of clothing for years and years?> IMO, 99.9% of the time, removing healthy length does> NOT represent an improvement. Is there any way to stop> it? Maybe, maybe not.Maybe, if you consider forcing your will on others to bean acceptable course of action. Why not just let peopledecide for themselves???