It’s hardly news that good looks (at any age) are important for most women. Whether or not cosmetic surgery is an acceptable means of attaining this ideal is a topic that even feminists quickly disagree on. One of the professions where good looks are vital for success (at least for women) is acting. Which is why the interviews with two (aged) female actors in a documentary on Gene Kelly made a lasting impression on me. The first interview was with Cyd Charisse who had an almost unlined but, sadly, also almost unrecognizable face. The second interview was with Kathleen Freeman who, despite being only three years older than her colleague, could at this point in time probably have been cast as Charisse’s mother. The difference between the women could hardly have been greater. On the one hand the internationally famous Cyd Charisse, whose fixed facial expression and refined manner were impossible to reconcile with the dynamic, expressive beauty from the films of the 50s. And on the other hand the internationally little known Kathleen Freeman, who I only remembered for her small role as a speech trainer in Singing in the Rain (as Phoebe Dinsmore who tries to help screechy Lina Lamont improve her diction). At the time these interviews were conducted, Cyd Charisse’s career was long over, whereas Kathleen Freeman had not only constantly worked as an actress but was still working (and continued to do so until shortly before her death). That in itself seemed remarkable, because of Charisse’s huge early success. Far more remarkable, however, was the contrasting impression the two women made during those interviews. While one of them was trying as much as possible to retain some of the old glamour, and in this laboured effort appeared stiff and a relic of a different era, the other appeared firmly rooted in the here and now, and full of life. Freeman too clearly enjoyed talking about the past, but it was her face that was expressive, and she was the one who came across as a dynamic personality. The lines in her face reflected not only her life experiences but also her intense joy of life.
If we believe that our emotions are an integral part of our life then surely it is just as important that we can communicate them to others, that they remain visible. Psychologists are constantly telling us how important non-verbal communication is. But is non-verbal communication still possible if large parts of your face have been paralysed by botox or stiffened through surgery? Are we (women) not actively limiting ourselves here to a degree where it becomes detrimental to our well-being? Can an unlined face ever really be preferable to a lively one? If liveliness is really becoming old-fashioned, I want to be as old-fashioned as Vivienne Westwood.