A hairy issue (16.10.06)
I find myself on the horns of a dilemma. I know, something new and different for me. Hey ho. So - here's the question - is it better to be noticed for being different, or not to be different?
Perhaps I should elaborate...
For the vast majority of my adult and late teen life, I have had short hair. Varying degrees of spikiness, granted, but short nonetheless. Said short hairedness is best illustrated in the picture you see here - althought that was taken a good four years ago, a mere week after I started drama school. But you get the idea.
Since then, my hair has varied in length, style and colour. You name the hairstyle, I've probably had it. All bar long, flowing locks, that is. I recently took the decision to grow my hair, as I thought it would make me 'more castable'. After all, who wants to shell out for a wig if they don't have to? With longer hair, I can play someone from pretty much any era, and as it's infinitely more stylable, of pretty much any type. All well and good, you may think.
But here's my problem. I'm not stunningly beautiful. Yeah, OK, I'll admit I'm probably not what you'd call ugly, but I'm not drop dead gorgeous either. And that's the thing.
I'm fairly average looking. Which is fine - and often better for an actor. But, by definition, that means that I'm not a lot better, or a lot worse, looking than most other people. Consequently, if you were flicking through Spotlight, chances are that if you did notice me, you'd have forgotten me again once you'd looked over another 20 images. Possibly even another two. Just another average looking actress with mid-length, nothingy hair.
However, if I had short spiky hair, I'm going to stand out a bit, just by virtue of being different. If you're flicking through Spotlight, and the other 3 actresses on that spread have mid length hair, you'll probably be more likely to remember me for looking a bit different.
But will having short hair typecast me? Or limit the parts and the plays for which I'm seen? Hmmm. So you see my problem...
photos: short hair copyright lisa bowerman, 2002, blonde hair copyright claire grogan, 2003
Perhaps I should elaborate...
For the vast majority of my adult and late teen life, I have had short hair. Varying degrees of spikiness, granted, but short nonetheless. Said short hairedness is best illustrated in the picture you see here - althought that was taken a good four years ago, a mere week after I started drama school. But you get the idea. Since then, my hair has varied in length, style and colour. You name the hairstyle, I've probably had it. All bar long, flowing locks, that is. I recently took the decision to grow my hair, as I thought it would make me 'more castable'. After all, who wants to shell out for a wig if they don't have to? With longer hair, I can play someone from pretty much any era, and as it's infinitely more stylable, of pretty much any type. All well and good, you may think.
But here's my problem. I'm not stunningly beautiful. Yeah, OK, I'll admit I'm probably not what you'd call ugly, but I'm not drop dead gorgeous either. And that's the thing.
I'm fairly average looking. Which is fine - and often better for an actor. But, by definition, that means that I'm not a lot better, or a lot worse, looking than most other people. Consequently, if you were flicking through Spotlight, chances are that if you did notice me, you'd have forgotten me again once you'd looked over another 20 images. Possibly even another two. Just another average looking actress with mid-length, nothingy hair.However, if I had short spiky hair, I'm going to stand out a bit, just by virtue of being different. If you're flicking through Spotlight, and the other 3 actresses on that spread have mid length hair, you'll probably be more likely to remember me for looking a bit different.
But will having short hair typecast me? Or limit the parts and the plays for which I'm seen? Hmmm. So you see my problem...
photos: short hair copyright lisa bowerman, 2002, blonde hair copyright claire grogan, 2003
posted by Tegwen at 15:23
4 Comments:
I have no shame in admiting that I love crap TV. Top of my list (okay near the top- CSI wins everytime) is America's Next Top Model. Everytime they do the makeovers they try and make each girl as stand out in style as possible, (but still leaves them as a blank canvas) and during judging all the girls with extensions and long hair are told to style it or tie it up or whatever. If the model who have short hair need long hair they put them in wigs and while I do get that it's different mediums I think the theory is the same. Go with suits you best and you feel makes you stand out. I think you look great with short hair, but I haven't ever seen you with long locks. Maybe go buy a good wig and try it out for a few days. If you love it rock on- if not, to Lacey you shall go.
With Cat. There's got to be a bit of personal preference; go with what you want. For you. If you like short, go short. If you want long, patient you must be... My hair took 4 years to get from short (a bit longer than your spikes) to current length. It was very inbetween and rubbish for about 2 years.
well, you know my opinion already (think back to monday night phone call). i really do LOVE the way you look with your hair as it is now, but i also think you look fantastic with short hair. to be honest, if it's about getting the parts, if the company want you, they'll have you, long or short hair, but if you honestly belive that having short hair will get you more auditions, then go for it! just do waht will make you happy...don't do it for the wrong reasons, or yo'll end up regretting it and we all know what happens when teg isn't happy!!
...................
RUN FOR COVER!!!!!
I think you look lovely with any length hair. Go with whatever you LIKE, whatever makes you FEEL a million bucks, gives you confidence etc. cos then you'll audition better and stuff, won't you?
Post a Comment
<< Home