Arizona Muse is the Newest Face of Esteé Lauder

[NICOnick]

What's it with many recent beauty campaigns featuring very average looking girls?

When I look at a picture of Barbara Palvin or Sigrid Agren in a beauty campaign, I stop and stare at the picture and marvel at the sheer, perfect beauty of these girls. It's the same with the vintage beauty adverts - all the women are just so damned beautiful.

I can understand Jourdan fronting YSL - her face is magisterial. Ginta is very pretty as well. I can understand Jac fronting Chanel - she's striking. I can understand Natalia Vodianova fronting Guerlain - she's insanely beautiful. Or the girl in the recent Clarins adverts. Hell, I can even understand Lindsay Wixson doing a beauty campaign - she's got a face which arrests your attention, even if not necessarily for the sheer beauty of it.

But I totally don't get it when girls like Karlie Kloss and Arizona Muse who are neither beautiful not strange looking in the Lindsey or Daphne mould - in other words, who are absolutely average at best - end up landing beauty campaigns and have their faces splashed all over magazines.

It's almost as if EL is just having a look at the models.com top 10 rankings and picking the most popular model of whichever colour they need who isn't contracted with anyone else. Liu Wen, Joan Smalls and now Arizona. I can think of so many other girls - of all ethnicities - who're better suited than the aforementioned three. What about - say - Aymeline Valade, who's got the most striking cheekbones and eyes? Or for that mater Toni Garrn, who's face would suit a beauty campaign to the T? Or Jacquelyn Jablonski who's face - those eyes! - is a million times more striking than Arizona's?

Why is it that for almost all beauty adverts they're jumping on the bandwagon and casting the girl most popular with designers, rather than girls suited for beauty campaigns?

I used to be one of those people who disliked Arizona. The way she talks, the way she photographs, the way she acts just bugs me to no end. Nonetheless, despite all those notions, I am still immensely drawn to her look (the same with Gisele Bundchen). Something about her face is so appealing. I can't put my finger on it. She definitely has one of those "basic" looks about her, but it is so interesting. Most of her work have been satisfactory, nothing stellar. However, I do feel that Arizona's best market is cosmetics/beauty.

Now, I definitely agree with you about Karlie—I never have gotten her appeal. I would put Liu, Joan, Karlie, and Arizona in the same category of looks - "the basics". However, "the basics" attract clients because they have a long-lasting look and are somewhat more relatable to customers. While yes, it would be wonderful to see girls who have more interesting or more unique looks to grace cosmetic/beauty campaigns, it is definitely a risk for the company, thus they settle for a basic beauty.

 

[khyrk]

Arizona is extremely photogenic and does not seem to take a bad shot at all. If her Vogue Paris cover is not any indication of a Beauty Contract in her future then I don't know what is. This does not come as a surprise at all to me, in fact it's already expected. Good for her.

 

[Handbag Queen]

She reminds me of Willow Bay their spokesmodel in the 80's/early 90's.

 

[congacon]

arizona's beauty is very conventional, an average person would find her to be extremely beautiful. karlie's beauty is anything but conventional.

happy for the girl!!!!!!!!!!!!she's is a lucky one. many models have been working in the industry for years and didnt get much, arizona on the other hand accomplished works that would take many models years.

i definitely think that vogue paris cover influenced el decision on choosing arizona as a new spoke person.

 

[loladonna]

What's it with many recent beauty campaigns featuring very average looking girls?

When I look at a picture of Barbara Palvin or Sigrid Agren in a beauty campaign, I stop and stare at the picture and marvel at the sheer, perfect beauty of these girls. It's the same with the vintage beauty adverts - all the women are just so damned beautiful.

I can understand Jourdan fronting YSL - her face is magisterial. Ginta is very pretty as well. I can understand Jac fronting Chanel - she's striking. I can understand Natalia Vodianova fronting Guerlain - she's insanely beautiful. Or the girl in the recent Clarins adverts. Hell, I can even understand Lindsay Wixson doing a beauty campaign - she's got a face which arrests your attention, even if not necessarily for the sheer beauty of it.

That's where subjectivity comes in. I don't think Vodianova or Ginta are remarkable beauties. Ginta in particular has 3 or 4 lookalikes who can be mistaken for her. Barbara Palvin looks like an even younger Natalia Vodianova. I can't think of another model who looks like Arizona.


I agree with others that her Vogue Paris cover and editorial sealed the deal for a beauty campaign. Estee Lauder could just slap their logo on these pics and have a ready-made campaign

zinio

 

[Vladita]

Congrats to her! I'm happy she stays humble in spite of her overwhelming success. Good job!

 

[Ochi Chernye]

I think girls who get beauty campaigns should be beautiful without any makeup on, and Arizona is not. Out of all the top models working right now, she's probably the most average looking of them all. She totally didn't deserve this. Arizona better thank her lucky stars she has a good agent, because if she didn't, there's no way in hell she would have gotten this.

Here's a comparison to show how average and dull Arizona really is. You can see how stunning Jac is without makeup on, but Arizona, eh, not so much.

photos from monikajagaciakgallery.blogspot.com, modelwire - NEXT

 

[pavonine]

I used to be one of those people who disliked Arizona. The way she talks, the way she photographs, the way she acts just bugs me to no end. Nonetheless, despite all those notions, I am still immensely drawn to her look (the same with Gisele Bundchen). Something about her face is so appealing. I can't put my finger on it. She definitely has one of those "basic" looks about her, but it is so interesting. Most of her work have been satisfactory, nothing stellar. However, I do feel that Arizona's best market is cosmetics/beauty.

Now, I definitely agree with you about Karlie—I never have gotten her appeal. I would put Liu, Joan, Karlie, and Arizona in the same category of looks - "the basics". However, "the basics" attract clients because they have a long-lasting look and are somewhat more relatable to customers. While yes, it would be wonderful to see girls who have more interesting or more unique looks to grace cosmetic/beauty campaigns, it is definitely a risk for the company, thus they settle for a basic beauty.

I don't dislike Arizona. I just don't rate her as a face that's suited for a beauty campaign. She does OK in grungy editorials and campaigns, but I just don't want her selling me lipstick and mascara.

It's the same with Gisele. I think Gisele's USP is her body (and hair)and not her face, and thus I think she's amazing for VS/high fashion campaigns/shampoo adverts/shoe adverts etc, but I wouldn't want to see her selling me skincare or makeup either.

Frankly, I don't get the point of inundating magazines and billboards with a face which simply doesn't arrest anyone's attention even momentarily. I can understand if they'd gone for a plain looking but extremely famous and instantly recognisable celebrity. Arizona's face is neither recognisable nor unmistakable (like Wixson) or even remotely memorable. L'Oreal's models are streets ahead - Doutzen, Laeticia, Milla, Claudia are just so much better than Arizona, Constance et al.

Besides, I don't really think Karlie is "basic" looking at all. She's slightly weird looking, and again, she's a hit in the high-fashion circuit because of her height and the way she caries her body. Her face isn't remotely pretty to warrant a beauty campaign (or even a commercial campaign).

 

[pavonine]

That's where subjectivity comes in. I don't think Vodianova or Ginta are remarkable beauties. Ginta in particular has 3 or 4 lookalikes who can be mistaken for her. Barbara Palvin looks like an even younger Natalia Vodianova. I can't think of another model who looks like Arizona.

I agree with others that her Vogue Paris cover and editorial sealed the deal for a beauty campaign. Estee Lauder could just slap their logo on these pics and have a ready-made campaign

Ginta may not be breathtakingly beautiful, but at least she's somewhat above-average looking. Arizona is just so goddamned plain that you can find better looking girls than her walking down any high street in any big city. And I'm afraid I going to have to beg to differ with you that because there's no other model that looks like Arizona, she deserves a campaign. Arizona's face isn't really so out of the ordinary that one'd be hard pressed to find another similar face. Her face is painfully run-of-the-mill, and not memorable in any way to me. Honestly, there are plenty of far more beautiful girls who'd have looked much better on that Vogue Paris cover/ed than Arizona. She just is very, very lucky, is all.

 

[Psylocke]

I think girls who get beauty campaigns should be beautiful without any makeup on, and Arizona is not. Out of all the top models working right now, she's probably the most average looking of them all. She totally didn't deserve this. Arizona better thank her lucky stars she has a good agent, because if she didn't, there's no way in hell she would have gotten this.

Here's a comparison to show how average and dull Arizona really is. You can see how stunning Jac is without makeup on, but Arizona, eh, not so much.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_yr2jmxjcqvQ/TC7PccSTuZI/AAAAAAAABy4/-d0w9eZ86SI/s1600/49342684.jpg
http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a353/youarearockstar/Second/Arizona1.jpg
photos from monikajagaciakgallery.blogspot.com, modelwire - NEXT

I think those pictures don't really prove anything. I love both Arizona and Jac but think Arizona looks more intriguing in that picture than Jac who looks like many other 14 years old teenagers.

It's really frustrating to read how many people think she doesn't deserve this. When does a model deserve a major job like this? Of course there are dozens of other girls who would be great spokespeople for Estée Lauder, too. But since it's such an exclusive job I assume the casting directory at EL have precise criteria why they choose certain girls. I definitely think Arizona has the face and the personality needed for a job like this. She's eloquent and gives thoughtful answers in interviews, she's pretty but not drop dead gorgeous in an intimidating way. She has probably worked harder than any other model in the past four seasons, I don't see why she wouldn't deserve a contract like this.

I think all the hate towards Arizona on tFS correlates with the fact that she's been so overexposed. She's not a bad model - except on the runway -, there are models who are far more awkward than her but don't get as much hate. I used to not 'get' her either but her immense amount of quality work is what got me interested and when I started following her thread I realized that she is an exceptional person with great work ethics, an interesting personality, fabulous personal style and an extremely photogenic face.

I personally am very excited for her and I can't wait to see her first shots for EL.

 

[agee]

Here's a comparison to show how average and dull Arizona really is. You can see how stunning Jac is without makeup on, but Arizona, eh, not so much.

It is a matter of taste because Arizona is the stunning one in that comparison to me, there is both physical beauty and even that extra something that shows depth. I have seen stunning images of Jac, but in this one she looks like an ordinary, blank palette girl.

But since it's such an exclusive job I assume the casting directory at EL have precise criteria why they choose certain girls. I definitely think Arizona has the face and the personality needed for a job like this.

I am on the same page. I think that personality, charisma, photogenic-ness and being someone who is good to work with are key factors. I like Arlenis Sosa, but on the surface I didn't get why she got the Lancome contract and pretty early at that, but then when I see her interviews I notice what a spark she has and I get it.
***

To me Arizona and Karlie are pretty / beautiful American girls who have unique features to set them apart, in both of their cases it's their eyebrows. IMO they are both well suited for commercial work, by the way in this context commercial and high fashion are not mutually exclusive, a model can be suited for both. Arizona is not hard for me to believe for Estee Lauder, heck she looks like the younger sister or cousin of Elizabeth Hurley and Hilary Rhoda. If somehow I had heard that she was up for an EL contract, I would think that she would not get it because of her slight resemblance to Hilary, I don't think that they look like twins, but they have similar features.

ETA:
Also Arizona has the most amazing green eyes.

 

[TREVOFASHIONISTO]

if Arizona looked like that i think i would like her more

 

[Deleted member 1957]

I agree both look pretty but Arizona looks less generic in that pic

 

[models_vlada]

I know beauty is relative and subjective, but as my art professor used to say, it is until a certain point, wether we like it or not there is an universally beautiful stereotype, for example i doubt any average human being would find ugly an Miss Universe contestant.

But my point is that i have always thought that when you're inside the fashion industry, your tastes and conceptions of beauty start to distort and differ from an average person, and i'm saying this because i doubt someone would find extra beautiful Arizona like for getting a EL contract.

If you see the picture of Jac and Arizona, i think most of the persons outside the industry (and the final consumers) would find more beautiful Jac than Arizona, but you can say, she looks more interesting or stuff, but average people don't start going "that" deep when looking at someone, and i'm sure just at looking at that picture my brother would say she looks like a stoned character in Trainspotting, and i include myself in this description, because for example, lately i've been having a big crush on Querelle, but a few people i've asked, just finds her ugly and then i get frustrated.


PD: This thread should probably go in "Fashion in depth" ahaha
I don't hate Arizona, i used to, but then i realize i don't, i just don't understand all of her success, despite of this i'm sure that any person outside the fashion industry between for example Constance Jablonski picture for EL, and Arizona's, will def. fall for Constance's.

Fashion Industry is based as many industries in "Speculation", and i honestly attribute Arizona's success to this, it's like shares. She's just being overrated for the media, and the different brands just responds to this.

 

[Psylocke]

I know beauty is relative and subjective, but as my art professor used to say, it is until a certain point, wether we like it or not there is an universally beautiful stereotype, for example i doubt any average human being would find ugly an Miss Universe contestant.

I think at this point in time it's hard to pinpoint what an objective standard for beauty is. We are exposed to beauty from all parts of the world, we know beauty can come in all shapes and forms and colors. The only objective standards I can think of are flawless skin, symmetrical facial features, fairly straight teeth and to some extent high/defined cheekbones. It would be naive to think that this doesn't apply to the majority of all models (whether high fashion, commercial or beauty pageant) - they pretty much all possess these attributes. The average person can probably not even tell much of a difference between someone like Arizona and Jac. Everything else we see in them is mainly subjective.
Jac is perfect for Chanel beauty because she is an extremely beautiful girl and as a Chanel beauty model you don't have the same spokesperson assignments you have when you're a contracted Estée Lauder model. I love Jac's personality but the usual EL or Chanel customer would most likely find it hard to identify with a goofy teenager from Poland that only speaks broken English and would have difficulty representing the brand and what it stands for*. Arizona, Joan, Constance and Liu are women, they have life experience (Arizona being a mother, even), they have interesting backstories, they're poised. EL seems to follow a clear pattern here, they don't endorse models only for their look, and they don't seem to want super young models.


*I'm just using Jac as an example here because the comparison was brought up before. The same could be applied to many other models who are clear candidates for major beauty contracts look-wise but in my opinion aren't suited for a brand like EL or Lancôme yet.

 

[pavonine]

the usual EL or Chanel customer would most likely find it hard to identify with a goofy teenager from Poland that only speaks broken English and would have difficulty representing the brand and what it stands for*. Arizona, Joan, Constance and Liu are women, they have life experience

Constance is 21. What life experience does she have, other than being born pretty, tall and slim which poised her at a perfect vantage to be a model?

Ditto with Liu Wen. As far as I know, she's no Aung San Suu Kyi.

Arizona being a mum doesn't really bring anything to the table, just as Jourdan being a mum doesn't really add anything to her as a model. It's not like the VS girls who after giving birth flaunted bigger t*ts. And as for maturity, I'm sorry, but neither Arizona nor Jourdan or any of the model mums (barring maybe Vodianova) have really parlayed their motherhood well enough.

So I'm afraid if you're going to argue that Arizona, Constance, Liu, Joan et al deserve contracts because they're somehow more of a woman with more experience/maturity/insight et than your average model, then it comes a cropper.

 

[Psylocke]

No, I'm not saying that is what makes them deserving of getting these contracts. I'm saying that's one of the differences between the EL girls and some other models people want to see get a beauty contract. They have more life experience than many of the younger models. Note: I don't consider life experience any great misfortunes or drastic events only, I mean the fact that they have a certain level of maturity because they had difficult backgrounds or exceptional circumstances to deal with but represent very positive outlooks on life. I don't know much about Constance, I must admit, but Liu Wen certainly has an interesting back story, which has been discussed in portrait both on CNN and in NY Times. Arizona Muse has experienced things in her private life that I don't want to get into here but that I'm sure could land her a spot on The Ellen Show or any other talk show in the future
I'm not generalizing and saying that all models except these are immature and inexperienced teens, but I do think that the EL models, as well as new faces like Aymeline Valade, Kati Nescher and Saskia de Brauw are bringing something new to the table and that as far as beauty contracts are concerned, those girls seem more fitted to represent big brands than those girls who have barely hit puberty and whose face may not have fully matured yet.

 

[models_vlada]

I'm saying that's one of the differences between the EL girls and some other models people want to see get a beauty contract. They have more life experience than many of the younger models. N

Well stated, to be honest i didn't take into consideration those other factors you mentioned, as the experience and how they will perform as a spokemodel. Anyway, i still don't think and average person will find equally beautiful Arizona, and let's take another model like Samantha Gradoville, Arizona's look is definitely edgier than Samantha's or Jac and people will def. tell the difference.

Anyway, i'd like to see how the final ad results, so i can maybe change my perception of this. And it might change, since Arizona has surprised in very different ways with her print jobs.

 

[GivenchyHomme]

I think girls who get beauty campaigns should be beautiful without any makeup on, and Arizona is not. Out of all the top models working right now, she's probably the most average looking of them all. She totally didn't deserve this. Arizona better thank her lucky stars she has a good agent, because if she didn't, there's no way in hell she would have gotten this.

Here's a comparison to show how average and dull Arizona really is. You can see how stunning Jac is without makeup on, but Arizona, eh, not so much.

photos from monikajagaciakgallery.blogspot.com, modelwire - NEXT

I actually think you got that backwards. Arizona is interesting even without makeup, and that's a very old picture you posted btw so it's really not relevant.

Way to pick out a terrible photo of her.

models.com

 

[Deleted member 1957]

I know beauty is relative and subjective, but as my art professor used to say, it is until a certain point, wether we like it or not there is an universally beautiful stereotype, for example i doubt any average human being would find ugly an Miss Universe contestant.

But my point is that i have always thought that when you're inside the fashion industry, your tastes and conceptions of beauty start to distort and differ from an average person, and i'm saying this because i doubt someone would find extra beautiful Arizona like for getting a EL contract.

If you see the picture of Jac and Arizona, i think most of the persons outside the industry (and the final consumers) would find more beautiful Jac than Arizona, but you can say, she looks more interesting or stuff, but average people don't start going "that" deep when looking at someone, and i'm sure just at looking at that picture my brother would say she looks like a stoned character in Trainspotting, and i include myself in this description, because for example, lately i've been having a big crush on Querelle, but a few people i've asked, just finds her ugly and then i get frustrated.


PD: This thread should probably go in "Fashion in depth" ahaha
I don't hate Arizona, i used to, but then i realize i don't, i just don't understand all of her success, despite of this i'm sure that any person outside the fashion industry between for example Constance Jablonski picture for EL, and Arizona's, will def. fall for Constance's.

Fashion Industry is based as many industries in "Speculation", and i honestly attribute Arizona's success to this, it's like shares. She's just being overrated for the media, and the different brands just responds to this.

the beauty industry has become very competitive and its not enough to just get a pretty face, you need more to capture the customer and as much as Jac would be considered more beautiful by an everyday person Arizona keeps the person on that page. Also being a beauty ad, who is more naturally beautiful doesnt count as much since she is going to be styled and photographed in a way that makes her universally beautiful.
This explains why several high fashion looking models have been getting beauty contracts as opposed to the more generically beautiful ones