REFLECTIONS
Then and Now
As Stila commemorates its 25th year as one of the world’s leading makeup brands, it’s interesting to ponder how the iconic girls would be received today. In the age of social media, an increased focus on diversity in the beauty industry, and a society somewhat less constrained by traditional gender roles, it’s difficult to tell whether the Stila girls would be as popular in 2019 as they were in their heyday. An in-depth look at the illustrations through a contemporary lens accomplishes two objectives: 1. it helps us gain a better understanding of the importance of inclusion across all areas in the industry; and 2. It explains how Stila, along with other newly founded brands at the time, helped precipitate a sea change in the reasons for cosmetics usage and how beauty products are advertised.
Social Media
As with most technological advances, social media (and the internet more broadly), is a double-edged sword: it allows a greater audience reach for small or emerging brands by reducing traditional geographical and financial constraints and encouraging a more visual culture, but simultaneously engenders a faster pace overall than in pre-internet days, essentially forcing brands to produce new content and marketing strategies more quickly than ever before. In the late ‘90s and early 2000s, Stila’s illustrations stood out in a sea of retouched models, but today they might get lost in the perpetual rush to adopt the latest advertising trend. Illustrations may attract thousands of “likes” one day, while close-up product photography becomes king the next. (1) Jeanine Lobell comments on the difficulty for makeup brands to adhere to consistent, long-term designs and strategies. “Things have sped up - our attention spans are shorter, we require more and more newness it seems. I am glad we were able to fully spend years sticking to the same formula. It would be tough to feel the pressure of so much change constantly. I’m not sure if the [Stila girls] would work today, I really don’t know.” (2) This may be why, starting around 2013, Stila underwent a complete overhaul of their packaging and art direction, abandoning the girls and adopting a more minimal aesthetic that is easily adaptable to any major changes in marketing trends and consumer preferences. (While considered quaint back in the late ‘90s, cardboard packaging has apparently become synonymous with “cheap” among consumers, so Stila’s design firm switched to a brushed gold metal palette to “elevate” the brand.) But even if the illustrations remained the main draw for Stila, so to speak, it would be difficult to make them stand out. Instagram in particular is an excellent platform for artists to share their work on a global scale at very little cost as compared to having an agent or gallery representation, but it also means the competition for the attention of the average person scrolling through is fierce. Jeffrey Fulvimari states that one of the reasons he went into fashion illustration was that it wasn’t the ubiquitous art specialization it is now. “I chose illustration because it seemed to be a dead medium. It was easier to get to the top and make some money. Now, you have to be individual as there are so many illustrators out there,” he says. It’s true: the hashtag #fashionillustrator has over 1 million posts on Instagram. With such a saturated market for illustrators and makeup brands alike, it’s uncertain whether using illustrations as the cornerstone of a brand’s image would be the key to success.
1. In a 2014 blog post, the author of Painting You Pretty notes that the use of Photoshop is another reason the Stila girls were gradually omitted from the brand. “Cosmetics companies feel pressure to ‘keep up with the Jones.’ If one company has an array of fabulous eyeliners, the next company will release a great set the next season. It only makes sense that most of the makeup ads probably contain more photoshop than makeup.” She goes on to say that to remain competitive, makeup companies feel pressure to use enhanced photos rather than other imagery such as illustrations. “When your ad is sitting next to Laura Mercier’s flawless face advertisement, it might be a little intimating to avoid a little post camera editing.”
2. Interview with the Makeup Museum, December 3, 2019.
Diversity and Inclusion
In looking at the roughly 150 individual Stila girls displayed in the exhibition, only 14 (less than 10%) appeared to depict black women. This is problematic for many reasons, but purely from a profit standpoint it doesn’t make good financial sense. Given the purchase power of black women – they spent over $7.5 billion on beauty products in 2009 – if any company wants to succeed, they must understand the market that exists outside of white customers. Plus, even today black women are grossly underrepresented in cosmetics advertising (3); brands offering extensive shade and product selections aren’t always shown on the people they’re intended for. A 2016 study of U.S. and U.K. makeup ads revealed that only 22% of the models were black, Asian or Hispanic, with the rest being white. Florence Adepoju, creator of MDM Flow, points out: “Even when brands have got ranges for darker women you go on their Instagram page and it’s not seen. There is no presence for it. And even if they have black or Asian women on their page they are very light in complexion and very Western features.” Thus, it stands to reason that even if Stila had a comprehensive product range that met the needs of all skin tones back in the ‘90s and early 2000s, one wouldn’t necessarily know it by looking at the girls. As with most brands back then, Stila may have come across to black customers as a line mostly for white women (4) with a few women of color included as an afterthought or token, while the girls shown in connection with Asian countries could be perceived as stereotypes.
In terms of gender diversity, the Stila girls may have inadvertently reinforced the outdated notion that makeup is only for women, and able-bodied, cis-gendered, traditionally feminine women at that. Where are the Stila boys? Where are the people who don’t identify with any gender? What about those who use wheelchairs? These questions were not on the industry’s radar back then, but asking them is downright essential to any brand’s survival now. There would have to be a wider range of people depicted if Stila or another company relied on illustrations for packaging and art direction today.
3. The issue of underrepresentation in beauty ads has persisted for decades, yet scant attention paid to it. In her graduate thesis, LaPorchia C. Davis cites one of the few studies related to black girls in advertising. A 2002 study “found that the African American girls felt that mainstream teen magazines seemed to overlook their fundamental concerns and interests and assumed that White dominance is normal and accepted throughout the mainstream media. The African American girls did not feel that the clothing, cosmetics, and grooming products advertised or discussed in the mainstream magazines fit their preferences or needs.” Davis, LaPorchia C., “African American women’s use of cosmetics products in relation to their attitudes and self-identity” (2013, p. 5).
4. In 2010, a Makeup Alley user remarked that “Stila is a brand I mark as ‘not brown girl friendly’ for the most part so I rarely look [at their line].”
Legacy
While the girls may not be up to 2019 standards in terms of diversity, they helped plant the seeds for the industry’s evolving views on representation in advertising. Lobell notes that even in the early 1990s, her intention was to represent everyone via the illustrations. One way of doing that was to make them as broad as possible rather than depicting specific women. “I wanted it to be about inclusion…I just loved that they could be anybody,” she tells the Makeup Museum. This statement demonstrates that the illustrations were meant to signify not so much a certain type of woman but rather a general embodiment of Stila’s aesthetic (modern, fashionable and accessible), functioning more as a brand mascot than representations of actual people. Fulvimari also emphasizes the importance of inclusion in his work. “I don’t ever want to be labelled as ‘prejudiced’ in the fashion world. I want my audience to be from all walks of life,” he says. Although it had a somewhat flawed execution, the desire to be inclusive via the illustrations was made clear from the brand’s start.
Not only did they set Stila apart, the illustrations paved the way for the increased use of fashion illustrations in other brands. While most companies do not employ an in-house illustrator to create images for their packaging and marketing as Stila did, the number of outside artist/illustrator collaborations with cosmetics brands in the past 20 years has skyrocketed. These collaborations are beneficial to everyone; the artist receives additional exposure and makeup customers learn about artists they might not otherwise discover. Additionally, they’re able to afford a reproduction of the artist’s work.
Lastly, the notion of wearing makeup purely as a form of self-expression, not because of pressure to measure up to an unattainable standard, was becoming the norm rather than the exception at the beginning of the 1990s. With their girl illustrations, Stila led the way in solidifying makeup’s primary purpose as a strictly voluntary creative outlet rather than a necessity to appear conventionally attractive. Stila encouraged women to experiment with makeup for enjoyment and find their own style rather than focus on using makeup to imitate what both society and beauty industry alike were proclaiming to be “beautiful”; with no model to compare themselves to, women felt more free to use their imagination in applying makeup and discover what looks they enjoy the most. When asked about the legacy of the Stila girls, Lobell concludes: “I’m not sure what the legacy is but I imagine it made people think out of the box - there are different ways to represent your brand besides airbrushed women. A little whimsy goes a long way.”