My aim with this is simply to express my dumbfoundedness. In the same way that my occasional series about places I'm not all that fussed about visiting looks at immensely popular places that I myself don't see what's so great about, here I'll be looking at people who have been highly acclaimed for their looks that I myself don't see as anything special. It's the disagreement between my opinion and that of the majority of the population that's the point of interest for me.
I say this, because I'm aware that rating people for their looks is regarded as a barbaric medieval practice in some quarters and I don't want to give the impression that I'm doing this for no good reason. All the people I'll be featuring have already been widely acclaimed for their beauty; whether this is objectification or empowerment isn't the issue here. I'm merely noting that it's happened for these people and they came out exceptionally well. The reason I'm posting is because I can't for the life of me see why they did come out exceptionally well. It's not that I think they're ugly, it's just I can't see why their looks are so highly admired.
Yeah, you turned off a while back and just want to know who's number 1 on my list.
Number 1 on my list is Marelene Dietrich:
I know that millions of people adored her looks, and that millions of people still do. You could well be looking at the above picture thinking, "What's he talking about, she's hot!".
I really don't see it, though. None of my beauty-detecting senses are firing here.
I know that different times have different standards for beauty, but if I think of some of her contemporaries — Claudette Colbert, Lillian Gish, even Mary Pickford — yes, I can feel my pupils widening. Marlene Dietrich, though? She's similar to Carole Lombard, except I prefer Carole Lombard.
Nope, sorry Marelene, I just don't see it.
Yet millions of fans disagree.