Charlotte alerted us to a make-up brand called Primitive that makes and sells natural lips sticks, glosses, and pencils.
The company is drawing on familiar associations of primitiveness with naturalness. We were natural “for centuries,” but have now somehow graduated from naturalness, such that we need to make a special effort to recapture the simple, intelligent, real, and honest beauty of our foremothers.
So, Primitive romanticizes our primitive past while making a questionable assertion about the relationship between time and naturalness. In addition, the names of their products locate primitiveness in some parts of the (modern) globe and not others.
The products are named after places that are, almost exclusively, in Africa, Latin America, Asia, and the South Pacific. In a previous post I introduced the idea of “anachronistic space.” I wrote: “Catherine MacKinnon coined the term ‘anachronistic space’ to refer to the idea that different parts of the globe represent different historical periods.” In this case, Primitive is counting on our associating a (romanticized) primitiveness with only some places and not others. It’s 2010 in Mali and Morocco. They don’t represent our own past, they represent unique modernities. And the places left out of these product names — largely North America and Europe — don’t represent the future. They are not wholly modern societies that have shed their primitive past; they, just like all societies, are a mixture of old and new stitched together to form the present.
For more instances in which anachronistic space appears, see our posts on representing the fashion of the Surma and Mursi tribes and Wild African Cream.
And for more on the social construction of the modern and the primitive, see these posts: “Africans” as props for white femininity, Union Carbide brings modernity to the world, primitive Australia cures modern ills, women as carries of tradition and progress, representing the Middle East, equating modernity with permissiveness, and civilizing the Pueblos.
Lisa Wade, PhD is an Associate Professor at Tulane University. She is the author of American Hookup, a book about college sexual culture; a textbook about gender; and a forthcoming introductory text: Terrible Magnificent Sociology. You can follow her on Twitter and Instagram.
Comments 12
Deaf Indian Muslim Anarchist — March 24, 2010
Primitive is such an offensive, racist word. Whenever I hear that word, along with "barbarians," I am reminded of my childhood, when white Christian kids at my school would call Hindus/Indians or Africans (doesn't matter where in Africa, you see, cos all Africans were considered to be one and same!) "primitive barbarians" just because the cultures, the beliefs were different. I used to feel ashamed to be Indian for a long time because of that...
Molly — March 24, 2010
Nearly 80% are places someone might go on a cruise (Sahara, Mali, and Taj Mahal are the only exceptions).
These aren't just anachronistic spaces (though I wouldn't dispute that characterization); they're places where "modern" people can go to temporarily become "primitive" -- to assume what they imagine are the most desirable aspects of a primitive lifestyle (apparently, semi-nude indolence, with a dollop of sexual license).
I've only been to the Caribbean a few times (two cruises and a "destination wedding" at a resort), but every time I was really struck by the huge gap between the (primarily American/European) tourists' imaginary Caribbean (lush vegetation, hookups, and umbrella drinks) and the actual Caribbean (a lot of working class, church-going families).
Even when it was right in front of the tourists' faces, many of them didn't seem to see it.
So I guess this lipstick promises that with no "artifice" (=effort?) on the wearer's part, an oiled-up man in a bathing suit (speedo or trunks, according to one's preference) will appear to offer an umbrella drink and a massage?
Jeff Kaufman — March 24, 2010
the places left out of these product names — largely North America and Europe
Really? Looking over the list I see:
sahara - africa
corsica - europe
tahiti - pacific
martinique - north america
mali - africa
morocco - africa
belize - north america
taj mahal - india
st lucia - north america
cozumel - north america
lanai - pacific (hawaii)
rio - south america
ibiza - spain
fiji - pacific
All the north american ones are caribbean, all the european ones are mediterranean.
I agree with molly: these places are for the most part, to the companies customers, places one could imagine going for a romantic vacation.
KarenS — March 24, 2010
Just a nit pick: Belize is in Central America.
queenstuss — March 25, 2010
And don't we pick and choose between the 'primitive' things we desire and those which we shun? I bet these products come in very 'un-primitive' packaging.
K — March 25, 2010
I think it's odd that a lot of these places couldn't really be considered "primitive." I mean, Ibiza is famous for its nightclubs and discos. And the Taj Mahal is the kind of structure that meets the West's definition of sophisticated and non-primitive.
They probably should have called the makeup line "Places with Brown People," instead of "Primitive."
Alice — March 29, 2010
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and suggest that primitiveness implies being at one with nature, therefore the places they picked are ones where it is warm enough to be at one with nature. In the nude. Eating berries from the bushes and stuff.
Okay, not really; this is pretty awful.
Anonymous — March 31, 2010
The most offensive line here to me was "natural beauty that can only come from natural makeup". Makeup is so strongly attached to the effeminate gender that in relation to women, "natural", being the bare minimum, means a certain kind of makeup (whether in some sense organic or less noticeable) and pictures of women that are clearly wearing makeup are described as if they are not wearing makeup. Has makeup become so expected and ordinary that it has become an innate part of the face of a human female in the average person's mind? Why don't people seem to give a damn that this vapid superficial culture is consuming females while leaving males entirely untouched? Why don't people seem to give a damn that the concavity or convexity of their genitals determines what kind of person they are made to be? Why don't people seem to give a damn that popular culture in general is defecating on their intelligence and dignity as human beings at every turn?