I used to be a pretty low-maintenance girl.
Yes, I can hear you scoffing.
No really, I was. I mean, I like makeup and cosmetics and shoes and all things girly, but in the old days, I wore make up because I liked it.
Not because the skin on my face appears to be sliding off and breaking out all at the same time.
And blotchy.
And with these wierd little breakouts.
I went to the Origins counter...to see what could be done.
And it was fun - she put all this stuff on my face, and chatted and it was like a mini-makeover. And my skin felt lovely. And looked good too.
She wrote down everything I should buy.
Which, if I had bought everything that day, would have come to $605. I mean really!
There was an article in one of the Sunday papers that expensive cosmetics make little of no more difference to cheap ones. I'm not convinced.
What do people think? Is your Clinique better than your ponds?
I know that my MAC makeup is better than my Maybelline (except for the Mascara - the only mascara you'll ever need is great lash), if for no other reason than it makes me feel better about myself. And the packaging is prettier. And the names are cooler (my favourite lipstick for example is New York Apple).
So cosmetics? Should I (over the course of about three years) shell out for the expensive stuff, that really is lovely. Or is my Garnier pure, and the occasional home-facial, enough?
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
Maintain Me!
Subscribe to:
Comment Feed (RSS)

|