You won’t find your Body Type by looking at Marilyn Monroe
My Image Archetype clients care about one thing: what clothes and accessories to wear and how to identify them in a store. For example, in a shoe store, they want to quickly point out the shoes that will suit them and those they should avoid. What they don’t care about is whether their eye shape looks like the eye shape of a celebrity of the same Image Archetype aka Body Type… You might be wondering, “Daniela, what are you talking about”? Let me elaborate…
In the previous article I explain why I highly respect David Kibbe’s approach to image consulting. David Kibbe understands that for a woman (or a man) to look like a goddess, like a star, like the best version of herself, she needs to find the context (i.e. the silhouette, form, fit, cuts etc.) that flatters her the most. Equally, she needs to understand her less as well as the least flattering lines, silhouettes and fits. The key to Kibbe’s theory is an in depth understanding of her bone and flesh structure, her yin and yang lines, proportions… her body geometry as well as her essence. If there is disharmony, if there is a war between the garments and the body type, the overall image will never be aesthetically pleasing. (It might be attention grabbing though, which might be desired in some circumstances.)
The danger with D. Kibbe’s theory is that some people, who study his work and are curious to understand their Body Type (BT), don’t see the forest for the trees. They never end up with an understanding about what silhouettes, cuts, shapes, clothes and accessories are the most flattering on them. Why? Because they are overly focused on analysing their features by comparing them to the Kibbe verified celebrities, i.e. photographs of celebrities such as Marlin Monroe, Audrey Hepburn, Cher, Jennifer Aniston, Grace Kelly, Elizabeth Taylor, Liza Minnelli etc. (Kibbe verified celebrities are celebrity examples D. Kibbe uses to explain and illustrate his 13 Body Types.) People compare, again and again, their face and body with the features of famous movie starts and never end up feeling like they fit any of the BTs. They do the Kibbe BT test and get more and more confused. Some say, (here I decided to exaggerate in order to get my point across): “Well, the slope of the shoulder of this celebrity is x° yet my slope is (x-9)° hence I cannot possibly be that BT…” or “Look at her nose (cheeks/waist/eye shape) compared to mine, oh no, this cannot be me either”.
The problem is that some people try to find their exact cheek, eye, shoulder, hip, chest and ribcage form, nose, hand and leg shape in celebrities’ faces and bodies and they often fail to do so. Some do succeed, however, many don’t. Eventually, feeling exhausted and discouraged, they often abandon the Kibbe theory.
They cannot see the forest for the trees. Their approach often leads nowhere. Why?
First and foremost, celebrities are not a general representation of the population nor do they represent mutually exclusively each and every Kibbe BT. By no means do I suggest that David Kibbe didn’t type them correctly. Yes, he did. However, these are (mostly Caucasian) celebrities who are often perceived in the Western world as some of the most beautiful and attractive people on the planet. In terms of their physicality, they are the winners of the genetic jackpot.
Secondly, there is seldom a female movie star without a fair amount of plastic surgery under her belt. Already in the days of old Hollywood, aesthetic enhancements were not uncommon. Both Marilyn Monroe and Liz Taylor underwent a number of aesthetic procedures (rhinoplasty and eyebrow lift is quite obvious compared to their pre-fame photographs). Looking at any celeb photographs: you name it, it could have been altered: noses, eyebrows, hair lines, breasts, waists, fat removal, eye-lid surgeries etc.
Thirdly, female celebrities are often on the lower end of their BMI or below the normal levels of BMI which might distort peoples’ perception of their flesh structure. Honestly, have you ever seen a chubby Kibbe verified celebrity examples? How many chubby or overweight celebrities are there to begin with? (Ok, I will not go there now, that would be another topic altogether.)
To sum up the above points, many of the Kibbe verified celebrity examples not only won the genetic lottery, they are also further perfected to satisfy the film industry requirements. With female celebrities, facial feature surgeries, breast and hip augmentations and waist definition surgeries enhance the Yin in the body (extra roundness, less prominent straight lines), whereas fat removal and low BMI enhance the Yang in the body (removal of the soft fleshiness). Now, this doesn’t mean that the BT changes with the surgery. Most probably it remains the same. However, the probability that we will be able to find our “mere mortal features” without any doubt among the features of Kibbe certified celebs is low. Especially if we overly focus on the tiniest details, we will always find deviations, and therefore might conclude that because of that deviation, we are not that particular BT. And this may happen with each and every BT. We won’t see the forest for the trees.
Real-life Romantic BT men and women who are most flattered by Romantic clothes and silhouettes might think they look nothing like Marilyn Monroe or Kit Harington. Real-life Theatrical Romantic men and women who are most flattered by Theatrical Romantic clothes and accessories wouldn’t agree that they have much in common with Vivienne Leigh and Johny Depp. Yet, they do belong to the same category. The trained eye of a body geometry expert will see the similarities in bone, flesh and yin and yang structure and balance. Still, it may not be so obvious to the general interpreter of the Kibbe BT Test. And I can guarantee that there are Romantic BT women out there who took the test and compared every feature they have with Marilyn Monroe, Elizabeth Taylor and Beyoncé and they concluded that because of the differences to the celebrities’ features, they most probably are NOT that type (while actually they are a Romantic BT).
Therefore, don’t compare yourself to the celebrities to the point of absurdity. Please don’t. Understand the theory behind the bones, flesh and vertical and horizontal lines, between yin and yang and understand how your height plays a role too. But don’t overly obsess with the celebrities’ hands, noses, eyes and shoulders. Please don’t. Instead, narrow down your options and then try on garments and silhouettes and fits of your most probable BT. Try them on and asses the situation. You should be able to order the results from least to most flattering. The most flattering clothes are your BT, your Image Archetype.
In the end, it is all about the clothes. What clothes suit you best, what is your most flattering silhouette, how do you combine garments, where do you create a horizontal line (if ever?), how about the vertical line, what is the shape of your ideal accessories and shoes, etc.? The answer is in the context between your body geometry and the clothes. For some of us, the answer will be impossible to find if we have to choose whether we look more like Madonna, Kate Blanchett or Gwyneth Paltrow. It won’t work. Your brain might find arguments for why you look a bit like all of them and neither of them all at the same time. And the vicious circle will keep turning.
The Kibbe’s Body Type theory is a revolutionary and excellent approach to finding your most flattering clothing items. However, it is a system that some use as their master rather than a servant. Don’t end up being a Kibbe BT Test and Celebrity BT slave. Master the theory and apply it to yourself. It is in the application, in the comparison of silhouettes in the context of your body that the answer can be found. You will get more answers there than by looking at old black & white Hollywood photographs.
You may book your Image Archetype analysis session with Style Identity in Zurich.
Notes:
Having said all of the above, I am the first to admit that while studying D. Kibbe’s theory I often ended in the vicious circle.
I use a couple of old Hollywood b&w celebrity photographs to illustrate some of the BTs on my website.
And I study the Kibbe certified celebs religiously. Of course I do! However, over the years, I’ve learned to determine not only celebrities, but most importantly everyday people, everyday Janes and Joes. But it took me quite some time before I could transcend my “celeb-level” understanding of the BTs to everyday people.
When I do the Image Archetype Analysis, both body geometry analysis as well as the clothes approach have to lead me to the same result.
There are examples of people who do feel that the 13 BTs do not represent them well, that is why some stylists add Ingenue and Ethereal (aka Angelic) types as well as a combination of 3 types to the mix. Read more bout it in The Origins and Evolution of the Image Archetypes (Body Types). Still, even if you are a combination of 3 essences, you will be able to find the dominant one among the Kibbe BTs. It might not tell the full story of your body geometry, but it will be rather close or simply closer than the remaining 12 BTs.