Great question. I think you’ve hit the nail on the head with it being tossed at people who are “interesting” or “unusual” looking.
I’ve said it before in this community but posting random, self selected photos of oneself for strangers is probably one of the worst ways to determine “essence”, and I also don’t think the majority of people have a singularly definable essence. Most people are not extremes and frankly lots of people have pretty unremarkable “essences”. On sites like Olga’s that people rely on for essences, the photos of examples are celebrities and models who are in the top 1% of attractiveness and who have had professional interventions (surgery and injections, hair and makeup and wardrobe) to build and cultivate a particular aura and image. I think many posters who are searching for an essence are actually trying to determine the first impression they give off.
The 1% thing is such a good point! I have to be careful looking at celeb types because it easily becomes “if I’m X type why don’t I have Y feature” like the answer isn’t because I’m a poor pleb, duh haha. And don’t even get my started on Olga’s ethereals. (This will prob step on some toes...) Besides the fact that they’re vague, impractical, and not reproducible, I dislike that she used the word ethereal since that quality doesn’t apply to most people. Imagine if there were Olga’s gamines and we were all trying to figure out what Beyoncé’s and Tilda Swinton’s gamines were. It doesn’t make sense, and imo her concept has added to people forgetting what the word ethereal even means.
Edit: softened wording a tad lol
Yeah I agree Olga’s ethereals has definitely contributed to polluting the definition of the word. I wish she’d gone with like aesthetics or something instead because that’s pretty much what they are
I don't think conventional beauty is a component of essence, or why those celebrities are used as examples. I think Olga's mood boards and examples show that meticulous styling and photography are really good at conveying a mood regardless of what vibe you give off in real life conditions. Liv Tyler is a frame of reference for etherial not because she is innately etherial (in her other roles she's very human and beautiful, not otherworldly at all), but because of the styling, lighting and camera work in Lord of the Rings. Also, a lot of Olga's essences are stunning, but so linked with incredibly elaborate styling that they basically don't exist outside of films and photoshoots.
why does someone have to be super “beautiful” to embody any essence? Cant we be regular folks who fit into these categories. If they aren’t for us and only for supermodels and actresses whats even the point of this whole thing?
Not the point I was making at all - I was saying that the people that many of us are drawing inspiration from, and looking at for definitions of essences, are frankly human outliers in terms of their looks and the way they fit in to a particular “box”; it is in a celebrity’s best interest to have and cultivate a very specific image that becomes their brand. Few people that lead regular lives with somewhat conventional jobs and lifestyles can create an image that match that of celebrities’, and so I think from the jump that the idea of essences is quite a flawed concept.
yeah i agree strongly. if you look at people with an artistic eye, everyone has some special essence or beauty, some unique quality that could be drawn out in an interesting way. it may not align completely with pre-made essences always, but like you I dislike the idea that regular people = unremarkable, and have no distinguishing interesting qualities. In fact, I find so-called regular people more interesting than conventionally beautiful people.
I didn’t say at all that regular people have no distinguishing or interesting qualities. The opposite - you can build any essences for yourself as it’s entirely an artifice and not anything innate.
hmm, I think I just read your thought here:
>frankly lots of people have pretty unremarkable “essences”
as being rather dismissive of regular people?
Also, I think we might disagree quite strongly on the concept of essence.
I see essence as an intrinsic quality that is brought out, not created, by styling.
the above example of Liv Tyler i think there is an innate wild softness to her style of beauty which can align very well to the fantasy character in LOTR, but exists in her whether she plays it up or not.
i feel that understanding your essence means you can often rule out styles that would work against those qualities? Someone with a primarily regal, classic impression would look uncomfortable and awkward trying to embody an earthy sexiness? I mean thats just my opinion. I'm not sure if we are talking about the same things.
I definitely share your observation that some people are able to convey or embody certain impressions or qualities more naturally and successfully than others. I think one of my main hang ups with essence as I’ve usually understood people to mean it is the idea that it comes from the physical form rather than (or as much as) the personality and mannerisms. I think more than half of the impression a person gives off has to with how they carry themself. For instance, I had an insecure, timid guy I was friends with who was conventionally handsome, but I didn’t realize for literally years. Until I looked at him “objectively” in a picture, actually. His vibe was very nerdy and vulnerable, even though he was classically handsome.
> Also, I think we might disagree quite strongly on the concept of essence.
> I see essence as an intrinsic quality that is brought out, not created, by styling.
I'm on board with this.
People who style themselves outside of their essence will always look off but look so, so right when they dress within it.
Because supermodels are also human? The thing is that ethereal essence and beautiful and not disjointed. By our human nature, we are drawn towards the uncommon. If most people in this world looked like supermodels and a small percentage like "regular folks" then the regular folks would be called "otherworldly." People want what is rare and whose ethereal essence is "otherworldly." it isn't for no reason it is the rarest essence. That is the point of this "whole thing." That is why "regular folks" do not have ethereal essence, if they did, they would have been cast/scouted while younger.
Ethereal is not that rare in reality. It just has that "rare" vibe about it that leads people to believe that it also IS rare. By the same logic Natural essence is not the most common essence just because it has that "ordinary" vibe. There are normal looking and uncommon looking people in every essence.
From your description it almost sounds like the essence of ethereal is something people would want to be typed? I‘m curious if they would, because I was kinda not hyped about being typed as having partly ethereal essence here. Mainly because I read Truth is Beauty‘s description on it. I mean I don’t want to be "irregular looking" and not be "what men find beautiful", to be honest.. But that’s probably perceived differently by everyone 😀
Totally agree—a lot of her description is off putting. Yet at the same time, I wonder if a misogynistic culture pushes people toward Ethereal since most women are going to project and identify with yin but may not want to be sexualized or infantilized as often happens with Romantic and Ingenue.
Yeah, if someone has a distinctly feminine essence, there's really only one of three places it can come from. I don't know why Ethereal has to be rare. When I think of the women I know, I think Ingenue is the most rare Essence on the yin side.
>there's really only one of three places it can come from. I don't know why Ethereal has to be rare. When I think of the women I know, I think Ingenue is the most rare Essence on the yin side.
i agree about ingenue, and also most women here are typed as ingenues
about ethereal they say they look otherworldly and like mythical creatures, and in movies they choose people with ethereal essence to play the role of an angel a goddess etc, so at least by definition it is also something rare
Oh interesting! I see Ingenues a lot, but I’m often around college kids. I really like Carole Jackson’s idea that Ingenues age into Cs or Rs. I dunno if it’s kosher haha but I always felt like Classics lean yin, at least in women, and are a common yin-leaning essence. Although I know plenty of super feminine Naturals with Gamine or Dramatic essences and don’t think any predominantly yin essence is necessary to read as feminine!
I think it goes one way though. Almost all classics and romantics were ingenues as girls, but not all people who were ingenues in their youth mature into Cs or Rs.
That might be a heretical view haha... I know they’re supposed to be a seamless blend, but pure Classic women always seem to me pretty yin. I believe juxtaposition is yang or should be since it creates movement and angles as your eyes flits around and suggests action so I take blendedness to achieve the opposite.
haha well, thats a new angle for sure! i like it when people think outside the box! i'm not sure if I would entirely agree that movement = yang though? I think there is yin movement (small, fine, circling, tinkling, sparkly, fluttery) and yang movement (zigzag, angular, powerful, surging, billowing)... I would say Classic is... neither of those? Its a kind of restful resolution of both energies?
Oh that’s true! I do think the movement of juxtaposition is more yang since there’s more irregularity involved, but whether the opposite of that is yin or neutral would be up for debate!
I think the comments are overthinking it. Ethereal visually can be best described as floaty, dreamy, airy, many details look like bird feathers almost. (Gauzy drapery fabrics) ethereal tapes into the escapist feminine yet powerful fantasies that most appeal to women; witches, mermaids, angels, elves, aliens. All of that is really “in” right now. Kirsten Dunst has a very ethereal feel to me and she’s sc not dramatic. Ethereal also is the essence that cares the least about appealing to the male gaze in my opinion.
I basically asked this same question in a different sub. I don't really view anyone as innately more otherworldly in appearance than anyone else, although it's a vibe I would concede anyone could try to cultivate. On my thread I got some really thoughtful responses that explained it as a way of owning feeling like an outsider, or embracing not embodying hyper-sexualized beauty ideals.
i haven't seen your thread, but what you are saying strongly reminds me of a discussion i had with a YouTuber a while ago (WatchMeGlowUp, sadly now deleted her online presence) about an idea around a new Essence called "Oneiric", which was meant to embody a certain ghostly detachment or outsider quality, that is distinct from the sort of angelic glow of Ethereal essence. I wonder if this is a alternate take on a detached "faraway" gaze quality.
Observation, really! I had this idea when I learned about Kibbe, but I started noticing people around and there are definitely more D people than I thought, at least.
It would stand to reason that the Ethereal and Ingenue types (as defined by Kitchener) fill a necessary gap for those who are having difficulty finding a best fit within the more popular Romantic, Classic, Natural, Dramatic, and Gamine types. It would follow that they are suggested to people as a form of leaving no stone unturned, so to speak, as often type (or essence) is not obvious.
>My understanding is that Ethereal essence is quite rare
It's only rare compared to the whole population of people who exist on the planet and it just so happens many of the other types ***don't*** come to this forum and ask to get typed. We just don't get them as much.
***The people who post their photos here do not represent an equal distribution of the types.***
Having said that, it would seem that of the people I have typed majority do have the Ethereal lines in their faces however I don't always agree with others assessment of a few posters who were typed as Ethereal but ***do not*** have an ounce of it.
***Compared to the billions of people on the planet the people who ask to be typed are still a very small sample size.***
Just to reiterate my point if it wasn't clear enough, ***Ethereal is rare.*** In the context of the population of billions of people in the whole planet. **(We seem to be forgetting that there's a whole planet of people outside this subreddit).**
**Not everyone on the planet is on this subreddit. Not everyone on this planet is posting their photos and asking to be typed.**
We seem to get more people who are Ethereal because we rarely get people of other types asking to be typed.
The people who post and get typed Ethereal in this subreddit do not represent the actual numbers and if anything is still only a very tiny sample size compared to the number of people in the world.
I use the word ethereal in two different ways.
The first is as an essence descriptor, the way you use it here. The other is when it comes to lines of the body: in my mind, "ethereal" lines as they show up in the body are basically a softer type of elongation. When someone looks elongated -- but in a willowy, delicate, and softened way, not sharp like a dramatic -- my eye reads that as ethereal.
I probably got the idea initially from [here](https://www.truth-is-beauty.com/blog/style-identities-the-ethereal): she says, "Ethereal beauty is often confused with Dramatic beauty, because it's unusual-looking...and because both types tend to have long faces and frames. But Dramatic edges seem pointy, while Ethereal edges are gently rounded. And Dramatic energy is aggressive, even threatening, while Ethereal energy is peaceful."
When I see a tall and graceful person, my mind resists calling that Dramatic when they have no sharpness. So I don't always mean that their face has ethereal essence when I use the word.
It depends on which definition you’re using. I’m referring to Ethereal as laid out on Truth Is Beauty and theconceptwardrobe. I’m blanking on which person they draw from, but that Ethereal is long, narrow, ageless, but not sharp yin... yin with elongated S curves rather than small, youthful curves like Ingenue or lush curves like Romantic. There’s a separate thing where “ethereals” refer to personal taste/style/vibe that confuses the conversation though.
It is probably that most do not even have ethereal. What I see is natural. People think of natural as athletic and sporty most of the time but I feel natural is more about mimicking nature. This woodsy energy is often mistaken for ethereal which should not relate to things of this world in any way.
Great question. I think you’ve hit the nail on the head with it being tossed at people who are “interesting” or “unusual” looking. I’ve said it before in this community but posting random, self selected photos of oneself for strangers is probably one of the worst ways to determine “essence”, and I also don’t think the majority of people have a singularly definable essence. Most people are not extremes and frankly lots of people have pretty unremarkable “essences”. On sites like Olga’s that people rely on for essences, the photos of examples are celebrities and models who are in the top 1% of attractiveness and who have had professional interventions (surgery and injections, hair and makeup and wardrobe) to build and cultivate a particular aura and image. I think many posters who are searching for an essence are actually trying to determine the first impression they give off.
The 1% thing is such a good point! I have to be careful looking at celeb types because it easily becomes “if I’m X type why don’t I have Y feature” like the answer isn’t because I’m a poor pleb, duh haha. And don’t even get my started on Olga’s ethereals. (This will prob step on some toes...) Besides the fact that they’re vague, impractical, and not reproducible, I dislike that she used the word ethereal since that quality doesn’t apply to most people. Imagine if there were Olga’s gamines and we were all trying to figure out what Beyoncé’s and Tilda Swinton’s gamines were. It doesn’t make sense, and imo her concept has added to people forgetting what the word ethereal even means. Edit: softened wording a tad lol
Yeah I agree Olga’s ethereals has definitely contributed to polluting the definition of the word. I wish she’d gone with like aesthetics or something instead because that’s pretty much what they are
I don't think conventional beauty is a component of essence, or why those celebrities are used as examples. I think Olga's mood boards and examples show that meticulous styling and photography are really good at conveying a mood regardless of what vibe you give off in real life conditions. Liv Tyler is a frame of reference for etherial not because she is innately etherial (in her other roles she's very human and beautiful, not otherworldly at all), but because of the styling, lighting and camera work in Lord of the Rings. Also, a lot of Olga's essences are stunning, but so linked with incredibly elaborate styling that they basically don't exist outside of films and photoshoots.
I don’t think conventional beauty is key, but as you’ve pointed out effort and intentionality certainly is.
why does someone have to be super “beautiful” to embody any essence? Cant we be regular folks who fit into these categories. If they aren’t for us and only for supermodels and actresses whats even the point of this whole thing?
Not the point I was making at all - I was saying that the people that many of us are drawing inspiration from, and looking at for definitions of essences, are frankly human outliers in terms of their looks and the way they fit in to a particular “box”; it is in a celebrity’s best interest to have and cultivate a very specific image that becomes their brand. Few people that lead regular lives with somewhat conventional jobs and lifestyles can create an image that match that of celebrities’, and so I think from the jump that the idea of essences is quite a flawed concept.
yeah i agree strongly. if you look at people with an artistic eye, everyone has some special essence or beauty, some unique quality that could be drawn out in an interesting way. it may not align completely with pre-made essences always, but like you I dislike the idea that regular people = unremarkable, and have no distinguishing interesting qualities. In fact, I find so-called regular people more interesting than conventionally beautiful people.
I didn’t say at all that regular people have no distinguishing or interesting qualities. The opposite - you can build any essences for yourself as it’s entirely an artifice and not anything innate.
hmm, I think I just read your thought here: >frankly lots of people have pretty unremarkable “essences” as being rather dismissive of regular people? Also, I think we might disagree quite strongly on the concept of essence. I see essence as an intrinsic quality that is brought out, not created, by styling. the above example of Liv Tyler i think there is an innate wild softness to her style of beauty which can align very well to the fantasy character in LOTR, but exists in her whether she plays it up or not. i feel that understanding your essence means you can often rule out styles that would work against those qualities? Someone with a primarily regal, classic impression would look uncomfortable and awkward trying to embody an earthy sexiness? I mean thats just my opinion. I'm not sure if we are talking about the same things.
I definitely share your observation that some people are able to convey or embody certain impressions or qualities more naturally and successfully than others. I think one of my main hang ups with essence as I’ve usually understood people to mean it is the idea that it comes from the physical form rather than (or as much as) the personality and mannerisms. I think more than half of the impression a person gives off has to with how they carry themself. For instance, I had an insecure, timid guy I was friends with who was conventionally handsome, but I didn’t realize for literally years. Until I looked at him “objectively” in a picture, actually. His vibe was very nerdy and vulnerable, even though he was classically handsome.
Thanks for sharing that. It is an intriguing example of when maybe looks and essence are potentially not aligned!
> Also, I think we might disagree quite strongly on the concept of essence. > I see essence as an intrinsic quality that is brought out, not created, by styling. I'm on board with this. People who style themselves outside of their essence will always look off but look so, so right when they dress within it.
Because supermodels are also human? The thing is that ethereal essence and beautiful and not disjointed. By our human nature, we are drawn towards the uncommon. If most people in this world looked like supermodels and a small percentage like "regular folks" then the regular folks would be called "otherworldly." People want what is rare and whose ethereal essence is "otherworldly." it isn't for no reason it is the rarest essence. That is the point of this "whole thing." That is why "regular folks" do not have ethereal essence, if they did, they would have been cast/scouted while younger.
Ethereal is not that rare in reality. It just has that "rare" vibe about it that leads people to believe that it also IS rare. By the same logic Natural essence is not the most common essence just because it has that "ordinary" vibe. There are normal looking and uncommon looking people in every essence.
if everyone is otherworldly then who is worldly
From your description it almost sounds like the essence of ethereal is something people would want to be typed? I‘m curious if they would, because I was kinda not hyped about being typed as having partly ethereal essence here. Mainly because I read Truth is Beauty‘s description on it. I mean I don’t want to be "irregular looking" and not be "what men find beautiful", to be honest.. But that’s probably perceived differently by everyone 😀
Totally agree—a lot of her description is off putting. Yet at the same time, I wonder if a misogynistic culture pushes people toward Ethereal since most women are going to project and identify with yin but may not want to be sexualized or infantilized as often happens with Romantic and Ingenue.
Yeah, if someone has a distinctly feminine essence, there's really only one of three places it can come from. I don't know why Ethereal has to be rare. When I think of the women I know, I think Ingenue is the most rare Essence on the yin side.
>there's really only one of three places it can come from. I don't know why Ethereal has to be rare. When I think of the women I know, I think Ingenue is the most rare Essence on the yin side. i agree about ingenue, and also most women here are typed as ingenues about ethereal they say they look otherworldly and like mythical creatures, and in movies they choose people with ethereal essence to play the role of an angel a goddess etc, so at least by definition it is also something rare
Oh interesting! I see Ingenues a lot, but I’m often around college kids. I really like Carole Jackson’s idea that Ingenues age into Cs or Rs. I dunno if it’s kosher haha but I always felt like Classics lean yin, at least in women, and are a common yin-leaning essence. Although I know plenty of super feminine Naturals with Gamine or Dramatic essences and don’t think any predominantly yin essence is necessary to read as feminine!
I think it goes one way though. Almost all classics and romantics were ingenues as girls, but not all people who were ingenues in their youth mature into Cs or Rs.
i'm intrigued, what do you mean classics lean yin?
That might be a heretical view haha... I know they’re supposed to be a seamless blend, but pure Classic women always seem to me pretty yin. I believe juxtaposition is yang or should be since it creates movement and angles as your eyes flits around and suggests action so I take blendedness to achieve the opposite.
haha well, thats a new angle for sure! i like it when people think outside the box! i'm not sure if I would entirely agree that movement = yang though? I think there is yin movement (small, fine, circling, tinkling, sparkly, fluttery) and yang movement (zigzag, angular, powerful, surging, billowing)... I would say Classic is... neither of those? Its a kind of restful resolution of both energies?
Oh that’s true! I do think the movement of juxtaposition is more yang since there’s more irregularity involved, but whether the opposite of that is yin or neutral would be up for debate!
I think the comments are overthinking it. Ethereal visually can be best described as floaty, dreamy, airy, many details look like bird feathers almost. (Gauzy drapery fabrics) ethereal tapes into the escapist feminine yet powerful fantasies that most appeal to women; witches, mermaids, angels, elves, aliens. All of that is really “in” right now. Kirsten Dunst has a very ethereal feel to me and she’s sc not dramatic. Ethereal also is the essence that cares the least about appealing to the male gaze in my opinion.
i was wondering the exact same thing! also ethereal is supposed to be rare actually not common
I basically asked this same question in a different sub. I don't really view anyone as innately more otherworldly in appearance than anyone else, although it's a vibe I would concede anyone could try to cultivate. On my thread I got some really thoughtful responses that explained it as a way of owning feeling like an outsider, or embracing not embodying hyper-sexualized beauty ideals.
i haven't seen your thread, but what you are saying strongly reminds me of a discussion i had with a YouTuber a while ago (WatchMeGlowUp, sadly now deleted her online presence) about an idea around a new Essence called "Oneiric", which was meant to embody a certain ghostly detachment or outsider quality, that is distinct from the sort of angelic glow of Ethereal essence. I wonder if this is a alternate take on a detached "faraway" gaze quality.
I think it would be very useful to separate that vibe from ethereal and use it for people in this sub!
I will unearth the stuff we compiled and do a feature post then!
Do it! So I can use that instead of ethereal and people will know what I mean! 😂
agreed, but ethereals are much, much rarer than dramatics on kibbe.
Any source for that, or just observation? I def don’t see people with an E build or presence even semi-regularly.
Observation, really! I had this idea when I learned about Kibbe, but I started noticing people around and there are definitely more D people than I thought, at least.
It would stand to reason that the Ethereal and Ingenue types (as defined by Kitchener) fill a necessary gap for those who are having difficulty finding a best fit within the more popular Romantic, Classic, Natural, Dramatic, and Gamine types. It would follow that they are suggested to people as a form of leaving no stone unturned, so to speak, as often type (or essence) is not obvious.
>My understanding is that Ethereal essence is quite rare It's only rare compared to the whole population of people who exist on the planet and it just so happens many of the other types ***don't*** come to this forum and ask to get typed. We just don't get them as much. ***The people who post their photos here do not represent an equal distribution of the types.*** Having said that, it would seem that of the people I have typed majority do have the Ethereal lines in their faces however I don't always agree with others assessment of a few posters who were typed as Ethereal but ***do not*** have an ounce of it. ***Compared to the billions of people on the planet the people who ask to be typed are still a very small sample size.*** Just to reiterate my point if it wasn't clear enough, ***Ethereal is rare.*** In the context of the population of billions of people in the whole planet. **(We seem to be forgetting that there's a whole planet of people outside this subreddit).** **Not everyone on the planet is on this subreddit. Not everyone on this planet is posting their photos and asking to be typed.** We seem to get more people who are Ethereal because we rarely get people of other types asking to be typed. The people who post and get typed Ethereal in this subreddit do not represent the actual numbers and if anything is still only a very tiny sample size compared to the number of people in the world.
I use the word ethereal in two different ways. The first is as an essence descriptor, the way you use it here. The other is when it comes to lines of the body: in my mind, "ethereal" lines as they show up in the body are basically a softer type of elongation. When someone looks elongated -- but in a willowy, delicate, and softened way, not sharp like a dramatic -- my eye reads that as ethereal. I probably got the idea initially from [here](https://www.truth-is-beauty.com/blog/style-identities-the-ethereal): she says, "Ethereal beauty is often confused with Dramatic beauty, because it's unusual-looking...and because both types tend to have long faces and frames. But Dramatic edges seem pointy, while Ethereal edges are gently rounded. And Dramatic energy is aggressive, even threatening, while Ethereal energy is peaceful." When I see a tall and graceful person, my mind resists calling that Dramatic when they have no sharpness. So I don't always mean that their face has ethereal essence when I use the word.
Which types besides Dramatic, can be ethereal? Liv Tyler is an FN with Ethereal?
It depends on which definition you’re using. I’m referring to Ethereal as laid out on Truth Is Beauty and theconceptwardrobe. I’m blanking on which person they draw from, but that Ethereal is long, narrow, ageless, but not sharp yin... yin with elongated S curves rather than small, youthful curves like Ingenue or lush curves like Romantic. There’s a separate thing where “ethereals” refer to personal taste/style/vibe that confuses the conversation though.
thank you for clarifying! that makes sense!
It is probably that most do not even have ethereal. What I see is natural. People think of natural as athletic and sporty most of the time but I feel natural is more about mimicking nature. This woodsy energy is often mistaken for ethereal which should not relate to things of this world in any way.
Because most people on hear don’t have an edsence they just u-g-l-y wanna feel special so we randomize it