Okay, now that I'm looking at more of these they are sort of odd. They all start to look like performers on the Lawrence Welk Show. I'm imagining them in chiffon dresses, standing in a line, singing Proud Mary. Just not workin' for me.
Lovely drawings, but something a little off.
(SOURCE: TEEN, March 1965) Click on image to see it larger.
(SOURCE: TEEN, September 1967) Click on image to see it larger.
Posts
They do look a little odd, don't they? But then, it was an odd time for women, and we were still supposed to conform to a particular vision, remember? And I've just found this ephemera blog -- love it!
ReplyDeleteYes, it was walking the fine line back then and companies didn't know which direction to go. It was right around the time when everything culturally seemed to blow up leaving advertisers suddenly aware that sometimes they needed to be "hip" which lead to some dreadful stuff. Stay tuned.
DeleteGlad you found the place.
That was my shampoo growing up. Then we switched to Herbalessence in the green bottle. Same company, I think. Jazzier graphics. But I always loved the Breck girls. Corny as they are.
ReplyDeleteOh yes, the first perfumed shampoo. It was amazing to have it smell like something other than soap. Now I just want to have it smell like I soap again.
DeleteSay what one may about the hair fashions of the now-distant past [even the beehives] but, in my opinion, they were all better than what is seen today. The finger-in-a-light-socket, eggbeater and multi-colored hairdos of today are ALL awful. Decades from now people will probably be asking what was wrong with everyone in the early-2000s, especially the females, for doing their darndest to look as freakish as possible. Hair should compliment and attractively frame the face, not be a scary or bizarre, jaw-dropping distraction.
ReplyDelete