Please note that I originally wrote this blog post in 2015 on my previous website, GET the LOOK. Some of the information below may be outdated. Currently, I work mainly with Ethereal Typology, created by me.
Outfits pinned on my Pinterest and my Instagram are the most current sources of information.
A Dramatic woman is best described by the term: aristocrat. David Kibbe only focused on the shapes of the face and figure, calling the Dramatic woman sharp, elongated, and angular. It doesn’t sound very appealing to someone who just found out that they represent one of the most masculine types of beauty (the other is Flamboyant Natural). Women want to feel feminine. Mr. Kibbe’s descriptions, in the case of the Dramatic type, are not particularly helpful in that matter. Therefore, it is worth looking at this type from a different point of view. A Dramatic woman has noble features, royal posture, graceful moves. Generally, we should analyze the bone structure and body structure, but the whole concept should be explained using the most stylish adjectives.
David Kibbe confronted the Dramatic type with the Flamboyant Gamine type due to the predominance of the features from answers A (see TEST). However, the Dramatic type is, in fact, most easily confused with Flamboyant Natural. Both are often represented by tall women with a similar body type (rectangle or cone) and strong, distinct facial features. Nonetheless, Dramatic women have a more refined bone structure and much sharper contours of the figure and face. The difference between these two types is best demonstrated by models – contemporary and those from the 90s. Today, Dramatic is the most common type on the catwalks, while the icons of modeling in the 90s were most often women of the Flamboyant Natural type (heavier figure, larger breasts).
Even after losing a few pounds, Claudia Schiffer would never have had the figure of Anja Rubik. Instead, her build would always be larger due to heavier bone structure and wider bones. Anja is quite an extreme example due to her skinny figure. However, she undoubtedly belongs to the Dramatic type.
Coming back to the 90s for a while, Linda Evangelista is also worth mentioning. She definitely distinguished herself compared to the hundreds of models from that period. Unlike Claudia Schiffer or Cindy Crawford, who are the Flamboyant Natural types, Linda is a distinct Dramatic type.
Below is a contrasting image of Linda (Dramatic) and Cindy (Flamboyant Natural). You can clearly see the difference not only in the facial features, which is obvious but above all in the body structure. Linda is remarkably smaller, with narrower arms, slimmer hands, and thinner legs.
By the way, the outfits of both ladies are worth a comment. Cindy wears a Dramatic dress that unfavorably exposes and enlarges her broad shoulders. On the other hand, Linda is wearing an outfit that would be more suited for a Classic woman (classic polka dots). The cut of the dress is not bad; it is a classic minimalist style. Unfortunately, polka dots combined with lace completely clash with Linda’s bold beauty. They are both completely different stories. Anyway, the dress is terrible at all. Who and why added this horrifying lace? Well, those are the charms of the previous fashion trends.
David Kibbe recommends sleek, smooth, geometric, swept off the face hairstyles. Perhaps for many Dramatic women, this would be the best option. However, hairstyle and haircut are very individual matters. Each Dramatic woman looks a bit different, has a different hair type, color type, and even face shape. For example, Linda Evangelista, a chameleon, looked fantastic in almost every cut and color. Now let’s imagine Anja Rubik in smoothly combed hair, revealing her entire face. It would be rather unfortunate.
Keira Knightley, on the other hand, looks very good both in a bob covering the cheeks and in long waves, i.e., both hairstyles not recommended by David Kibbe for the Dramatic type. The issue of the bangs is also open. Most Dramatic women look unfavorable in it, but there are also faces that clearly look good in bangs.
One thing is for sure. Sharp, male haircuts should be avoided. The specificity of Dramatic’s beauty makes the face look too masculine with very short hair. Quite another thing is a smooth hairstyle; hair combed back or behind the ears. They also reveal the face but in a completely different way. They are ascetic but feminine.
According to David Kibbe, a Dramatic makeup should be clear and well-defined: a strong emphasis on the eyes and cheekbones combined with intense lips. In this matter, it is similarly difficult to agree 100%. While such makeup does work for dark-haired Dramatic, it does not suit women with lighter color types.
The accent on the eyes? Absolutely, we need power here. Cheekbones – if they are distinct on their own, why make them up additionally? Unless it’s for the evening or the photo makeup. Lips – the intense color of the lipstick does not necessarily match the light, muted Dramatics. However, it is indispensable for dark-haired people. Below are some examples of the right makeup for Dramatic women representing different color types. When looking at the photos below, it is worth paying attention to hairstyles that do not necessarily meet Mr. Kibbe’s requirements but are quite suitable for women wearing them (all of them are a Dramatic type of beauty).
Elegance and chic – those are the focal motifs of the Dramatic style. It does not mean that women of this type of beauty have to give up comfortable, everyday outfits. It’s all about the shapes of clothing and accessories being sharp and sculpted. Clothes must fit well. They need to have crisp, clear lines.
