If you have a closer look at how beauty product ranges were developed in the late 19th century, and especially in the first part of the 20th century, you will be surprised to see that many ranges included products for the face muscles, like Barbara Gould’s. How come?
Until recently, and even today, treatments of wrinkles as major signs of ageing have been a priority as part of the anti-ageing approach. The cosmetics industry has always been extremely interested in the origin of wrinkles. In light of this, standard anti-ageing approaches took into account common causes, like ill-adapted food diet, slow microcirculation, loss of skin elasticity, loss of subcutaneous fat, or faulty health practices. But these various suspected causes also included muscular weakness, which was almost put on the same level. The supposed relationship between muscles and wrinkles was based on the belief that the face muscles gradually got weaker due to all sorts of reasons: disease, worry, neglect, age… All this led to skin sagging. As a result, strengthening the face muscles could make the skin firmer, improve face contours, and reduce the formation and appearance of face lines. Such was experts’ logic at that time.
Massages were long associated with this issue, because they were supposed to strengthen muscles. Many massage techniques, and even facial gymnastics techniques suggested more or less efficient approaches.
The well-known Jacquet pinching technique was one of them. Developed by Doctor Jacquet in 1911, it remained widely used until today, either in the form of the initial gestures, or as a more sophisticated practice using devices and a now-reference technique called Endermologie®, which is based on mechanic stress.
Other routines can also be mentioned, like various facial gymnastics methods and very basic devices, like Facial-Flex.
Different rollers and/or wands were also developed in the same vein.
And of course, smartphone applications have recently completed this catalogue of solutions.
DS Nintendo 1 games console
The massage techniques are numerous and it would be very difficult to make an exhaustive inventory. these devices. Serana Habib who helped me to prepare the attached file which completes this information.
However, back in the old days, people thought it was important to feed muscles with muscle oils, also known as “suppling oils”, “toning oils”, or “wrinkle oils”. The rationale behind muscle oils was much similar to that for “skin foods”, also believed to feed the skin by building up subcutaneous fat, the lack of which was also seen as a cause of face lines. The belief in the flesh-regeneration virtues of vegetable oils was widespread, and they were even recommended for thinning treatments to feed the face as part of a diet, so that it would not look gaunt, or to build up the breasts. In 1898, Browning said: “I found out by experience that it is easier to ‘take off’ flesh than to ‘put it on’. But the best treatment is to sleep as much and as often as possible, eat as much of the most nourishing foods as the system can assimilate, avoid nervous excitement, brain work, and muscular exercise, get as much fresh air as possible, and as much laughter, and maintain an equable temperament, a contented mind, and a tendency to indolence. A massage course and some kinds of medicated baths will greatly help with this treatment.” (Browning, 1898, p. 219-220)
Perhaps the most outstanding of muscle oils at that time was developed by a brand called by its creator’s name’s, Eleanor Adair, who promoted the benefits of her Ganesh Eastern Muscle Oil.
Eleanor Adair was a young British woman who, after getting married, stayed a while in India, near the Himalayas. Back to England in the early 20th century, she opened beauty salons which soon got famous. She used her experience in India to claim her “secrets” came from the Kashmir Valley, more exactly from a “Ganesh temple” – hence their name. This notably successful preparation was called “The Great Beautifier”. But although she called her salons by her own name, Adair did not do so with her products and treatments.
The oil was “great” because its qualities and benefits were fundamental, not superficial. When fatigue, overstrain or neglect cause the muscles which form the contour of the face to sag and contract, the outer skin becomes loose, wrinkled and lined, and hollows and puffiness ensue. It is only by rejuvenating, stimulating and nourishing these tired muscles and tissues until they are healthy, full and firm that the outer skin can stretch over them smoothly and evenly, providing a natural, youthful colour. This could be achieved in surprisingly quick time using the Ganesh Eastern Muscle Oil, which was so akin to the skin’s natural oils that the tissues rapidly absorbed it and were strengthened by it.
Eleanor Adair was not the only one to highlight the benefits of this type of cosmetics: most major salon companies used muscle oils in their treatments at some point. Her contemporaries, Jeannette Scalé (Mrs Pomeroy) and Frances Forsythe (Cyclax), did the same.
Also called “tissue oils”, these products were applied on the sagging parts of the face. Most were based on vegetable oil, like olive or almond oil, with small quantities of resin, terebene, methyl salicylate, and camphor oil suitably perfumed. Formulas of muscle oils appeared in most cosmetic chemistry texts until the outbreak of World War Two. Then, they disappeared. Here is an example : Poucher formula, 1932, p. 513-514)
|Huile d’amande douce||1000|
|Huile essentielle de camphre.||5|
|Rose centifloria, No 1091.||10|
Although it was widely believed that only natural oils had ‘nutritive value’, mineral oils were also used, either as part of a formulation or in isolation. This type of oils offset the fact that vegetable oils sometimes left the skin feeling dry (deNavarre, 1941, p. 283), so they were considered more emollient. Also, as they were viewed as occlusive, they helped hydrate the skin and make wrinkles temporarily less visible. Here is another formula example:(Chilson, 1934, p. 320).
|Huile de ricin inodore||10|
In Europe, where biological products were traditionally used, mineral oils were less popular. The same went for “rich” oils, like cod liver, avocado, and turtle oils.
Many American brands added this type of product to their ranges, like Elizabeth Arden, with Ardena Muscle Oil (1930). In 1935, Barbara Gould recommended adding a few drops of her Muscle Oil to her Tissue Cream, which actually had the same purpose. The beginnings of Do-It-Yourself!
As with skin “foods”, the passing of the American Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FD&CA) in 1938 led the American Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to dramatically reduce cosmetics with nutritive claims, to the delight of the American Medical Association (AMA). The 1938 American Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act was only enforced in the USA, which means elsewhere, cosmetics companies could still use this claim until the late 1960s.
Although the products claimed to be muscle oils disappeared for a long time, they later re-emerged. They were often mixed up for massage oils, which had previously existed, but represented a separate category. The name was changed. Apart from massage oils, which were still marketed, as can be seen with Clarins, a particular type of oils prevailed: they bore the antinomical name of “dry oils”. Since oil is not wet, it cannot be dry! You will find a thorough analysis of this category here. These products were widely advertised in the 2000s, a cult product being Nuxe’s Huile Prodigieuse which, although it must not have been inspired from The Great Beautifier, replicated the phenomenon with different characteristics.
Lastly, in the same vein, body oily serums, but especially face oily serums, made a comeback. The industry was led to reconsider this type of preparation due to the case of parabens. Indeed, the issues related to these substances put the notion of microbiological cleanliness in the spotlight. It is well-known that this risk is closely linked to the presence of water in formulas. Compelled to reduce, and even remove antimicrobial preservatives from formulas, the industry focused – again – on anhydrous (water-free) formulas based on oil mixtures. And they appeared to be excellent products. Most of them were based on the oh-so-famous volatile oils, but not only.
These were the 2010s. The cycle is complete – at least for now!!!!
Special thanks to Serena Habib who helps me to right this contribution.