My hair!

My lack of hair!

All right, it doesn't look so bad there, but notice how the second one is much more of a close up of my head, because you no longer need to take a picture of my whole back to get my hair in it. Also it's been shaped so that the sides that hang over my shaved bits are only just longer than my chin, so from the front it looks more like a long bob. To be fair, the hairdresser was the one in the students union, who has seen every sort of inadvisable hair that students can contrive to give themselves and so knew what to do with that bit. But really, it's shorter than I wanted, shorter than it looks when neatly brushed to long and smooth as it is there. It barely catches in the neck of things. I can no longer put it in a plait, because of the layers. It only just stays in a high ponytail, and in a low ponytail the front bits fall instantly out. I'm going to have to work out some other ways of putting it up, because down it just looks dowdy.
I remember a TV programme involving Trinny & Susannah where they pointed out to a woman in her forties that from behind, with her unreconstructed long hair and a little rucksack on her back, she looked like a teenager, and she did, which then looked daft when she turned round and clearly wasn't. I can't remember what hairdo they gave her instead but you can bet it was short and complicated and coloured and would cost endless amounts of money to hairdressers and endless mornings with a blowdrier to keep up. I don't want to look like I've had my hair cut off because it was 'getting too much to deal with' ("There, you'll spend less time shampooing that now," says the hairdresser; NO I WON'T. Seriously, what sort of significant time saving will there be in the whole process of putting shampoo on hair, rubbing it into scalp, rinsing it off, etc., when the bit that's gone is the bit that added by far the least time to the process, mostly getting shampooed by way of being attached to the bits that still will need exactly as much attention?) and yet I refuse to pay hundreds of pounds a year on the sort of high-maintenance brouhaha that people call a hairstyle. Are these really the only options available?

My lack of hair!

All right, it doesn't look so bad there, but notice how the second one is much more of a close up of my head, because you no longer need to take a picture of my whole back to get my hair in it. Also it's been shaped so that the sides that hang over my shaved bits are only just longer than my chin, so from the front it looks more like a long bob. To be fair, the hairdresser was the one in the students union, who has seen every sort of inadvisable hair that students can contrive to give themselves and so knew what to do with that bit. But really, it's shorter than I wanted, shorter than it looks when neatly brushed to long and smooth as it is there. It barely catches in the neck of things. I can no longer put it in a plait, because of the layers. It only just stays in a high ponytail, and in a low ponytail the front bits fall instantly out. I'm going to have to work out some other ways of putting it up, because down it just looks dowdy.
I remember a TV programme involving Trinny & Susannah where they pointed out to a woman in her forties that from behind, with her unreconstructed long hair and a little rucksack on her back, she looked like a teenager, and she did, which then looked daft when she turned round and clearly wasn't. I can't remember what hairdo they gave her instead but you can bet it was short and complicated and coloured and would cost endless amounts of money to hairdressers and endless mornings with a blowdrier to keep up. I don't want to look like I've had my hair cut off because it was 'getting too much to deal with' ("There, you'll spend less time shampooing that now," says the hairdresser; NO I WON'T. Seriously, what sort of significant time saving will there be in the whole process of putting shampoo on hair, rubbing it into scalp, rinsing it off, etc., when the bit that's gone is the bit that added by far the least time to the process, mostly getting shampooed by way of being attached to the bits that still will need exactly as much attention?) and yet I refuse to pay hundreds of pounds a year on the sort of high-maintenance brouhaha that people call a hairstyle. Are these really the only options available?
no subject
Date: 2008-12-18 12:09 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-12-18 04:17 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-12-18 12:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-12-18 12:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-12-18 04:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-12-19 10:38 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-12-19 12:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-12-18 12:25 pm (UTC)"There, you'll spend less time shampooing that now" - corroborates my theory that hairdressers really have no clue what to do with long hair. I seek out middle-aged hairdressers who have seen the effects of what young hairdressers do to their hair and understand the concept of "no really, just cut off the bad parts and don't style it in any way". If anybody says the word layers, I stand up and walk out.
You could do small braids all over and hold them back in a headwrap until the front grows to a sensible length again. Though, cold scalp.
no subject
Date: 2008-12-18 04:23 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-12-18 05:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-12-18 06:35 pm (UTC)That is, in fact, exactly what you should have said. It's still layers, but layers in the ends to stop it being in a nice straight line, as opposed to layers at the front, which frames your face, and is what most people want. 'Feathered at the bottom' may also have worked, or, alternatively, 'You see how there's no straight line on my hair now? I want it exactly like that, but X inches shorter'.
no subject
Date: 2008-12-18 06:59 pm (UTC)Also, though, the layers *are* in the ends. I think I did say something about not wanting it to end abruptly, but her efforts haven't worked very well.
no subject
Date: 2008-12-18 12:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-12-18 04:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-12-19 02:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-12-18 01:55 pm (UTC)Is there any reason that a high ponytail isn't a good enough way to put it up?
Also, I know plenty of people with long hair who don't wash it every day because apparently it takes ages. I'm not sure what they do either. Admittedly I take more than 5 minutes to have a shower because I wash my hair every day, but it's really not that much time. And there is no difference in time between now and when I had hair to my waist. It seems, as a girl, you're meant to carefully blow dry your hair whatever length it is, therefore 'wahing hair' is actually a much longer process for long hair because it would take about an hour to blow dry and straighten. What's the bllody point with long hair? It's straight because it's heavy!
Anyway...
no subject
Date: 2008-12-18 04:29 pm (UTC)I think part of the dissatisfaction may be because it's gone straighter than usual here because it was blow-dried; my hair's still slightly wavy even when full length, and I'd expect it to be more and hopefully interestingly so now it's shorter. I have rewashed it today, it's air-drying, and I'm waiting to see the results.
no subject
Date: 2008-12-18 10:31 pm (UTC)Interferes with hats, hoods, etc?
no subject
Date: 2008-12-18 01:58 pm (UTC)I'm sorry you're not happy with the new hair, though. That's a LOT of hair in that first pic!
no subject
Date: 2008-12-18 01:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-12-18 04:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-12-18 02:59 pm (UTC)i find washing my hair takes a long time. but i think i'm just generally slow. it takes me about an hour to get ready in the morning. i think if i did things like dry/style my hair, put makeup on, have a cup of tea etc. i'd just never make it in to work...
no subject
Date: 2008-12-18 04:44 pm (UTC)I'm not keen on the idea of an alice band - all a bit pearl-necklace and little-lacey-collar. Also bandanas don't suit me because I have no forehead. They make me look like I never got round to growing any frontal lobes.
I'm going to have to do a hairstyle experiment post soon at this rate.
no subject
Date: 2008-12-18 06:45 pm (UTC)french plaits i can do, but never managed a decent one on myself. cos you need all your fingers and to be maintaining tension and i just can't do that behind my head...
i can do the straight-ish but not dead-straight to make it not look so solid sort of haircut on long hair. can't remember who it was on last, but it was ok. no idea what it's called though. i just kind of went for it with lots of little upwards snips so just the last couple of inches is sort of thinned out. it's the sort of thing you can do yourself if your hair's long enough...
no subject
Date: 2008-12-18 07:46 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-12-18 07:21 pm (UTC)I last went to one in 2001 and only cos I was having my pitch-black almost-waist-length hair bleached blond and coloured (blue, that time), and I wanted to make sure it didn't fall out. I *still* ended up thinking I could have done a better job myself :-(
Honestly, I don't have a clue why people think long hair is more trouble than short hair of any variety! YOU JUST LEAVE IT! I am a lazy enough bastard that I don't even brush it every day if I'm busy. I have probably saved a fortune on 7 years of no haircuts, not least since I've not been able to colour it for about 3 years. Easy!
My suggestion is that you invest in some grips and clips. If you want something non-obvious and non-fripperous, ordinary hair grips are ace, and very cheap. I like the bendy metal slides myself, especially if you have straight and shiny hair like me, and I find small butterfly grips very good (the teeth help), but these may be too foofy for your taste.
no subject
Date: 2008-12-18 07:23 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-12-18 07:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-12-18 10:35 pm (UTC)I really, really hate the way they think it's OK to throw their guests' stuff away/cut it up. AT LEAST CHARITY SHOP IT!!
IME, mothers are never mollified by hair, so I have never bothered. Of course, your mother may be unusual in this regard.
no subject
Date: 2008-12-19 02:18 pm (UTC)My mother complains about my split ends every year. It's not like they were bad, or getting worse, but every year she tells me I should go to a hairdressers and at least get it trimmed. This year, she will Not Be Able To Say That. This will make my Christmas a small but appreciable amount better.
no subject
Date: 2008-12-18 07:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-12-18 09:13 pm (UTC)(In fairness, I have incredibly tangly hair, more so since the ends still contain residual dye/bleach/kill damage, and it can get v tangly at work, so I've upped the brushing. But funnily enough, when it was heavily bleached - at home, by me - it was actually better behaved, and I could easily go a week or more without brushing.)
Also, if your hair isn't too slippy, what about the more traditional option of large combs? Too "Gift Of The Magi"?
no subject
Date: 2008-12-19 10:46 am (UTC)I have next to no experience with long hair, and mine's a different texture to yours as well (one reason long hair doesn't work for me), so unfortunately I can't advise, beyond obv trying things out yourself, which you're doing already.
As for hairdressers... well, I've never met anyone better than Nina (http://www.ninasvintageandretrohair.com/). She cut the bob in my icon, which is the most-complimented hair do I've ever had, and took next to no effort. She now specialises in vintage hair (which is hella faff! Pin curls and everything!), but I know she's done unusual and alternative stuff in the past. I like to imagine that Nina can fix any hair dilemma, but maybe that's just me.
no subject
Date: 2008-12-19 12:17 pm (UTC)