Are You Hot?

BASEKAMPâs installation of 10 portraits from Cornford

and Crossâ ã10.ä

BASEKAMP's installation of 10 portraits from Cornford and Cross' "10." Photo By: Michael T. Regan

Two artists answer that question with technology, not washed-up celebrity judges.

by Robin Rice

Just yesterday, senior dermatologist Dr. Albert Kligman was scheduled to speak at the College of Physicians of Philadelphia. His topic: "The Psychobiology of Aging: Appearance Counts from the Cradle to the Grave." His thesis: "In the United States, appearance counts for virtually everything; beauty almost always determines how much positive attention one gets."

Dr Kligman is mostly concerned with wrinkles and sags, but in their project, "10," the British team of Cornford & Cross used facial recognition software to quantify almost all aspects of facial beauty. Matthew Cornford and David Cross, who began working together in 1987, are best known for projects that are too edgy, too unpredictable or too expensive to survive beyond the planning stage. However, their provocative proposals have been successfully exhibited.

At BASEKAMP, a gallery dedicated to showing collaborative work, "10," one of Cornford & Cross' completed projects, is documented in a row of 10 monumental and monumentally mundane black-and-white headshots. These winners of the ultimately objective beauty contest illustrate the premise that beautiful people earn more money and are more successful than those who don't measure up. They were selected by software programmed to analyze 24 facial measurements for symmetry and relationship to an ideal determined by a digital mingling of faces renowned for beauty. Prototypes included the famous portrait of Nefertiti, Keanu Reeves, Naomi Campbell and Michelangelo's David.

In a sociopolitical twist on the contemporary television show Are You Hot?, Cornford & Cross solicited contestants from among the residents of a disadvantaged neighborhood near London. The authors' decision to use their stipend as prize money in their contest was motivated more by theory than by altruism. They divided the prize among the top 10 according to the computer's analysis of how closely each face approached the ideal.

The only requirement was that entrants be over 16; however, as Dr. Kligman could no doubt have predicted, the computer rejected every face over 25. Self-selection also played a role, though not a decisive one. Despite a multi-ethnic constituency and broad advertising, there were few non-whites among 200 or so entries and none was selected by the software.

Required to abandon all animation of expression and face the camera with a mug-shot stare, all, including top winner Rachel Rigby, lack sparks of appealing personality. Yet, idiosyncrasies insistently draw our attention: slightly imperfect complexions, flawed and dated (1998) makeup and those subtle irregularities sought by the computer. One woman who wears a small nose jewel, an element of social decoration, was reportedly angry at her low placement.

This work addresses the evolutionary value of beauty. According to contemporary Darwinians like Ellen Dissanayake, aesthetic discrimination increases the likelihood of genetic survival. Evolutionary biology theorizes that the desire and ability to select healthy food or a healthy mate tends to perpetuate the species. Anything -- food or partner -- that deviates from symmetry may be damaged, defective or old. In their exhibition essay, the authors link the title "10" to the "1" and "0" of binary mathematics, which is the basis of the Human Genome Project, which, interestingly, was truly completed just a few weeks ago, although the achievement was announced earlier.

Posted on the gallery wall are the top 10 entrants' computer scores, including the computer's notation of each face's biggest defect. "Nose too short" is most common. An unstated assumption of "10" is that beauty is not a positive thing but an absence of negatives -- the reverse of the way beautiful people are usually described: beautiful hair, beautiful eyes, beautiful lips. This assessment of flaws in practice does not fully reflect experience. Isadora Duncan was fat. Sophia Loren's chin is short. Even Nefertiti, who contributed to this research, had a longish, though elegant, nose. Maybe Mom was on to something when she told you beauty was more than skin deep. But let's not go all the way to wearing masks like that really creepy Mr. Personality.

Cornford & Cross: Ten Photographic Portraits from '10’

Through May 3, closing party May 3, 8 p.m., BASEKAMP, 723 Chestnut St., second floor, 215-592-7288

Also on view at the West Collection, June 3-Aug. 26, SEI Investments, 1 Freedom Valley Dr., Oaks, 215-206-8176.