In 2016, Pantone 448c was officially (informally) dubbed the ugliest colour in the world. The colour was originally described as a variation of olive green, but was quickly changed to “drab dark brown”, after the Australian olive association expressed concern about the colour causing a deterrence from olive purchase and consumption.
Pantone 448c is the colour so ugly, even olives don’t want it.
But what does ugly even mean? If beauty is subjective, then ugly must be as well. Does ugly even exist? And if so, who gets to decide what is ugly and what is not?
Pantone 448c is a colour in the Pantone colour system, selected in 2012 as the colour that would be used for tobacco and cigarette packaging in Australia, due to the fact that it was determined as the least attractive colour. It was determined that cigarette and tobacco products needed packaging that would deter consumers from buying the products, rather than attract them, and thus it was ruled that tobacco and cigarette packaging legally needed to be as unpleasant as possible — plain, logo-free, include large health warnings, and graphic pictures of the consequences of smoking. And be Pantone 448c.
Pantone 448c is the colour so ugly, it’ll turn a smoker’s lungs bright pink again.
But how did this even happen? Who was given the power to deem a colour so ugly that its only use would be to drive people away?
In 2012, the Australian government approached a research group, asking them to develop a packaging design as unappealing as possible. Three months later, these new cigarette packages were born, and 448c would never be looked at the same again. During this process, the research group asked 1000 smokers which colour they found the most visually offensive, and 448c came out on top. The most common words used to describe the colour were “dirty”, “death”, “rotten”, and “tar”
This packaging design gained traction over the years, and in 2016, 448c was being used in cigarette packaging across the world, in countries like France, the united kingdom, Ireland, Norway, New Zealand, Slovenia, Saudi Arabia, Uruguay, Thailand, Turkey, Belgium, and the Netherlands.
So apparently it is in fact the people who get to decide what is ugly and what is not. Go figure.
But what are the implications of having this power? The power to deem something repulsive and unworthy on no other basis than the fact that you just don’t like it? Does Pantone, the company behind this colour, have any say in this decision? Or does the opinion of the people triumph that of the creator?
Pantone is widely known for making or breaking colours. Dubbing a colour as ‘the colour of the year’ can make an unnoticed and overall average colour go from zero to hero, suddenly appearing in art, design, and fashion all around us. Pantone is also known to be adamant about the idea that no colour is uglier than another. All colours are equal, and other colours are just colours. Pantone, coming to 448c’s defence, stated that they were unhappy about the way in which the colour was seen, saying that they found the colour to resemble “deep, rich, earth tones”, rather than death and tar.
Does this mean beauty is indeed in the eye of the beholder, or have we simply removed 448c from the contexts in which it thrives?
In fact, many artists and designers have voiced their opinions on the matter, stating that no colour is ugly, and that Pantone 448c is indeed a very normal colour. It is just a colour. It is not ugly, or rotten, or disgusting. It is just a colour.
It is just a colour, and having the power to change its meaning and uses with a label as simple as ‘ugly’ serves as a pretty uncomfortable reflection of beauty standards in western societies. Neither a single person, nor a group of people, should have the power to label things and change their meanings, especially on a basis as unfounded and subjective as personal preference. If 1000 people have enough power to turn the entire planet against a colour, simply because they did not like it, how does this power translate into our everyday lives? Into magazines and corporations selling us beauty standards and ways to reach them. Selling things as right or wrong, as if our physical appearances have morality, and not reaching the beauty standard is a criminal offence, punishable by rejection and disapproval. Does ugly even exist, or is it simply a condition sold to us by capitalism? If ugly does exist, why is it such a bad thing, anyway? Ugly is a word like any other. It is just a word. Why does ‘ugly’ not exist as an objective adjective like ‘hot’ or ‘cold’ or ‘yellow’ or ‘soft’? When did ‘ugly’ become an attack strong enough to trigger a recoil into oneself?
Does celebrating unconventional beauty make the word better, or does it simply highlight it as an outcast? As a problem to be addressed?
We are surrounded by unconventional beauty every day. In people, nature, art, design, colour. In 448c.
Acne, unibrows, stretch marks, facial hair, gap teeth, size, unclear skin, frizzy hair, weight. These features do not make us less human than those without them. Your scars and stretch-marks are not blemishes to be ashamed of, but rather are proof that you have lived and grown and experienced. Your freckles are constellations of sun kisses and proof that you are alive. If the signs that we are human are what make us imperfect, then let us all be imperfect. The trees and the ocean and the sun and the moon do not rely on perfection to be beautiful, not do they need the approval of humans, they just are. Maybe we should let things be. Maybe we should just be.
Why was a shade of pink selected as the colour of the year in 2019, while a shade of brown was selected as the ugliest colour of all time?
Perhaps it is worth examining the racial and body politics of unconventional beauty, and why a shade of brown is deemed as an inherently ugly colour? Perhaps the collective decision that 448c is a repulsive colour, the colour of death and sewerage, speaks into centuries of colourism, racism, and mistreatment of those with darker skin tones. Is the dislike of 448c, a rich shade of brown and green, simply a reflection of years of bias? When was it decided that pink was pretty, and brown was ugly? What constitutes such a decision, allowing for something as simple as pigment and a reflection of light to be deemed less than? What constitutes such a decision, allowing for something as simple as a skin tone to be deemed as less than?
Perhaps pretty and ugly simply need to be re-contextualised? Perhaps ‘ugly’ is simply what happens when something is removed from its context?
It can be argued that context often impacts our view of something. Looking at a bowl of spinach in the context of a children’s birthday party, on a table surrounded by cake and sugary foods, might make the spinach seem ugly. Place the spinach in a home-made quiche, on a table surrounded by warm, freshly cooked foods, and the spinach suddenly has more meaning. It is in the right place. Perhaps 448c only appears ‘ugly’ because we view it in comparison with other colours.
“448c is uglier than blue because I would rather wear a blue shirt, than a drab dark brown shirt.”
“448c is uglier than pink because princesses don’t wear drab dark brown dresses.”
Other colours are just colours, but when we compare them out of context, their meanings shift, and suddenly, other colours are no longer just colours, instead, other colours become better.
“448c is the colour of a forest. It is the colour of the trees and the soil, and it is the smell of the earth. It is the colour of the ground that we walk on, our connection to the planet.”
448c is the colour of moss, and the Adhemarius Sexoculata moth. It is the colour of my eyes, and the Seymchan meteorite from Russia. It is the colour of the Dimitrios shipwreck near Gythio, Greece, and of the Zuhair Murad FW13 haute couture collection. It is the colour of fashion, and the Kumano Kodo pilgrimage route in Japan, and the shutters at an abandoned factory. It is the colour of quail eggs in a rusted bowl, the frogs in the Eastern Cape, the Nautilus, and of lake Michigan through a seawall. It is the colour of dried lavender, sage, and bayleaves, the Indian blue robin, and the opal creek in Oregon.
Perhaps, if we view 448c in the right contexts, the word ‘ugly’ will no longer even be a consideration.
