Skip to main content

game of thrones - Why does Daenerys Targaryen have dark eyebrows?


On the show, why does Daenerys Targaryen have dark eyebrows? Isn't her platinum/gold/silvery hair supposed to be her hair all over? ... this couldn't possibly by an effects gaffe that the showrunners argued with Emilia Clark about - could it?




Answer



Blondes can naturally have dark eye brows


As already mentioned, Blondes can have naturally dark eye brows, many do in fact.


Actress' natural appearance


The actress is originally a brunette and therefore it is understandable that she might not want to get her eyebrows dyed for years. She wears a wig to pull off the silvery outlook and that's about it.


Filming issues


The lighting in the shooting can make light eye brows almost invisible. A prime example here would be Helga from Vikings, whose eyebrows look bad to be honest. That is of course, if you can spot them at all. And bear in mind, those are her real eyebrows.


Legal and medical issues


Coloring eye brows is medically dangerous and in some places, illegal.


There are no oxidative dyes that are approved by the American FDA for use on eyebrows due, in large part, to the high amount of ammonia used in the color. Concentrated ammonia can cause nerve damage. Bear in mind, just under your skin, hidden behind your eyebrow a mere millimeter or so, there is a major facial nerve.



So usage of such dyes would be technically illegal although I am aware that many hair saloons in USA offer such services nevertheless.


This can lead to blindness or facial paralysis, a fate producers might want to save their lead actress from. Not to mention, to save themselves from lawsuits.


Why don't they use alternatives?


As you suggest, painting is a viable alternative (Although I don't quite see how they could paint the dark hair blonde without bleaching it first but then again I am not a hair styling expert so lets assume it is a safe alternative). Moreover, eyebrow wigs are also available.


So why don't they use the alternate methods? No Idea. There's nothing on the internet which suggests why they did what they did. A safe guess would be that the actress isn't open to those methods at all.


What say you, Oh Martin?


Official response of GRRM, author and creator of the series, on this issue is:



That again? Really?

sigh




As you can see, they aren't very bothered about the minor details. The fact that blondes can have darker eye brows makes it all the more unnecessary to waste time on that trivial, irrelevant detail.




Further info w.r.t actual regulations1 as provided by Broklynite in comments (tip of the hat to him):



To the best of my knowledge there are no hair dyes approved by FDA, period. This is because they are typically made using coal tar dyes and harmful. They get away with it as a cosmetic because the argument is that it is not supposed to be used where it touches the skin itself or the roots, and therefore isn't harmful. This is for all hair dyes, eyebrows are not singled out. However, the FDA does have regulations about colors which are permitted near the eyes specifically. But bleaching may be considered something else tho still fall under cosmetics. I would check the actual regulations.


This is a little bit complex, so please bear with me.


With regard to dyes: a list of approved colors and what they can be used for may be found on the FDA website at ucm106626 and a little more info at ucm127988.


According to 601 (a) adulterated cosmetics of the FD&C Act, hair dye may contain coal tar dyes if they have a warning label which includes explicitly forbidding its use for eyebrows and eyelashes. According to ucm143066 on the FDA website:


"No color additives are approved for dyeing the eyebrows or eyelashes."


So long story short: no coloring eyebrows with dyes tho non-dye



Colorants may be used such as approved color powders (like makeup).


As to bleaching, the active ingredient in hair bleach is hydrogen peroxide, typically 30% strength (note that your home stuff is usually 2-3%). Hydrogen peroxide is on the FDA list of Substances Generally Recognized As Safe. However 21 CFR 184.1366 goes a bit more into detail that it refers to the use in food and cloth.


However, Since hair bleach at 30% is an openly dangerous chemical, I would suspect that it's use near eyes would no longer be considered a cosmetic but instead as exposure to a dangerous chemical, in which case OSHA may take a step in.


More or less, any company dumb enough to use it would open themselves to a lawsuit for hazardous work environments even if this is not covered explicitly by FDA. That said, it may fall under another FDA regulation or be an interpretation of a regulation which I am unfamiliar with.


On re-reading sec 601 I note it says:


"a cosmetic shall be deemed to be adulterated:



  1. if it bears or contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to users UNDER THE CONDITIONS OF USE PRESCRIBED IN THE LABELING THEREOF..." (emphasis mine) which would seem to cover the unsafe use of 30% hydrogen peroxide near the eyes."


If the label says to use it near the eyes, the manufacturer gets busted. If the label does not say to use around the eyes and they use it anyway, HBO gets busted for using it.



FDA site on eye cosmetic safety found ucm048943. Note that 601 (a) explicitly states that hair dye does not refer to "eyelash dyes or eyebrow dyes."


So would be going with the more generalized harmful cosmetics regulations I think. Not a lawyer though, and not representing the Agency in this long series of comments, just pointing to publicly available information on regulations and Agency publications. Your mileage on this info may vary, and this does not constitute recommendations or legal advice.


I make no claims as to the veracity of my statements.



1. The responsibility for accuracy of these claims lies with Broklynite. I do not claim to have gone through the articles cited by him.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Did the gatekeeper and the keymaster get intimate in Ghostbusters?

According to TVTropes ( usual warning, don't follow the link or you'll waste half your life in a twisty maze of content ): In Ghostbusters, it's strongly implied that Dana Barret, while possessed by Zuul the Gatekeeper, had sex with Louis Tully, who was possessed by Vinz Clortho the Keymaster (key, gate, get it?), in order to free Big Bad Gozer. In fact, a deleted scene from the movie has Venkman explicitly asking Dana if she and Louis "did it". I turned the quote into a spoiler since it contains really poor-taste joke, but the gist of it is that it's implied that as part of freeing Gozer , the two characters possessed by the Keymaster and the Gatekeeper had sex. Is there any canon confirmation or denial of this theory (canon meaning something from creators' interviews, DVD commentary, script, delete scenes etc...)? Answer The Richard Mueller novelisation and both versions of the script strongly suggest that they didn't have sex (or at the very l...

Why didn't The Doctor or Clara recognize Missy right away?

So after it was established that Missy is actually both the Master, and the "woman in the shop" who gave Clara the TARDIS number... ...why didn't The Doctor or Clara recognize her right away? I remember the Tenth Doctor in The Sound of Drums stating that Timelords had a way of recognizing other Timelords no matter if they had regenerated. And Clara should have recognized her as well... I'm hoping for a better explanation than "Moffat screwed up", and that I actually missed something after two watchthroughs of the episode. Answer There seems to be a lot of in-canon uncertainty as to the extent to which Time Lords can recognise one another which far pre-dates Moffat's tenure. From the Time Lords page on Wikipedia : Whether or not Time Lords can recognise each other across regenerations is not made entirely clear: In The War Games, the War Chief recognises the Second Doctor despite his regeneration and it is implied that the Doctor knows him when they fir...

story identification - Animation: floating island, flying pests

At least 20 years ago I watched a short animated film which stuck in my mind. The whole thing was wordless, possibly European, and I'm pretty sure I didn't imagine it... It featured a flying island which was inhabited by some creatures who (in my memory) reminded me of the Moomins. The island was frequently bothered by large winged animals who swooped around, although I don't think they did any actual damage. At the end one of the moomin creatures suddenly gets a weird feeling, feels forced to climb to the top of the island and then plunges down a shaft right through the centre - only to emerge at the bottom as one of the flyers. Answer Skywhales from 1983. The story begins with a man warning the tribe of approaching skywhales. The drummers then warn everybody of the hunt as everyone get prepared to set "sail". Except one man is found in his home sleeping as the noise wake him up. He then gets ready and is about to take his weapon as he hesitates then decides ...

warhammer40k - What evidence supposedly supports Tau as related to the Necrontyr?

I've heard of rumours saying that the Tau from Warhammer 40K are in fact the Necrontyr. Is there anything that supports this statement, in WH40K canon? I just found this, on 1d4 chan 1 : Helping Necrons? Or are they Necrontyr descendants? An often overlooked issue is that Tau have no warp signatures, just like Necrons, hate Warpspawns and Warp in general, just like Necrons, have the exact same skull shape,stature and short lives, and the overwhelming need for Technology and beam weapons, JUST LIKE NECRONS. GW may have planned a race that simply prepares a pacified, multiracial galaxy for Necrons to feast upon, supported by Ethereals that have a C'tan phase blade. Then there is a reference of "dark seed in east" by the Deceiver, so the tricky C'tan might give Tzeentch the finger in the JUST AS PLANNED competition. Or maybe GW just has so little creativity that they simply made a new civ conforming to an Old One's standards without knowing it. Is this the connec...