I once worked on the King’s Road and it was pretty clear that the women looked prettier than those where I lived in the East End (of London). I reckon lots of money = good haircut, facials, good make-up, less stress, more sleep = prettier. This observation led to a great plan for a state sponsored hairdressing academy and haircuts for everyone, free at the point of use and funded from general taxation. Coming to a manifesto near you soon.
Without a “before” photo to compare with, I wouldn’t make a guess at the OP. But she looks like the J.K. Rowling I’ve always seen in photos. I’ve always found her attractive. I’d point my Whomping Willow her direction…
No, really, the proportions of her face look different.
Her face can be found on the cover of several “opportunistic” books that always seem to surface around a literary hit: unauthorized biographies, books analyzing Harry Potter, etc. As well as magazines, news stories, documentaries.
What is it about the Brits that every thread subject seems to turn into an excuse for a dig at welfare-state socialism?
I guess it’s the fact that Rowling’s own life shows how a welfare program can “succeed” that brings out the ire of the Conservatives.
A former welfare mother is now rich, beautiful, and a credit to her country! Take that, John Major!
I don’t think she’s had any cosmetic surgery. She’s always been an attractive woman – now she looks healthier and more elaborately groomed. Which you’d sort of expect.
A better diet, more sleep, a good mattress, a good exercise program . . . these things could all make quite a difference without her having gone under the knife. That stated, I do think the shape of the nose looks a bit different. She may have had the bridge smoothed. The picture in the OP has slightly fuzzy definition, though. It very well could just be makeup and lighting.
Still, if I came into $77 million, you can be sure I’d work on having a few of the rough edges smoothed out . . . so I wouldn’t blame her one bit if she has.