Muted Tones Spoke Loud and Clear

This week’s television drama was created by a calm, measured conversation between two well-dressed Republican women, Cassidy Hutchinson (Representative Liz Cheney), which resulted in one of the most exciting and riveting television events of the last decade.

Americans were captivated listening to the testimony about President Donald J. Trump’s behavior on Jan. 6. But we were captivated visually, too, by the hundred tiny, but critical, decisions that had gone into each woman’s style choices. Everything — hair, makeup, jewelry, wardrobe and nail care — seemed to communicate calm, control and, especially, neutrality.

The witness’s outfit was a nonevent. Ms. Hutchinson was an aide to Trump White House. She wore a white blazer over a black scoop-neck top, and a small, jeweled circle pendant on a short chain. Small stud earrings were also worn. The look was remarkably neutral and avoided any flash or spectacle. Flattering without being “fashion-y.” Mature but not matronly. The clothes were meant to disappear and the cameras focused mainly on her face so the audience was left to consider her grooming choices.

Her shoulder-length dark hair was brushed out and flipped at the ends. (In perhaps her only “tell” of nerves, she adjusted her hair several times.) She wore minimally visible makeup — what appeared to be light bronzer, but no discernible colors of lipstick or eye shadow. Her manicure was also a completely colorless embellishment — a demure pearl white.

Viewers caught a glimpse of this manicure at one of the hearing’s most dramatic moments: when Ms. Hutchinson recounted being told that Mr. Trump, enraged at being kept from joining his armed supporters, had allegedly lunged at his Secret Service agent’s throat. Ms. Hutchinson explained the situation by placing her hand lightly on her clavicle.

That one moment encapsulated the startling power of Ms. Hutchinson’s appearance before the House select committee: She was telling a frightening story, but she unspooled her memories in the most reserved, unthreatening, visually calming way imaginable. Her demeanor and her look were at distinct odds with the details of her testimony — and this disjunction itself, this striking contrast, threw her words in sharp relief, intensifying their impact.

Ms. Hutchinson’s measured demeanor and muted look mirrored that of her interlocutor, Ms. Cheney, the vice chairwoman of the committee. Ms. Cheney maintained her unchanging facial expressions, tone of voice, and level affect throughout all hearings, no matter how troubling the revelations. (Representative Bennie G. Thompson is the chairman of the committee, and allows himself moments of irony or even humor.

Her white-blond hair is styled in a side-part with soft waves. The effect is stalwart, unflappable, a more senior version of Ms. Hutchinson’s look. She has kept to a series neutral-toned jackets, her pearls, and the Capitol Police pin that she wears to show solidarity with the officers.

Both women chose neutral tones. This invites viewers to focus on the words and not on the appearances. It leaves little room for anyone else to criticize their choices. Ms. Hutchinson, in particular, must have known that her credibility depended on how she was perceived by the nation when she stepped into national spotlight for the first time.

Women’s choices in matter of dress and grooming are always more fraught than men’s. We have so many more decisions to make (hair, makeup, jewelry, heel height, pants or skirts) and hence so many possible avenues of visual communication — and, of course, Mistakecommunication. And particularly for young women in the professional world, the daily task of constructing a look at once attractive and “serious” can feel like traversing a minefield.

Young women are also a primary target of “beauty culture” and its vast array of products, techniques and dictates. Social media teems with thousands of tutorials on “reshaping one’s face” with contouring makeup, how to make eyes look bigger, noses smaller, skin smoother. The overall messages are clear but contradictory: “become an artist of the self,” “make yourself beautiful” and “do it imperceptibly.”

It’s a tall order — time-consuming, hard to ignore and subject to wide interpretation. And it’s especially hard for women in politics. Some female politicians like Senator Kyrsten Silena and Representative Alexandria Ocasio­Cortez, use bold makeup, jewelry, and arresting clothes to make a point. Others have chosen their own versions. Kamala Harris, Vice President, has her Tahitian pearls, dark pantsuits, and Senator Elizabeth Warren, all-black outfits, topped off with soft, colorful jackets.

Many of the (often young and attractive) women of the Trump administration favored an overt, high-glam style, and we saw a lot of very long hair, dramatic false eyelashes, sheath dresses and stiletto pumps — a “beauty pageant” vibe said to be favored by the former president.

At the hearing, Ms. Hutchinson’s image was distinctly different from that aesthetic. She looked as if her goal was to blend into the corridors, to convey depth and not surface (although she was clearly telegenic).

Trump claimed that he didn’t know Cassidy Hutchinson, even though she was only a few feet from the Oval Office. Perhaps he didn’t know her. Perhaps her style was more subtle than the styles of other young women around him. We all know her now. The nation will never forget Cassidy Hutchinson’s disturbing story, which she told in her precise, low-key style.