Originally Posted by ECaruthers
Many people want to feel a contact with celebrities. (I don't know why. I'm not one of them.) Wearing a fragrance Britney Spears is not wearing seems very similar to reading gossip about things Britney is not doing. Except that buying the fragrance sends her a little money.
BTW, am I the only one who read The Perfect Scent
and was disapointed not to be able to buy the perfume Sarah Jessica Parker actually wore and initially wanted to sell?
Originally Posted by mysticknot
I think what irritates me about celebrity perfume is multi faceted.Just my 2 cents.
1. Perfume making celebrities are laughing all the way to the bank / tax free havens
2.I find it hard to believe that many of them wear their namesake perfumes.
eg. India Hicks has a line with Crabtree and Evelyn but she has a bespoke perfume made for her by Creative Scentualization .An element of hypocrisy perhaps...
3. Some of the perfume names are tacky. eg. Britney Spears' Circus Fantasy
4. Their belief that the general public are stupid and will buy anything ( this one is debatable )
5.They dilute the 'concept' of what perfume is
I would like to know how interested they are in the creative process of perfume.
People have always been fascinated with the concept of celebrity.
We are interested in the clothes they wear, the stores they patronise and who they are dating, marrying, divorcing, etc.
In modern times, this means movie stars and other media celebrities.
In the past, the nobility/royalty of Europe functioned as celebrities. People wanted to patronise businesses that were used by the aristocracy: toiletries, clothing, etc. A Royal Warrant, issued by many monarchies, functions as the official patronage of royalty. Modern companies (such as Creed) seem to imply
having the British Royal Warrant by using a three-plumed logo which imitates the arms of the Prince of Wales. To my knowledge, there is no Royal Warrant for Creed.
Ditto for Parfums D'Orsay. The company was started up in 1908 by a conglomerate of European investors, and the company cultivated the fanciful "legend" that the namesake, Comte d'Orsay (a real French aristocrat), was the creator of his own perfumes. (See "Perfume Presentations," and "The Perfume Handbook" for this history.)
By associating scent with fashion icons (such as Empress Eugenie of France, Empress Elizabeth of Austria, and the Anglo-French Comte d'Orsay), there is the association with beauty, elegance and leisure. BTW, all three of these mentioned aristocrats were the beauty icons of their day. Even Grace Kelly, a princess by marriage, inspired the Hermes Kelly handbag, which is now a perfume.
A real princess is much like a "media princess": admired for her beauty, life of leisure and fashion sense. Buyers want to "steal" a little of that elegance for themselves by buying the scent.
BTW, Jessica Simpson was sued by her jeans company for not promoting her own line of clothing. In an interview, when asked her favourite jeans, she replied, "True Religion."
So much for wearing one's line of clothing or perfume.
There was also a recent article on Basenotes that reported that Paris Hilton is contracted with Parlux to promote several more perfumes with her name for the next five years. (OK, her recent Siren is not too bad, but some say it's a knockoff of Viva La Juicy by Juicy Couture.)http://www.basenotes.net/industry_ne...is-hilton.html