Rhiannon Harries: 'I can't quite believe anyone really wants to smell like Jennifer Aniston'

Sunday 25 July 2010 00:00 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

This election is still a dead heat, according to most polls. In a fight with such wafer-thin margins, we need reporters on the ground talking to the people Trump and Harris are courting. Your support allows us to keep sending journalists to the story.

The Independent is trusted by 27 million Americans from across the entire political spectrum every month. Unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock you out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. But quality journalism must still be paid for.

Help us keep bring these critical stories to light. Your support makes all the difference.

What does Jennifer Aniston smell of, do you suppose? Gin and cat food? Despair? Perhaps, if I really wanted to know, I ought to have got myself to Harrods last week, where Hollywood's eternal singleton was launching her eau du parfum, Lolavie.

Innumerable celebs and hemi-semi-demi-celebs have trodden the path of eponymous fragrances before her, not all of them of the shameless Britney/ Paris/J-Lo variety. The reasonably credible likes of Sarah Jessica Parker and Halle Berry have also stood in posh department stores and declared, straight-faced, that they pair designer threads with their own cheapo scent.

But it's still somehow surprising every time a bona fide A-lister stoops to this cheesy merchandising low. Clearly in the female celeb code of conduct, hawking a perfume is acceptable in the same way that advertising coffee or watches is thought fair game for serious male stars.

Perhaps it's the veneer of creativity, as they swan around sniffing vials calling for "more Californian jasmine" and thinking they are Coco Chanel. Most likely, it is the cold, hard cash. All I can assume is that a fragrance deal is worth a huge heap of money, which must in turn mean people still buy celebrity fragrances in their thousands – and that is truly mystifying.

In 2005, I wrote a piece about the explosion of celebrity fragrances. Even Boots' buyers admitted to being surprised by their success, but it did seem less incongruous back then, when we weren't quite so saturated with celeb culture and frivolous purchasing seemed marginally less absurd. Aniston's stab at the genre is supposedly a little more refined and grown-up – hence a higher price and the Harrods launch. But it's difficult to imagine many adult women, with £25 to spare, who'd consider a celeb fragrance (let alone one in the image of LA's most famous spinster) the best they could do in the beauty hall.

Buying into a brand, by splashing out on Chanel, say, suggests a certain degree of uncertainty about one's identity (yes, I know some people simply want to smell nice, but they could always go for Yardley, it's perfectly pleasant). But at least there's a little room for manoeuvre there. But to buy into the image of an individual, and in such an intimate way as perfume, flags up the kind of insecurity you'd hope to find only in the very young.

Publicising her new gear, Aniston recommends you "wear a scent that really represents you". I can't see many women finding themselves represented in Jennifer Aniston – The Perfume. Although, I suppose I did once have that thing with Brad Pitt...

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in