Beyonce fragrance finds fierce competition
by Jeffery Racheff
International pop star Beyonce has found herself in a smelly situation. The “Halo” singer, who plans to introduce a “Fierce” themed fragrance line next year, is currently being sued by Abercrombie & Fitch for copyright infringement. The clothing retailer already owns a cologne by that name, and they’re claiming her new perfume poses a “likelihood of confusion” for consumers.
So is Beyonce really trying to swagger-jack A&F’s scent?
Well actually, no. Beyonce does intend to release a line of fragrances in 2010, but not once has she said it would have anything to do with the name “Sasha Fierce,” her on-stage alter ego. Practically, it wouldn’t even make sense, as the album it would be associated with would be almost two years old by that time.
Abercrombie and Fitch, then, appears to be going solely off some insider “fire-alarm” gossip. And rather than just making a phone call, they decided to hire a team of lawyers and file a federal lawsuit stopping Beyonce and Co. from continuing in trademark infringement.
The art of fragrance-naming is unlike any other. Most sound like words pulled from the title of a soft-core Cinemax film: Eternity, Perhaps, Unforgivable Woman. This is mostly due to the fact that a perfume’s name doesn’t actually require any rational connection to the perfume itself. It’s totally creative, abstract and subjective. You can name it anything you want, as long as it leaves a consumer with a feeling of passion or intensity. Any normal moniker that actually evokes scent sounds generic. “Scent of Melon” or “Cactus Spritz” may inform you of how a smell is supposed to smell, but they also sound more like something you’d find at a dollar store, not the Dior counter.
“Fierce,” at $40 an ounce, is A&F’s most popular cologne. According to the clothing line’s website, the scent is “an immediate attention getter and rightly so. Its fresh citrus aroma is the first aspect she’ll notice because of its clean, poised attitude. However, it’s Fierce’s warm musky subtleness that will naturally draw her curiosity because of its seductive nature.”
I know what you’re thinking — what’s so fierce about “warm musky subtleness?” Obviously the odor has nothing to do with the definition of “fierce.” Otherwise, if it actually took after its name, the cologne would be so acrid and masculine that it would melt through your skin. Women would indeed draw near you, but only to offer first aid for all the third degree burns on your neck. A&F is not interested in crafting a savory body aroma, but rather an attractive brand. In other words, they’re not trying to sell scent; they’re selling lifestyle.
So the question then becomes, which lifestyle does the name “Fierce” sell better — Beyonce’s feisty alter-ego, or Abercrombie and Fitch? I’m willing to venture a guess and say there are more straight-up “Single Ladies” fans than lovers of artificially-faded cargo shorts. Beyonce wins that one on sheer numbers. Also, it couldn’t have helped A&F’s east coast, rugby image when the word “fierce” took on somewhat of a flamboyant undertone after being championed by last year’s Project Runway champion fashionista. Winner Christian Siriano practically turned it into a battle cry for homosexuals everywhere.
As Abercrombie has made clear, they’re worried that Beyonce’s image is more powerful than their own, and that her perfume will cause confusion and take business away from their own product. What I can’t understand is how this confusion would hurt A&F. No one (at least not me) had even heard of their “Fierce” scent until Beyonce crafted her own, so wouldn’t A&F welcome this publicity? Wouldn’t they be pleased to see her fans accidentally purchase their product?
But in the end, Beyonce can call her fragrance anything she pleases. There will be plenty of folks who buy the product no matter what it’s called simply because it evokes the personality and aura of their favorite star. Because, as Romeo would have said, “that which we call a Beyonce fragrance, by any other word would smell as sweet.”
