Covet by Sarah Jessica Parker {Perfume Short (Review)} {New Perfume} {Celebrity Fragrance}

covet ad2.jpg

Covet promised to reveal more freely the "vixen" side of Sarah Jessica Parker and since we know that Lovely (2005) had a toned-down musk that smacked of marketing compromise for the actress who usually loves her musk straight-up and dirty, we were expectant and holding our breath metaphorically speaking, awaiting something like a modern-day Bal à Versailles, a gift from the fragrance developers to SJP after her resounding success with Lovely in 2006. Instead what we get is yet another perfume in shackles and Covet is not even as pretty smelling as Lovely, which does not make it necessarily more interesting smelling.......

Alas, when we released the air in our lungs to aspire in some of the olfactory impressions from the new scent, we were surprised to discover a perfume that is a bit unusual at the start, true, but mostly appears formulaic. It was advertised as a "fougere on estrogen" as the fougère family of perfumes is reserved in its vast majority to men. The perfume does have an intriguing "after-shave" facet to it, but upon pondering it further, the sensation of innovation is mostly due to one's intellectual apprenhension of a scent in which gender categories have been pushed around, rather than to a truly interesting olfactory impression. Does the displacement of the gender line suffice to create something worth seeking out? Not if you think that gender conventions in perfumes are just that, mere conventions in the first place. What about the much-vaunted sexiness factor? There is a vague boudoir personality to the perfume resting on an impression of powder/cocoa powder, but it would have to be qualified with the word "metallic". Covet is, for lack of a better expression, a metallic boudoir perfume, that is to say in other words that it is rather on the odd and cold sides.

It starts with a green vegetal impression that is reminiscent of the kind of effect one finds in absinth-y perfumes, a bit medicinal, minty, sweetish and unusual. Sarah Jessica Parker said that she loves the smell of geranium leaves and so this note was incorporated.

The body of the perfume is syrupy and the blend is such that no distinct facets emerge. Instead of conveying the idea that this is due to the masterful blending of contrasting elements, one finds the word "non-descript" to be appropriate in this case. The scent offers the impression of a vaguely fruity-floral concoction with a ribbon-like smooth unfurling texture and the weightiness of a fairly heavy syrup with cold metallic accents. The boudoir aspect derives from an impression of face-powder and a somewhat intimate feeling.

One way we have found that helps us appreciate the perfume better is to think of it at some point as being a "green ganache" (chocolate) as we made an association with Guerlain Iris Ganache. Then instead of feeling that the mix is a bit non-descript, it helps focus on a soft, unusual gourmand texture.

The dry-down is amber-y, musky, vanillic, warm, not unpleasant but very banal at the same time and lacking depth. It is cold to some extent too, as the amber reveals some metallic flashes being reminiscent of the "electrical amber" in CK IN2U. But where that facet appeared consistent with the futuristic imagery around the Calvin Klein scent, here it seems to clash with the persona of the actress as well as the promises offered by the ad copy. In fact the discrepancy between the perfume and the story is large enough to let the word "hype" find some room to settle comfortably in there. The flacon also does not look as beautifully designed and interesting in person as it appears on the ad and the juice is yellow rather than peridot-green as advertised.

In summary, Covet is a bit intriguing at first but rather conventional and disappointing in the end borrowing from several commercial trends all at once. It does not even smell particularly good. It smells best in the top notes and in the light citrus-y musky dry-down. In fact it is devoid of charm for us, something that we find is rare in quality perfumes (the ingredients are good quality) as even the least pretentious of commercial perfumes can harbor the charms of simplicity and comfort rather than suggest ugliness. It smells better as a sillage scent than up-close.

"top notes of wet greens, geranium leaves, Sicilian lemon, lavender and chocolate; a heart of honeysuckle, magnolia and muguet, and a drydown of musk, vetiver, bois de cashmere, teakwood and amber." The perfume was created with perfume consultant Ann Gottlieb and perfumer Frank Volkl of Firmenich.

Related Posts

18 Comments | Leave a comment

  1. Ouch.... ;-(
    really had high expectations about this one...
    one question: is it in the same line as Lovely, a little towards the unisex category?

  2. It must have been a disapointment as we expected something nice and not common from SJP.
    Lovely was, well...lovely and it was a hard act to follow I guess.

  3. Guido,

    Interesting question; yes, I most definitely think that it could be considered to be a crypto-unisex perfume. It is not very flowery and all the feminine attributes like powderiness and sillage are held in check. The amber could be found in a masculine fragrance.

  4. Helg,

    This is at least how I experienced it, as a let-down. The beginning is a bit more intriguing but the mostly linear development was boring and felt more odd and forced than interesting to my nose.

  5. That was the answer I waited for... ;-)
    Gotta test it as soon as it appears here in Holland...

  6. That was the answer I waited for... ;-)
    Gotta test it as soon as it appears here in Holland...

  7. Guido,

    Please do report back if you can and especially if you like it:) I am afraid I was rather insensitive to its charm, but must say that it seemed to sell well.

  8. I will let you know for sure...
    Dunno when it will roll out here in the NL...
    Hope soon!

  9. au contrare

    i found the scent quite disarming at my girl's first spray

    three hours later, i was aroused, intoxicated and ultimately captivated (no pun intended with advertising) behind it's aroma.

  10. John,

    I am glad that it works for the both of you. After all, perfumes are meant to bring enjoyment to the senses.

    Having followed the ads about the perfume I expected it to be more original and way sexier and could not help but feel disappointed at sniffing another me-too scent after the less conventional beginning. Was not enthralled by the hard-looking bottle either. It makes me think in person of an oversized old-fashioned faucet knob and felt clunky and even ugly.

  11. i love this perfume. its one of my favourites, its great.

  12. Hmmm... guess I am not quite as excited about getting my free sample now. But I'll certainly give it a sniff just to be sure! Thanks for the review.

  13. Absolutely, it's the wise thing to do as you might relate better to it. Also I might have been useful in lowering your expectations, which was not the case in my case:))

  14. Covet was the first perfume I ever returned to a store. I could barely smell a thing after an hour. It was a huge disappointment to me after Lovely. Let's hope SJP will be true to her word and create something more adventurous next time!

  15. Hey,
    I finally smelled it... ;-)
    Well... I like it... but I don't adore it the way I adore Lovely!
    I just sprayed it on paper strip so I might give it a try on skin,
    I also got the metallic edge you got...and maybe that's why I'm not sold.... I miss something... ???... I might fall in love with it if it works differentely on my skin.

  16. Nobody will say that you are not giving it a thorough chance:)

    So you adore Lovely -- what do you think of its sisterhood with Narciso Rodriguez, especially the edp?

  17. I like Narciso Rodriguez but I find it too opulent for me to wear... Lovely is more transparent and subdued... like it is there and not there... after some hours people can smell it on you if they come very close.. like an aura...
    NR is so strong, especially when overdosed.
    The 2 fragrancese share similiraties, but in the end are also very different.
    Which one do you prefer?

  18. I tend to prefer the eau de toilette version of Narciso Rodriguez for Her, which I find to be the most subtle version of these notes. I am not however factoring in functional criteria like wear and sillage etc.


Leave a Comment