Cordovan
Avon (1982)

While this was released in 1982, Cordovan smells more like it could've been launched 7-10 years prior (in agreement with Varanis Ridari on Basenotes), but it sure does pack an 80s cock-strut punch for an Avon masculine. It opens with a whole lot of what smells like litsea cubeba, lemongrassy-citronella thickness, and a slug of soapy carnation soon follows. Herbaceous and white-flowery is what stands out most in its mid-stage, and then a castoreum-styrax-musk medley overshadows it all and hugs me like a pair of tight blue jeans. This is macho. This is a hunk. A hot daddy. 

Avon had never really been on top of current male fragrance trends since the bulk of their customer base has traditionally been women; but when they did -eventually- contribute to a popular trope in men's fragrance, they typically brought something noteworthy to the table for anyone taking a chance on them. Avon Cordovan (1982) is a scent that likely seemed conventional in its time, almost passe even with the emergence of powerhouses, but Avon had a plan in mind with the stuff to make it ultimately more appealing than the sum of it's parts, as it was labelled as a "long lasting cologne". Avon always was non-standard with concentrations, labelling parfums as "ultra-colognes" in a nod to Estée Lauder's "super colognes", for one. They had a big success on their hands with Black Suede (1980), and that was apparently a tough act to follow, because their next few big pushes in the male category were advertised for their practicality more than their smell. Avon Rugger (1981) was for instance, a "Cologne Plus" that felt like an over-hyped aftershave with its skin soothers "built in"; and Cordovan was being pushed as lasting a long time, never mind the smell of it, so perhaps the biggest dead give away that this was an order of magnitude above the usual Avon cologne-strength sauce was the fact that its biggest size was a 2.5oz/75ml bottle rather than the usual 4oz-6oz masculines Avon had taken to, or the 3.4oz/100ml standard sizes used by European makers. Avon implied that their new juice was more potent; but at the end of the day, an extremely strong cologne really is just an eau de toilette concentrée isn't it? Avon weren't really accustomed to using such lingo at the time, so let's go ahead and call it a cologne, sure.

Luckily, Cordovan wasn't just sillage quantity, it was quality too, albeit dated quality. Avon decided to drag the early to mid 70's aromatic chypre style out of the closet one last time and give it a go, adding some cinnamon tones, lots of sweet amber (very typical of Avon), and some rose/carnation notes in the drydown alongside some lovely leather and oakmoss. The smell of Cordovan is somewhere between the lemongrass of Halston Z-14's (1976) legendary opening, and the sweet floral warmth of Monsieur Houbigant/Monsieur Musk (1973), but minus most of the musk part and adding in the castoreum leather of Van Cleef & Arpels Pour Homme (1978). It's all very sophisticated and citrus/aromatic in the opening, with bergamot, lemongrass, cinnamon, coriander, and geranium. Cordovan moves into jasmine indole, rose, carnation, orris root, and vetiver in the middle, then dries down to a very soapy but powerful amber/oakmoss/leather/labadnum warmth that will last most of the day, with a very nice transition along the way. Cordovan is actually one of the more interesting creations by Avon from any decade, as it literally has the construction of a great mid-70's fragrance but with the resonance of an 80's powerhouse; seriously guys, even a tad of this on a finger will overpower whatever else you're wearing. What I really like most about Cordovan is it's a rare combination of herbal leather tones and sweet indolic florals, and nothing else like it would appear until the late 80's/ early 90's, but more on that below. If this had been released in 1972 instead of 1982, it would have fought tooth and nail with stuff like Aramis 900 (1973) and could have been a trendsetter; but alas, that isn't Avon's way.

Overall, the claim on Cordovan's bottle is pretty accurate: this is a long-lasting cologne that would be labelled a man's parfum in the 21st century. If you love vintage 70's aromatics and want a fairly niche one to add into your wardrobe, I'd highly recommend tracking this down, even in aftershave form (it has nearly the same projection/longevity as a standard eau de toilette). Cordovan is of course discontinued, but Avon would repackage the ideas here twice; first in an updated composition that fit a woodier fougère mold in Avon Everafter for men (1990); and then in a form closer to Cordovan, but with greater complexity as a masculine for then Avon-owned Giorgio Beverly Hills called Red for Men (1992), even though neither are one for one the same. Avon Cordovan and Giorgio Beverly Hills Red for Men could almost be father and son versions of the same idea with a decade between them and the resultant shift in top notes from spice to freshness to tell them apart; If you can smell them side-by-side, you'll see what I mean. Designing a higher-quality masculine scent must have whet Avon's whistle for the designer joint-venture for men called Féraud pour Homme by Louis Féraud (1985), as that was a real designer powerhouse contender. If you're not sure about Avon's recycled DNA practices, just check out their 2000's aquatics to see what I mean, as each builds on facets of the last. Cordovan is a good, solid performer, if a bit too rare and precious to really make good regular use of; and probably not unique or special enough in light of other olfactory delicacies from the era, even if I'd reach for it more than some of them, personally. Thumbs up.