The world is a pretty terrible place these days. Lots of people are out of work, and many of those still working are making less. There's a war in Iraq that seems to get worse day by day. Oil prices are rising and global warming appears to be accelerating. And then there's the high-stakes media conflict known as the presidential election. It's enough to make a guy want to sit in his room and play video games all day. Nonetheless, there is one event that overshadows all of these: Britney Spears has a new perfume.

Well, actually, it's a "fragrance." I know, I know. The jokes are just too easy. Feel free to use your own; I refuse to take cheap shots. There is one thing about the use of the word "fragrance," though: A quick perusal of the perfume counter seems to confirm that the use of the actual term "perfume" appears to have gone out of style. This fact shouldn't surprise me. I've never been au courant with the fashion/perfume/whatever crowd.

So she's got a fragrance. It's called "curious." That's right. "curious" with a small "c." That's so...well, the only word that comes to mind is stupid.

I mean, doesn't she know that the last step in the downward spiral of a pop culture career is your own fragrance? And don't give me that "Michael Jordan did it, and he's still cool" nonsense. Michael Jordan's fragrance stiffed, in large part because his fans thought he was still too cool to have a fragrance. Britney's fans? I know there are people who are still fascinated with her drunken weddings and all that, but does anyone still buy her albums? Not really. So she's no longer a singer, but just an icon. And what do icons do best? Shill their own fragrances.

Elizabeth Taylor has had a number of fragrances, even as the members of the public still interested in her every waking moment keep dying off. I did a quick scan of a couple department store web sites, and I found one other celebrity fragrance (or rather, an entire line of fragrances): Jennifer Lopez.

Need I say more?

So now that Britney has signaled the end of her short and decidedly inglorious fifteen minutes, what's next? "Stink, by Pink?" "Avril Showers?" "Youthful Exuberance, by R. Kelly?" The mind boggles.

I must admit a certain dislike for fragrances of all sorts. As a teeny-bopper in the 80s, I experimented with such dreadful colognes as "Stetson" and "Drakkar Noir." The latter is so famously overbearingly awful that jokes have been made at its expense in at least five movies that I've seen (and I don't watch that many movies). I guess I'm one of the few guys who actually prefers the scent of a woman to a parade of cloying chemicals. Or maybe we're just suckers for the marketing. After all, most of the fragrances on the market today are attached to the name of one fashion designer or another--people who owe everything to the reality of a label-conscious public.

Whatever. Anything that makes me turn my attention from the blood sport that is national politics these days (or, for that matter, any sign of the demise of BritneyWorld) must be a good thing.

Or maybe not. I don't know. I have no idea what "curious" smells like. (again, feel free to insert your own easy jokes here; point will be deducted for using the word "tart"). I didn't have the guts to ask for sample. That's just too silly an idea to even contemplate.

Jon Worley was pleased to see a small display for "misunderestimed, by W" as he walked out of the store.