Power Tool: Mascara motors
Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.
We never really listened to Mom on that one either, but it does seem to apply to the mascara-with-a-motor craze.
Estee Lauder’s TurboLash All Effects Mascara ($32) was the first “motion” mascara, followed by Lancome’s Oscillation ($34), and then an upgrade called Powerbooster ($39) lash primer. Soon Maybelline came out with Pulse Perfection ($11-$15), which markets a wand that operates at about 7,000 vibrations per minute (whose job was it to count that?) and a battery that lasts for an estimated 130 applications. We also found SpinLash, from one of our favorite sources: “As Seen on TV.” Rather than vibrate, the brush rotates 360 degrees as you apply your mascara. They all seem silly to us, but this one sounds downright dangerous.
The basic theory behind these products is that by vibrating, the applicator will separate your lashes, reduce clumping and make them look longer. It’s a nice theory, but everyone who has tried one and reported to us, say the mechanism is useless and really just adds $5-$12 to the cost of the product. A good, non-pulsing applicator brush is going to do the same job.
This is a classic case of companies forgetting to ask their customers. Any woman who wears eye makeup will tell you that she has tried vibrating mascara – while driving down the highway, or after a bad night of drinking. It doesn’t work.
So just because product developers CAN put a little vibrator in the cap of the mascara tube, doesn’t really mean they SHOULD, does it?
Damn. Mom was right.
