As promised, today’s a revisit of Perfumes: The Guide by Luca Turin and Tania Sanchez, now that more of you have had a chance to read it. For my earlier review of the book, click here. I propose a free-for-all discussion of any aspects of the book that interest you, with the gentle reminder that we are all adults, theoretically, and we can disagree and still maintain some civility. Please don’t make me come on here and moderate.
The Guide has been a hot topic and occasional source of hard feelings since its release. Obviously I don’t agree with everything in it. My personal approach is the grain-of-salt angle; if I’m in agreement with LT and TS, well, then – we are all genius. If I’m in disagreement – someone is wrong, and it isn’t me, is it? I’m grateful someone thought the topic was of sufficient interest to publish a book on it, and I welcome any converts to the brave new world of perfume obsession. Lurkers – today may be the day to let your hair down and post your first comment! I’m also sending a shout-out to Mercedes and other commenters on The Guide over the past couple of weeks to reiterate your criticisms.
I probably spend a little time each day, often before bed, browsing the book. I’ve folded down the corners of various pages, with the earmarked perfume reviews falling into three general categories, and here are a few examples:
Vindication. I’m going to leave aside reviews of classics like Chanel No. 5 and Mitsouko, which would have shocked me had they awarded anything less than five stars. More rewarding to me is to see scents I think of as underdogs get a little love from the authors. This is especially true when my admiration for a particular scent comes with a small but (I’m being honest here) persistent fear that my love for that scent indicates I have crappy taste. Gucci Rush would fall into this category. It’s a wonderful, weird, brash scent – warmly human but surreal, hairspray and milk. Having TS award it five stars (“… it smells so new, so confident, so reckless, so of-the-moment, Rush manages at every stage to feel cozy and alive…”) gives me an absurd amount of pleasure. A different kind of vindication is seeing LT give Serge Lutens Rousse two stars and call it “one fine mess” from “the periode bizarre.” Heh. Another example is Dior’s Hypnotic Poison (four stars, LT), the “almond” Poison, which I’m wild for, almost as much as the original, and which LT describes as “dark, velvety and autumnally muted, and … radiates in a way that only a great perfumer could have arranged… it was done by Annick Menardo, which explains everything.”
Provocation. Having the authors pan something I like, or love something I hate, doesn’t send me into the spasms of fury I’ve seen elsewhere on the boards and blogs. My reasoning: if I start with the construct that criticism is opinion, no matter how well- or ill-informed, and I disagree with that opinion – then I guess we have a difference of opinion, and I’m okay with that. I am sure it would feel more personal if I were the actual perfumer (and more about that in a bit), but as someone said elsewhere, if you put your creation out there for public consumption, someone, somewhere is going to hate it. Anyway, LT gives Hermes Hiris one measly star (lots of lame stuff got at least two) and manages to pay Hiris creator (and one of my favorite perfumers) Olivia Giacobetti a backhanded compliment at the same time, lauding two of her other fragrances as “great insofar as she manages to break with her usual manner: delicate florals with a pale, sour note reminiscent of clothes washed with unscented fabric softener.” Yeow, that smarts. And while we’re on the topic of perfumers, LT seems to have his favorites and not-so-favorites. Further, I generalize that he is not a big fan of pared-down, minimalist compositions. I could go on for paragraphs citing examples of ratings I totally disagree with, but will name just a few: Marc Jacobs Men (one star); MoslBuddJewChristHinDao (five stars, and puh-leaze), Serge Lutens Sarrasins (five stars), Secretions Magnifiques (ELd’O, five stars, kill.me.now), Apothia Velvet Rope (one star.)
Revelations. Perhaps my favorite part of the book, these are reviews of fragrances I have tried that highlight some aspect I hadn’t noticed or appreciated. Or, they are fragrances I haven’t tried and now want to try, desperately. A random sampling from My Must-Retry list:
L’Artisan Vagnilia (“unfettered, hilarious, boisterous, totally devoid of chic” – that last bit is a compliment in context.) LT gives it five stars and makes it sound like a riot, which I totally missed.
L’Artisan Patchouli Patch – four stars from LT and an ode to its development, which he says includes my BFF helichrysum (everlasting flower or immortelle) in the middle. Wow, really? I’ll check it out.
Hermes Osmanthe Yunnan – this may be the only Hermessence the authors liked. TS gives it five stars and talks about the milky aspect of the fragrance, which gets my attention, and calls it “a perfume of pure happiness.” Need to unearth my sample.
A random sample of the New To Me and Must Try category:
Etro Gomma (LT, three stars) “a classic leather in the Knize Ten mold, but more floral, composed by the great Edward Flechier.” Never heard of it.
Profumo.it Grezzo (LT, four stars). “A beautiful woody-fruity confection based on an accord that smells like cedar and apricots (osmanthus?)” He goes on. I want it.
Lady Stetson (TS, four stars). She compares it favorably (and actually prefers it) to Chanel No. 22, which I like very, very much, and no, I am not kidding, although she describes the bottle as hideous. Buy It Now at your local CVS.
Mauboussin (LT, four stars). “An oriental situated somewhere between the first Kenzo Jungle and Fendi’s Theorema, with a skilful combination of warm, mouthwatering dried-fruit notes and clean, uplifting woody-resinous incense and olibanum,” done by Christine Nagel. What was that? Oh, look, and there goes my credit card levitating out of my wallet for an unsniffed purchase.
A couple more thoughts and I’ll shut up and let you dive in. First, I have a relatively high tolerance for snark, and I believe I heard/read that the authors axed a couple of their reviews as too mean. Furthermore, perfumers have to suck it up and take the criticism of their oeuvre just as other artists do. Having said that, LT’s reviews of Mona di Orio’s line seem so vitriolic I can’t help but wonder if there’s a personal element in there. This from a review of Carnation (LT, one star): “She also says she studied with Edmond Roudnitska, but her creations suggest she paid little attention.” Lux – one star, LT, “dire citrus.” Nuit Noire – one star, LT, “a hilariously bad fragrance” with “a loud civet fart.” Oiro – one star, LT, “third-world air freshener.” I spoke of respecting others’ opinions, and LT’s got me beat on any level of technical knowledge of perfumery, but … seriously, come on. One star? For all of them? Did their PR drone make LT mad? This is the only set of reviews that taken together make me uncomfortable.
And last – Do fragrances change according to the wearer’s chemistry? This is a question in the interesting Q&A in the book. TS starts her answer, “For a long time, LT believed the answer to be absolutely no, and that all assertions to the contrary were marketing ploys” etc., and reading that, one expects a paragraph later on in the question explaining how LT’s changed his mind. I’ve now read that question several times, and it’s never clear to me in what way he’s changed his position, which I think he’s held firm to on the various talk shows and interviews. If I read this right, they concede that skin maybe creates nuances in the top notes, but that all drydowns are equal. I am in no position to argue with LT on the technical merits – but, as almost anyone has experienced in a group sniffing situation, fragrances seem to smell different on different people. I know that’s not a reasoned argument; it’s merely a statement. Most folks who’ve sniffed fragrances simultaneously on other people would agree with me, science or no science, and I’m not just talking about the top notes. Fragrances go inexplicably wrong – sweet or sour, musky or strange – on various people at various times. For another educated view on skin chemistry, see Victoria on her recent post on Bois de Jasmin (and so wonderful to see you back, V!)
Enough from me. The floor’s open. Your thoughts?
I have GREAT difficulty with the Mona Di Orio creations critique, as well as negative commentary on her appearance.
Why so vindictive ?
I felt so drawn to Ms. DiO, that I wanted to either adopt her or marry her.
Seriously- a soul, and a perspective.
No one fragrance is for everyone- but at least, she does not bore you- and her scents evolve.
It is one thing to bash a corporation- another to hammer the small niche perfumers.
I have strong opinions myself, but I refuse to be cruel in order to be funny-
I think I manage to amuse you all without causing permanent injury, no ?
Mauboussin- very nice.
If you want some, it’s really inexpensive at imaginationperfumery, or I can send you some.
I sound annoyed, I suppose.
Chacun a son gout, as it says under my name at POL- and I truly believe in that.
And I sing it, too.
German or English- your choice, baby.
Prinz Orlovsky here… but GENUG .
I admire hard work, effort, and all due diligence.
I enjoy reading well-written criticism.
But I’m weary of snark.
Well, I connect with much of what you’re saying. On the Monas: again, I can’t argue the technical details with LT. I think he’s just WRONG. And ITA about ragging the small niche lines, although I suppose one could argue treating them differently is unfair.
On the other hand, I don’t think anyone is reading this like the Bible and deciding they’ll never sniff a one-star.
Having read (translated) bits of Le Guide, I knew LT could be pretty brutal, so I was prepared for that, and sometimes I find it very funny. It’s not funny when it feels petty, though.
Love the book. I did find them to be too harsh on some of the By Kilian range which I happen to love.
Bravo Chaya. Exactly my thoughts only spoken more eloquently than I think I could have managed.
Chaya, darling, as usual the voice of sweetness and conciliation, always a mensch - hugs - I came back to the first post here when I realized that the lovely Mona, whom I have never met, but am compelled to feel a twinge of true sisterhood for here, as a perfumer who has been personally attacked could use a boost by a nice link. (Well, wasn’t that a sleepy-eyed run on sentence to end all!) I’ll get coffee in a minute….but first I wish to allow the PP readers know about a wonderful project Mona has been working on since August: a custom perfume for a bride in the States, all documented on Perfume Critic. http://perfumecritic.com/joomla2/ I love darling Marlen and may get to meet him in the next week or so when he visits Boca/family, but darn if I can figure out the exact link for the story/series of posts on Mona/bride. I know it scrolls in the top of the page, and then there are links from there. I believe there are four parts in the story so far. It’s called A Perfect Marriage.
It’s wonderful to watch the process unfold. There - tiny mitzvah done for the day, off for coffee!
I have to admit I was completely shocked when Must de Cartier got 1 star where as a celine dion fragrance got 2 stars. Smelled Lady Stetson today and still prefer Chanel 22. And I really don’t understand the love of L’Artisan Vanilia, which is very weak slightly harsh vanilla that doesn’t have much character. I rather love though that my first major perfume Lolita Lempicka got 5 stars. And will never understand the love for Beyond Paradise.
Agreed, I don’t see the reason why Beyond Paradise (men’s version too) is regarded so highly. The perfume evolves smoothly through different hues and shades, but their so bright that it feels a bit like watching TV with the colour contrast turned way too high. Perhaps even approaching something florescent.
For myself, I’m surprised that Chanel’s Pour Monsieur Concentre received 1 star and the original 5 stars. Although I also like the latter, I find the former is quite nice in that peppery sort of way. Maybe that’s what he means by “more vulgar”? That being said the husband and wife team are right on about so many of the other fragrances (Light Blue, Nahema, Thierry Mugler’s Cologne, Pi, Coco Mlle., etc ) that can’t help but wonder if something in my brain is amiss.
Lolita Lempicka definitely gets 5 stars for being Angel’s smart and beautiful cousin. An ex of mine used to wear this and despite those bad memories, this perfume still fantastic.
The BP thing made me feel a lot better, actually, because my understanding reading his long review is he is, essentially, admiring the perfume based on its architecture. They have constructed something that should be gone in a brief period of time but manages to stretch out into the horizon (paraphrasing here.) My point being, it’s like listening to my brother-in-law the builder admiring the clever employment of the joists in a new house. Yeah, that’s great, but I can’t see the joists, so who cares?
The drydown for BP IMO is probably the best part, since I find the other parts, though well engineered, to be a tad bit loud in that Enya music cracked up too high way. Good analogy with the joists
Dang, I keep forgetting to resmell Must, I’ve been over there twice. Yeah, I was surprised too — I recall it not being my favorite (I am apparently not a Cartier girl) but I didn’t think it was terrible, either. And it sounds like you didn’t get any more out of L’A than I did… I did think his discussion of what made LL so great was really interesting. Those are what I think are some of the best parts of the book, when he explains why he thinks something works really well.
Well I don’t think Luca ever liked the original to begin with, so I don’t think he would care about the tweaking to begin with, in fact his response might have been “Bring it on!” (okay I highly doubt his reaction words have been that, but I’m getting a bit of a laugh imagining him saying that).
Oh, I don’t know. I could see him saying, Bring it On! In any case, I need to re-smell it to see what the issue is. The Guide may have the consequence of many one-star perfumes getting samples!
/
I also don’t get LT’s dislike of Must by Cartier. It makes me wonder how much of the “does it smell different on different people” is due to skin and how much due to our individual scent abilities (nose, training, etc.) Either way, I really like Must and bought a decant. It has the sharp bite of a chypre in there that I love.
I was thrilled to see some of my favorites mentioned favorably or given 5 stars: Lolita Lempicka, L by Lolita Lempicka, Nina by Nina Ricci, the classic Chanels and Guerlains, etc..
But I thought the reviews of Dior Addict, Sarah Jessica Parker Covet, and Dolce & Gabbana Light Blue, were a little too negative, given my love (or appreciation) for them.
That said, I think Luca & Tania were perfectly right to hold niche brands to the same high standards as corporations–given all the “flim-flam” marketing produced by *both* groups, and that niche perfumery is often vastly more expensive/overpriced than mass market, its important not to give niche a free pass based on notions of exclusivity or elitism.
Okay, so you offer a reasonable argument for holding all perfumers to the same standards. If they are producing “art,” and I would argue that they are, shouldn’t they be judged equally on their merits, the final product, rather than, well, that’s pretty good for a one-man outfit? I mean, this way Andy Tauer can feel that much better, not like someone patted his head.
I was shocked they liked L. I mean, I really like it, but I figured they’d go, meh. Was a bit surprised about the hatred for Light Blue, which I like. But then we’re back to my pedestrian taste.
I’m shocked at the Light Blue review and I wouldn’t call your tastes pedestrian, consider this, I think last year Perfume Smellin Things ran a perfumer’s perspective on great summer fragrances, and Light Blue was listed as a favorite from a fairly well known nose.
Hey, I remember that! Who was that? Somebody I really respected. Again, I don’t know anything about the chemistry of Light Blue. You can complain about its ubiquity, but I still think it’s a great scent, and I can think of lots of other things I’d like to smell less on everyone.
*shudder* i HATE light blue. that is all.
Ah, c’mon! It’s light! It’s bright! It smells all right!
Lolita Lempicka got 5 stars, but L only 3. I noticed that in particular because I like L.
I don’t personally like LL, but I get what they were saying about its construction. L I like a lot, but not sure I can advocate its genius.
It’s a really nice vanilla with a dab of immortelle and a bottle that makes me smile.
For the last 10 years I’ve bravely soldiered through irony, post-modern irony (in which we didn’t know what irony was and substituted snark for it instead), and deconstructed irony, which is simply a new word for mean. Stick a fork in it, it’s done. I love Chandler Burr’s books, but I’m skipping this one. I don’t want to feel bad about perfumes I love and own, because these sophisticates push me back into the perfume equivalent of 7th grade.
I prefer the funnier, more pointed, specific, descriptive world of perfume blogs where I know who is my perfume twin and who is my perfume evil twin. And I can enjoy the really good writing in different styles.
As to perfumes smelling the same on everyone, or just having the top notes wobble, then settle down to the same smell, that’s just silly. I followed a woman down the street to ask her what fabulous fragrance she was wearing. White Linen. Rushed out bought it, sprayed it on, ARGHHH. Flowers left in a vase in the sun for a week. I’ve smelled Angel on a zillion people and it’s everything from chocolate rose to gak on a yak. Perfume is like a lovely linen dress. One size does not fit all the same way. Some women are elegantly rumpled, others look like an unmade bed.
OK, zoll zein Sha.
Put so well!
I’m reading it and am seeing that certain houses are taken to the woodshed (Le Labo) and some scents that are hideous on a lot of people I know are given 5 stars. I mean I know one person upon whom Angel was absolutely divine; you wanted to live only on her sillage. The rest of us? ChocoVomit (thanks to March for the phrase). He writes that Un Bois Sepia is a “dim witted” two stars, and MossBudJewEtcetera is a “masterpiece”? Whatever. I got more out of the concrete box from MBJ and on me Sepia sings. It’s all about the chemistry baby…
No no no!!! No such thing as skin chemistry! Smell THE SAME ON EVERYONE. And the 90% of us who disagree are dimwits.
I think Marc Buxton’s the bomb, and I don’t know what LT’s smelling in there, but how could he overlook the pkging on that one and then be so very very annoyed by Le Labo? And with you on the Sepia…
The Angel Conundrum. Here’s my personal problem with Angel — like Poison, it is such an ufb strong scent that to me, it *does* smell almost the same on everyone. And to me that smell is chocovomit, but that’s not my point.
My point is, it’s the sort of fragrance that dominates the wearer and everyone else in the elevator. I’ve never smelled any nuance in it. But maybe it’s my own personal hatred…. I don’t smell any nuance in Light Blue and Prada Iris, both very distinctive scents that I smell on everyone around here (good office scents) and I like those just fine. Dismissing my own argument. 
Wonderful, thoughtful post, QC. Thanks!
So you are boycotting as well? I am interested in the number of people who are doing so (a legit response). And I am also right this second distracted by the fabulous scent that keeps appearing and disappearing in the vicinity of my computer …
.. where were we? Sigh. Scented laptop: occupational hazard.
White Linen!!! hahahaha, I have done the SAME thing, and also (this is weird) I have asked two women what they were wearing and they said Narciso, which when I try it (paper, skin) I cannot smell AT ALL. I get *nothing.* And also I’ve stopped two ladies in elevators and found out they were wearing, I kid you not, Liz Taylor’s purple nightmare, forgot the name. Smelled AMAZING on them, really great. Smells like paint thinner and catbox on me, with a little lavender.
I will, also, be skipping this perfume comic book. For some reason it just puts my “nose” out of joint.
Less of a boycott than just.not.interested. I read perfume blogs every single day, because they are interesting and well-written, often balanced with pros and cons, with a nod to bottles and boxes. Frequently LOL wonderful, including bitingly funny. I’m just weary to the bone of snark passing as criticism. I’m getting shivers of 7th-grade slam books (remember those? You may be waaaay too young) and I barely survived that the first time. Legit criticism is depth and insight,fury and fun, and I’m not detecting that from this distance. [Carefully places down 10-foot poll at end of book, exits stage left.]
Well, I wasn’t fishing for compliments with this post, but I appreciate them. I love the company.
You have an excellent point about the blog world. For me, it is like when I go to the symphony or opera - I always want to read the review of all the critics, even the ones I know I will disagree with! Sometimes I learn more from reading the one that I think is out to lunch - it forces me to defend my position, really answer why I disagree. To me, that is good criticism of art, that the critic will make me think, even if I disagree.
I guess that is what I like so much about this guide - finally, perfume treated as art and given it’s due with appropriately professional and considered criticism out there in a traditional form. Even if I think they are sooo wrong about a few of my favourites (Must by Cartier, Soir de Lune by Sisley are examples)
I think this is beautifully put. Although there is much to argue with in the reviews, I am pleased that we *can* argue — that the topic is considered worthy of argument. And I know what you mean about criticism — if I disagree, I have to use my brain and try to think of why.
I was very surprised by the Sisley. Would have expected at least three stars, more likely four.
Some of the reviews have made me wince or raise my eyebrows (the litigious Bond is “endearingly plucky”?) but it’s been entertaining and educational reading — and my must-try list gets longer every time I dip in. One disappointment is the houses that aren’t included: Parfumerie Generale (except Coze), Parfums DelRae, Santa Maria Novella, Profumum, most of Comme des Garcons. (I’d especially looked forward to the authors’ thoughts on the Incense series).
no way, it says “endearingly plucky?” Freaking kill me now, I’d like to give their adorable legal team a piece of my funny mind, but they’d probably sue me into the poorhouse.
Thanks for the list of some of The Missing, which confuzzles me. And you could argue that some of the stuff is *really* obscure, and maybe they couldn’t get any, but not the CdGs, and certainly they review some other really obscure stuff. I feel like instead of Tania having to go out and drum up samples, I wish there’d been a team or at least an enthusiastic perfume friend to keep a list going.
I nearly gagged when I read that “endearingly plucky” in the Chinatown review. Nothing endearing about those bullies.
Don’t Turin and Sanchez have perfumista friends who could give them samples?
Well, yeah. I’m sure she did have someone. Which brings us back to the part where we could talk about how some bits of The Guide seem a little rushed, or sloppy. Where’s the index? And maybe some of the stuff is impossible to get, but not some of the examples we’ve cited on here (Bal, some of the CdG, etc.) I think they could have benefitted from having some perfumistas vet the list.
I think some of the missing lines just wouldn’t give them samples for reviews(e.g., Montale: they mentioned this somewhere; of course, they could get them elsewhere–but they chose not to). Others, they say they will get to later.
I said this I think elsewhere to you, but I’d have hired someone to put more effort into making sure there were fewer missing scents and lines.
Being cynical - then you wouldn’t have a reason to issue an updated version in three years time![:-\](http://perfumeposse.com/smilies/yahoo_question.gif ":-\")
“
But I would think a redo would depend on how this one sells, and so they’d be motivated to make it as good as possible the first time?
I have a long list of “must try that one”s now, too. Mauboussin intrigued me, as did Lalique’s Flora Bella, chilled milk, cold floral, and a sucked spoon?? Must try!! Anyone else tried it??
Overall, though I’m mystified for their love of Lauder, I’m very happy with the book.
I vaguely remember Flora Bella from sniffing them all at the Lalique boutique in Chicago, and Flora Bella was sharp, but that’s all I recall (would make sense with sucked spoon.) Don’t remember the milky part. I liked them all, though, including Le Parfum (which I think they gave one star to.)
Much of the EL stuff (the newer stuff anyway) doesn’t do much for me, too fresh a lot of it, but they’re not the first perfume nuts to love them. I think there’s a lot of appreciating the composition objectively from the point of someone who understands the chemistry and can admire the construction. I know Bois de Jasmin does.
I was pleasantly surprised FB was by B. Duchaufour- I really like his work. Of all the new ones from the guide I’m curious about, this one may have to be my blind buy….
My recollection is it’s available relatively inexpensively online? It seems to me the Laliques cost less than I’d expected (assuming no fancy bottle.)
Well, I am just stubborn. I have thus far refused to buy and look at the Guide, preferring to watch the hoopla and hear the more sensible reviews from the sidelines. I am also holding to my view that Provocation (nee snark,and/or play-with-the-readers) is perhaps too large a theme in the book, given some of the truly wacky evaluations.
But I will eventually succumb, and am most interested to play with the Revelations. The Vindications surely won’t give me as much pleasure as sharing an “ahhh” with you and other perfume friends over a mutually aligned taste in a fragrance.
Oh, and Marchele-I would love to have lunch with the authors, with us sprayed with Vanille Tonka and Tauer’s Orris-one on each arm, well into drydown. No chemistry change-bah
The revelations have turned out, unexpectedly, to be the best part of the book to me. I’m always ready to retry something based on an interesting observation about some aspect of a fragrance, and they do cover things I’ve never heard of and/or never bothered smelling.
Yeah, Orris on you would be a perfect example of skin chemistry. And you’re right, sniffing with friends is the best.
It’s funny, I was most excited about reading snarky, bitchy perfume reviews and having a laugh over a glass of wine; this has become my least favorite aspect of the book. If LT and TS are gonna give a scent one star, I’d prefer a lengthy, thoughtful justification of the rating, rather than just a pissy quote. Otherwise, don’t even review the fragrance and use that space for a scent that merits closer examination. I don’t expect them to praise everything, but if a teacher gives someone a failing grade, they’re expected to mark the paper and make it clear why the score was given, right? Forget about one star Paris Hilton fragrances and review the damn CdG Incenses; that’s what we all want!
That being said, I do respect and appreciate their democratic approach to fragrance; they represent designer, niche, mainstream, as well as regular ol’ drugstore cheapies and find value and beauty in all areas. They certainly have me interested in revisiting some cheapos from the past-Grey Flannel(I’ve always loved it, wore it yesterday, layered with a little CB Violet Empire), Halston Z-14, which I haven’t smelled in years, but used to love, and Stetson, a favorite of mine when I was nine years old.) I wonder if LT and TS are getting a kickback from Walgreen’s or some other drugstore…Of course, they haven’t really done anything to curb my jonesing for all things Guerlain, but that being said, they do seem to play favorites a bit. Guerlain, Lauder, move to the head of the class. Caron, Di Orio, detention’s right down the hall. I guess we all have our favorite houses and noses, but if you’re writing a book, shouldn’t you make it less obvious to everyone who your pets are?
Finally, yeah, it’s all subjective and I enjoy and respect reading everyone’s opinion, especially if it’s well written. It ultimately just makes me want to sniff (and spend) more. Just don’t be a bitch about it. Tabac Blond one star? It’s long been at the top of my To Smell List; now I’m just gonna bust my ass to make sure I do.
I sprayed my modern Tabac Blond edt (I have the vintage and modern of both parfum and edt) today, just in honor of the single star! Onery, eh?
my artist cousin suggested making a hip fanzine for one star fragrances
Great idea! We are all of us One-Star Girls in some way.
A One-
, slightly tarnished boy here.
You can sit with us.
I think your point about the short, snarky reviews is an excellent one — they don’t really *tell* you anything, other than it sucks, and (I think I said this in my original review) I’d have preferred much less of that to make room for more reviews of other, absent frags.
It’s not like the negative stuff is inherently bad. I find it very instructive when, for example, they analyze a two- or three- star fragrance and discuss why it’s a near miss, often due to the cheap ingredients. And sometimes LT marvels that something smells really good in *spite* of cheap ingredients. I can’t smell cheap ingredients, so this interests me.
And yes, let’s talk about the positive for a bit. I too loved the really wide range of scents included, including the drugstore stuff. I am not sure I even know what Stetson smells like, and I think they really liked the men’s and the ladies? So I’m going to smell those; why not? And their love for Grey Flannel just makes me smile as it does you too. (and layered with VE sounds like HEAVEN, btw!) And I loved TS’s review of Sex Appeal for Men, have you smelled that?! It sounds great.
The Carons. I think that’s one name that p!sses most people off, esp. Alpona and Tabac Blond. And I guess if they’d done the same to Guerlain we could re-test my indifference to the negative reviews.
A clarification, guys :
I didn’t mean that niche houses should be held to a different standard-
I just feel that reputations can be ruined, potentially, and that indie folks take a MUCH bigger beating.
I’d HATE to see someone put out of business , because of a bash- not a “review”…
I love the democratic approach, it’s my favorite.
Chaya, I think Judith’s comment along the lines of them saying, they don’t care for the perfumer’s style would have been a legitimate alternative. And acknowledging that LT could argue me into the ground on the chemistry involved in Mona, but I still am baffled. They are not precisely my thing, but if I’d had to name ten lines (or ten fragrances) I thought were utter crap, hers wouldn’t be on it. I am hoping, as another commenter said on here, some people go out and try Mona’s stuff just to see what the fuss is about.
what WOULD be on that list? clearly, i am a fan of the bashings. im also curious about the reviews that were left out because they were “too mean” its funny until it’s one of my faves. haha.
Not answering this. I don’t want to start another fight. Sorry, whistling man emoticon doesn’t work!
I haven’t read the Guide yet, and I go back and forth on whether or not I even want to. I’m sure I’ve learned more from the great crew here (and on some other blogs) than I could from snarky one liners. With that said, I do have an observation: I wonder at the reverence paid to LT’s expertise and technical knowledge because he’s a chemist. Does that make the guy down at Home Depot who’s an expert on color and which colors make up the myriad paint selections an artist or art critic??
I see your point; for LT specifically, though, I’ll have to disagree. Having read Emperor of Scent and his defunct blog, among other things, I would find it extremely difficult to argue against LT’s bona fides as a critic. He’s obviously extremely well educated in all sorts of areas, has a wide range of interests, and a genuine passion about fragrance. Can he be shamelessly biased and insensitive and what have you? Sure. Knowledge doesn’t guarantee objectivity, I’ll go that far with you. But, for all its warts, I love The Guide because at its best LT and TS lift the veil and show me something completely new about a scent.
First of all, I must say that I’ve enjoyed reading the book and learning lots of things I didn’t know. However, I find there’s a kind of snobbery there in precisely trying so hard not to seem snobbish: oh yes, we don’t do only niche, we do mainstream and even shopping mall perfumes. This is great by me, but then there’s not enough space for everything and I miss scents and houses that are important (for me): Lubin, the Incense series, Montale, Delrae, SMN,… On the other hand, there’s a comment on 8 different “Clean” scents (all of them with one star), which is kind of meaningless, especially if not all the houses are so extensively covered. The same with “The Art of Perfumery” or all the Angel variations.I prefer them when they point out what’s been achieved with a fragrance, and why it’s successful, than when they just dismiss it in few words (though I must admit they can be cruelly funny). Perhaps that’s the point: instead of Perfumes: the guide” it should be called “Perfumes: the test”
Or “Perfume: A Guide”
That’s funny, you named a list of some scents I miss most in The Guide. And it sounds like that for all of us, the short-one star reviews don’t serve much purpose. I much prefer an educated explanation of *why* something is good, bad, or could have been better.
Well, my first reaction is to agree completely with you (b/c you are always right, ya know); I had all of these responses to the book–and still do. But as it is settling in, I’m afraid my feelings are more negative. I got it immediately and devoured it on the train to NY–but then I find I’m not really interested in looking at it any more. It’s just not as useful as I had hoped. The best part is finding fragrances that one wants to try (and ya wantcha Gomma, ya gotcha Gomma [I think 3 stars is about right for this: nice but unremarkable leather in the TB mode–good for layering]). But even here, I would appreciate more information–(guesses at) notes, more description, etc. and fewer one-liners. These are just not really helpful–and they’re not so funny after a first reading, either. And while I admit that I am, unfortunately, as capable of being b*tchy as anyone, I don’t see that publishing this sort of stuff does much good–especially when we are talking about small perfumers. I agree that they should be held to the same standard as others, but many of the “clever” nasty reviews are going well beyond that. Why not just post one review saying they don’t care for MdO’s style of perfuming; (they are not completists in other houses)? I am not a big MdO fan myself, but I really uncomfortable with these reviews. Also–while they certainly give the impression in some reviews that they really hate LeLabo, that turns out to be misleading: they give Patch 5 stars and Iris 4 (the contempt seems to stem from the initial response to samples). Finally, while an occasional snark could liven up an informative book, the “ironic wit” here is so all-pervasive that is becomes, IMO, pretty wearing.
So, on the whole, I’m disappointed. I will still glance at the Guide to inform me about scents that I don’t know. But I would have used it much more if it had more information and less snark.
On skin chemistry: LT is simply wrong. If his revised impression were right, I could wear T42, which starts out wonderful on me. But as several of its fans have commented, something awful happens to me in the drydown. And we all have many more examples.
Lotsa typos here. Will just correct one that renders the sentence incomprehensible: I was talking about LL’s initial (negative, “witty”) response to LT and TS’s request for samples; apparently the authors don’t care for snark in others.
I read your long, interesting comment and didn’t find a single typo, so there. I was concentrating on what you were saying.
Of *course* you’d have Gomma, since you have every leather in the known world. But I can’t just type on here, and Judith, I need me a sample of that.
Having said that, if you find it three-star, I can probably live without it….
I could argue that LT/TS figure anyone who cares about the notes can get online and google them. OTOH I can argue that many people would agree that a guide to perfumes without the notes is less helpful. Overall, yeah. I think being less b!tchy with the one-liners (just dropping some?) and fleshing out some of the other reviews would have been a good way to go.
Reading your comment I keep mulling this thought, which I keep failing to type in here because I’m having trouble trying to word it inoffensively. You’ve read more stuff on MUA, maybe you know. I keep speculating about Tania’s voice. I feel like she signed on for the LT voice? That level of stridency. And I don’t recall that from blog comments, I remember more warmth and … agh, grasping for the words, reserve isn’t quite right, is it? The point being, if you’re going to coauthor a book with established author LT, what does your side sound like? If she’d gone softer and more philosophical, maybe she’d sound too milquetoast. But by (IMHO) doing more of a LT-style voice, they up the overall b!tch quotient considerably. I think the book would have had a very different feel if TS had stuck to more of what I think of as *her* voice, softer but just as smart. But I don’t know her. Maybe she’ll pop on here and tell me I’m full of it. I remember she got into at least one big argument on LT’s blog with another commenter, and she can hold her own in an argument.
Although when I first opened The Guide I had not read any of TS’s other writing, I did get a sense that she had allowed his style to eclipse hers ( a not-uncommon phenomenon in relationships), and felt slightly sad for her. I then read some of her old blog postings, and my initial sense was strengthened. It is always disheartening to me to see a talented woman take on the voice of her husband. Tania, be your own woman! Perfumanity wants to hear your voice, too.
I was disturbed, as so many others here are as well, that they were too severe with some houses. I have no desire that their tastes be my own, and enjoy the fact that LT is apparently my ETF, but some of these small houses could really suffer from their treatment in this book, if it came down to a matter of investors using it as a basis for decisions, whereas a large, established house is just going to laugh it off. I have no experience with Di Orio, just as an example, and maybe they are not so hot, but if it’s a matter of taste, then it seems irresponsible to take potshots when one could be affecting the livelihood of those about whom one is writing.
Having said all that, I am glad I bought it, and will return to it, if only to record my violent disagreement in the margins. That’s why margins are so wide, after all.
Oh, love your use for the margins, and the idea of LT as your EFT!!! That should leave you with a wide variety of choices.
If you come back and revisit this — can you describe in a little more detail your impression of Tania’s previous writing style, and how it might have changed in the new reformulation?
It seems very … Turin-esque, would love a description of an earlier style. As a blogger who is always trying on different style hats, I find the topic very interesting.
Well, I could certainly be wrong about TS’s style. Another commenter wrote below that TS is, if anything, snarkier than LT, and I will defer to those who know better than I. I had read some of her old posts on “Brain Trapped in Girl’s Body”, and she comes across to me as a thoughtful sort, except when writing about mayonnaise, at which point she is just hysterical. So what the heck do I know? As far as your style, we all love you the way you are, so don’t change.
Tania’s writing style was definitely reserved, poetic and thoughtful, but in person she’s without question a Brooklyn girl with all that implies. In the reviews, I can hear her speaking more than I see her writing. It’s as though they recorded themselves talking about each fragrance, then transcribed the most choice comments.
Thank you for confirming I am not nuts.
Thanks to both of you.
I found myself ignoring the stars. The written text and the “star rating” at times had no relationship to each other. Particularly in the 2/3/4 range. (Wish I had a more concrete example - but I’m at work and it would look a bit suspicious if I had The Guide at my desk)
Also found that there were a whole mess of scents I now wanted to try or revisit - just to see what they are talking about.
The conversation (even as bitchy as it has gotten in some circles) is the biggest contribution this book makes. More so than their opinions of individual fragrances.
With this book (and some of Chandler Burr’s writings), you are bringing in a wider range of opinions besides those of us who consume blogs. For some people, formal book publication still wields more authority than blogging - whether the authority is deserved or not.
The writing I see here, Now Smell This, Perfume Smellin Things, Perfume Shrine (among others) carry just as much (if not more) authority with me as “The Guide.” Mostly due to range, experience and passion - you all actually WEAR and LIVE with most of this stuff, not just sniff it analytically on little paper strips.
The bloggers can tell me whether Mitsouko would still smell good in a bowling alley (my answer - yes!) or if Aromatics Elixir would kill a man at 20 paces (which is why I’m afraid to crack open the new bottle I purchased
). Ultimately, we still have to live with the fragrance and develop our own opinions. At least with these resources (including the Guide), we are encouraged to broaden our horizons.
Wait … what part of having The Guide at your desk looks suspicious?
The Big Cheese keeps walking by me rolling his eyes, I am supposed to be working too. But, erm, no. I’ll get there. I don’t want to look at the Visa bill anyway.
ITA that, if nothing else, the *conversation* this book has prompted is a delight. I love, love, love the way people are thinking about fragrance. I love and embrace the idea that people can discuss scent as an art. I love the differing opinions. Even people who hate the book reap the benefits of discussion. I want perfume to have a wider audience as a topic. I want less mystery, and if LT/TS rag some of my favorites in the process, I can live with that.
The 2/3/4 range — you’re right. Given that it’s subjective, I felt like with some of them, they could probably have adjusted the star one direction or another on a different day. Three stars seems to be a particularly wide category.
Umm…what does ITA mean :-
I also vote for less mystery in fragrance. Some would argue that it would remove the “mystique” that sells so many fragrances. The thought that “if I wear this I will be someone else / someone better / more elegant / an irresistable sex goddess / whatever”.
Personally - I just wanna smell nice and educate my nose. The education piece can be particularly difficult when the formal “notes” say one thing and your nose / brain is screaming something else.
Sorry — I Totally Agree. And I remember Robin at Now Smell This using IIRC and me thinking for a looooong time before figuring out that one. People complain about the abbreviating on blogs, and I suppose I should do less of it.
Having bored everyone around me with my impressions on the Guide (sorry again Nicola), it’s high time for some online venting.
Of course initially I went straight for taste validation, and got a mix bag of praise and disappointments, the latter frankly hurting more than I had expected. But then I tried to base my judgement onto more objective grounds and this is my list of pros and cons.
Pros:
1) There are lots more fragrances I am keen to test or re-test and lots of them are easily accessible. Duty Frees are all of a sudden a lot more interesting than before. LT and TS are definitely not niche snobs.
2) Some of the reviews, positive or negative, are very informative, enriching and fun.
3) It is a huge accomplishment and hats off for that, although maintaining complete rating consistency is almost an impossible task.
Cons:
1) It is clear that more time has been spent on some reviews than others. While it may not be necessary to expand on the ocean of fruity florals, trashing a more reputable scent may require a bit more explanation than a one liner.
2) Think there are some inaccuracies (e.g. the MDCI Promesse de l’Aube review)
3) There are obviously some personal agendas making some of the reviews less objective than desirable. I am referring to the Carons (yes we got the reformulations were bad), the MdO issue (yes she does seem to have a high opinion of herself) and to a certain extent Le Labo too (yes, they do have an odd naming and availability policy), but did they need to relegate all or most of the scents to make a point?
The great think is that after obsessively carrying the book with me everywhere for about a week, now I have moved to some sort of relative indifference which is probably the way I should have approached it all along.
Silvia-
I’m agreed with all your comments, except one…
I had two in-depth conversations- very deep ones- with Ms. Di Orio-
And I never had the impression of her being sweet on herself.
I was amazed by her lack of artifice, shyness, and passion…
Did you get to talk with her?
Just curious.
Sorry, should have qualified more: it’s only what transpired from reading her website, which I believe has now been changed. Bad PR perhaps, but it got people talking even before the Guide came out. If I met her in person, I’d speak to her of my love for Carnation.
Apology unnecessary, hon but thank you anyway. The Guide has clearly stirred deep feelings and I will be approaching it with some caution now. Can’t say anymore because I’ve yet to receive my copy!
Silvia — on the pros, we agree on the retests. I didn’t even think of that going into the book. I also wish the duty-frees were more widely available (I don’t fly a lot) although if I look around online I can probably find them. And I agree that maintaining consistency with the stars is very difficult, but could argue that, having decided on a star rating system, it’s their job to make it work as well as possible. On your cons — I definitely share your feeling about the disparity in time spent on particular reviews. Don’t you get the feeling some of them were the result of, I don’t know, smelling their 45th fragrance at 11 pm on a rainy Thursday and thinking, oh, who cares? The ones that they had nothing to say about? I wish they’d said nothing and moved on to something that inspired them (a problem I understand as a blogger.) And I definitely feel some inconsistencies in their response to the stupidity/verbiage of perfumery. Le Labo and Mona clearly irked them, but then he gave the Elternhaus five stars. I couldn’t have done it; I’d have had to ding them one star for their pitch.
I had two main… qualms, and enjoyed the book thoroughly despite them:
1: they agree like, 95% of the time? seriously?
2: their treatment of all Le Labos seems a bit… biased. he discusses a bit of a tiff with a Le Labo representative, and I’ve got to wonder if that had anything to do with it.
Yeah, I heard reviewers ask them about that! Agreeing 95% of the time! In some ways I think it would have been a better book if they’d *disagreed* radically on more scents, which would be perfectly plausible, wouldn’t it? I mean, you could admire the construction of a scent and still find it horrible. When they both reviewed a fragrance because of a disagreement, it was still a minor disagreement — along the lines of TS going, well, I understand its genius but it has no soul. I think TS saying, LT is out of his fricking mind on this one would have been a nice change of pace.
The agreement/disagreement issue is a very interesting one — it keeps popping up for me, in venues besides perfume as well. The argument I get is that making disagreement transparent is confusing, especially for beginners, and that it lessens the authority of the opinionators. (Chandler Burr actually spoke about this at the Sniffa luncheon, if you remember March — that he had wanted to publish a reconsideration column, but the NYT said no.)
The argument I give back (but I can’t say anyone’s listening) is that disagreement is: a) fun, b)necessary, c) a part of all criticism.
It’s just bizaare to me, in so many ways, this idea that power comes from a single message, but apparently a lot of people think so. All of which is to say that LT and TS may not have had a lot of choice. (But what about Roger and Ebert — I say!)
I find that “two different perspectives is too confusing” and “you can’t change your mind, it’s too confusing” to be … confusing. People change their minds all the time. I change my mind on here all the time about fragrance. But you’re right, maybe the publisher felt like they needed to be basically in agreement? I don’t agree though.
I read the Guide cover to cover and was left with the certainty that a serious perfumista was not its target market. Makes sense. Although I like to think that those of us who have actually read The Secret of Scent and have a deep love for the art of perfume are an increasingly significant constituancy, we are still relatively small in numbers compared to everyone else.
I learned nothing from the Guide. I found that it offered nothing new on any of the topics covered in the narrative sections. As for the perfume reviews, the pained attempts to make the reviews “clever” diminished these writers and was unhelpful to someone who was looking for a more nuanced and serious treatment of these scents. I agree with the statements above that too many words were devoted to tearing down the work of certain perfumers and to scents that the writers did not like. I suppose waxing “ironic” is easier than waxing poetic. These writers are better than that. I have to hold the editors and publishers responsible for some of the choices made - including the apparent commitment to glibness.
Nonetheless, if going on GMA and radio to promote the Guide leads to a new audience for perfume, good. I imagine a whole cadre of men and women intimidated by the many perfume offerings who would welcome an “authoritative” Guide which allows them entrance into the world of perfume without the initial missteps that are so easy to make if you rely only on the advice of the SA at the cosmetic or department store. I am actually pleased that someone thought there would be a mainstream market for a book about perfume. I just wish this book hadn’t sacrificed content for the “sound bite” approach to reviews.
I gave away my copy of the Guide. I found nothing in it to warrant a place in my library.
In the mall the other day, I decided: I want to hire myself out as a guide to help people buy fragrance (a service I offer for free to helpless people in Sephora whenever I am there).
I would not be representing a particular agenda in terms of marketing or commission. I am knowledgeable about the offerings. I can help the customer find something s/he might like. From that perspective, I welcome any contribution to the cause of making information about a variety of perfumes available to people — people who probably don’t know a lot of those fragrances even exist. You are right, it’s much easier to do irony than poetry, and I think irony is more LT’s style anyway, judging by the book.
You have been doing that March. Right here. You, Patty and Lee. In the short time that I have been reading your posts I’ve tried niche fragrances that I’d never heard of and probably wouldn’t have and I’ve tried some classics that I also would not have tried if I hadn’t discovered the Perfume Posse. You’ve all opened up a whole new fragrance world to me and probably others who read these posts daily.
Hey, thanks. I appreciate that, totally without snark or irony. I work hard at this, and I take it seriously, in my own way.
I am nuts about fragrance, and I think if nothing else that shines through.
and p.s. it’s true — I have sold so much product at Sephora and Nordstrom, they ought to pay me a commission.
whole-heartedly agree!! And many, many thanks for the guidance
I thought it would be fun to read the comments about this book, until I saw how people (over)reacted on the various forums. ITS A BOOK. People are acting like someone proposed and wrote a new Bible!
Having said all that, I take it for nothing more than any review I read on a particular fragrance…I don’t think PerfumePosse.com would get a backlash if someone commented on how they didn’t care for something.
I agree with some, not with others…on the few mentioned above, I think Sarrasins deserved its 5-stars, and I think Marc Jacobs for Men deserved its 1.
The only disappointment I had in the book were the few missing fragrances I would have liked to read about - Feminite du Bois, Bal a Versailles, Duel & Mandragore, etc. etc.
Overall I found it very entertaining and will refer to it often when trying something new.
Dane, I hear the guys on Basenotes are absolutely rabid about the Creeds and some other stuff… are you a guy? I can’t remember, I think so. Only asking because the only people I know who like MJ Men are women.
I find it nice and creamy/woody, but I know some people think it’s awful, weirdly fresh/synthetic. Wonder if …. skin chemistry is involved?
I already said this on here in another comment, but I wish TS had had some help in rounding up samples and making a list. FdeB and Bal are glaring oversights, in my opinion. I may be wrong but I thought Mandragore was in there? TS, three stars, nice but could have been better? I love Mandragore, I realize it doesn’t have The Drama of the name, but I don’t care.
Correct, I’m a guy. The boys on Basenotes are always upset if anything bad is said about Creed, but agree 100% on all the Creed assessments in the book as well.
Ah, so its the women who are buying MJ for Men! I was wondering what kept it on the market…figs & cheap musk is all I get out of it.
There was an insightful thread on POL regarding the ommissions and Dr. Turin welcomed the suggestions for the potential 2nd edition. Too bad the drama flared up all over the board and everyone took the book as a personal insult and forced Dr. Turin to leave completely.
Hey, Dane, you say “figs and cheap musks” like it’s a *bad* thing. And it IS all the women. Somehow I can’t imagine a man smelling that and wanting to wear it. It’s too femme to be a legit masculine, but not femme enough to be ironic. If that makes any sense, which I think it does not.
And back to the first part of your first comment — I guess it’s just me (or us?) but I don’t understand the strong feelings connected to this. LT/TS dissed their fair share of fragrances I really LIKE. But as you said, it’s just a *book.* Full of *opinions.* I wonder if LT/TS were surprised by the backlash?
Ha…I suppose figs & cheap musk have their fans! I totally understand what you mean about feminine men’s scents being ironic, like Dior Homme. MJ missed that mark.
I sincerely hope that LT & TS didn’t take all the comments negatively, but I have a feeling they (he) did (from reading the responses). When people started commenting on their marriage & personal lives, it would be hard not to be insulted.
Anyway, I’m loving the book overall…even when I disagree. His 1992 guide was/is my ultimate reference book, and I’ve waited anxiously for this release. I think they did an excellent job and look forward to the 2nd edition (The Guide v. 1.2?).
The part I love most about perfume reviews is hearing insider-scoop on ingredients, synthetics, and history. I could care less if it got 5-stars or 1. I think its a shame that people don’t embrace it just for that reason alone!
Lord, the marriage stuff. Head-slap. I totally forgot. I was stunned by that personal stuff. Who knows what the circumstances were, and what business is that of anyone’s, anyway? What’s that got to do with the book, and the reviewing? Having a smackdown with LT about Caron is one thing, but that is something else. I’d have left too.
Dior Homme! Perfect example. And (not sure if you will be back) I giggled yesterday, putting Egoiste on. The thing’s practially wearing high heels. I would love to smell that on a man.
Egoiste is another perfect example…Insense as well. I love them all, but I mostly wear “women’s” scents anyway (don’t get me started on that!) I’m glad the guide continued the previous guide’s advice on men digging into the ladies scents and vice versa. Probably the best advice a man could get.
I couldn’t believe the personal comments people would make…SO inappropriate. I can believe that many of the Caron’s have undergone some reformulations, but I still like them!
Thanks for all the comments March…it must have taken your entire day to keep up with all these comments.
Yes, I loved LT’s advice (paraphrasing) that if you’re a man into oriental scents, why not walk across the aisle to the ladies’ shelves for the best selection? And I thought his realization that Patou 1000 would be a perfect men’s scent was brilliant.
I find “women’s” scents on men incredibly sexy. I’m talking blatant florals like rose, tuberose, jasmine. Speaking of skin chemistry, I feel like men tend to make even the most feminine scents a little rough. I’m not sure masculines on women have the same effect on hetero men, however. Although according to them I should be wearing bacon.
I did enjoy the book, but did take it with a grain of salt. It was interesting comparing my opinion (non-expert) to theirs expert) - but I too felt that there was something a little personal going on regarding the Mona di Orio fragrance critiques. So much so, that I didn’t find them credible. I’m now anxious to sample them.
As to chemistry - I firmly believe that fragrances can and do smell different on different people. For example, I had purchased a FB of Delrae Debut (unsniffed - dumb, I know….), and it was absolutely terrible on me. I found it a new home with a woman I work with. She came to work one day and I loved whatever fragrance she had on. Well, it was Debut, and it was totally different on her than on me.
The bottom line for me is that I have to like it and enjoy it. It doesn’t matter what their opinions are - but saying that, I still enjoyed the book.
I’m glad you said you’re anxious to sample the Monas. I was hoping that might be one reaction to the intense criticism in the book — that people might be tempted to try her (relatively obscure) line. I think she deserves all the accolades she gets.
I know, the unsniffed purchase! Bad idea; and I am guilty too. Sometimes I wind up with spare bottles after friends from this blog go running off and buy something I rave about and it is *nasty* on them. That’s how I wound up with Andy Tauer’s Orris — Louise does something criminal to it.
Hey, I need to email you about Weds.
Oh, man! I thought I had more time
Just got the book yesterday afternoon and have only had the time to look up the most important (to me) reviews. I’ve already heaved a big sigh of relief that two of what I feel will be my most enduring loves got five stars - L’Eau d’Hiver and Onda……sigh…..
Okay, I’m getting bored answering these in order, skipping around now
The Vero reviews made me really, really happy. Rooting for the small perfumer, ya know? Andy’s stuff made me happy the same way. And I was thrilled/pleased to see how much they like the MDCIs, because that guy was so incredibly nice and decent when we were mocking the “prestige” of the brand and he sent us all samples. I mean, he could have been a d!ckhead in response to our not being very nice, but instead he got busy and sold us. Great strategy.
I literally laughed out loud when I read LT’s review of L’Artisan’s Vanilia. It is one of my all-time favorite scents, but unfortunately, I am unable to wear it due to some mysterious reaction. I re-test it periodically to see if maybe it will no longer induce the red itchies, but no such luck. My latest attempt was last week at Henri Bendel, and the crook of my elbow heated up like a ceramic cooktop. I’d like to hear LT explain that one.
I personally think his writing style is much more amusing than his opinions.
That is so weird! I wonder what you’re sensitive to. Hey, maybe it’s OAKMOSS, I hear that makes people’s arms drop off all the time. Wait, where’s my eyeroll emoticon.
I am really lucky, I have what I’d describe as “sensitive” skin but have had excellent luck with fragrance — other than the occasional scrubber, but that’s a different topic 
And I will now definitely have to retry the L’Artisan, particularly in light of my newfound vanilla love.
Hi March,
I generally avoid perfumes containing oakmoss (not one of my favorite notes), so I have no idea why Vanilia causes this reaction. I was able to wear it exclusively for a few months and then the reaction occured and has persisted - we’re talking 15 years now. Sometimes, I get reactions to “natural” perfumes such as Rich Hippie or Aftelier. Nothing a little Cortizone 10 can’t handle!
If I Could ask one thing of LT, it would be to break Vanilia down molecularly to figure out what the possible irritant might be. But in the meantime, I satisfy my vanilla jones with Organza Indecence, Indult Tihota and Guerlain Spriteuese Double Vanille.
And you have just named several of my winter favorites! If you’d told me last year I’d be loving the vanilla, I’d have laughed in your face.
Once it gets you, it hooks you forever.
A couple of summer options you might consider are Yosh Ginger Ciao and Hidden Cove by Majenty. Not straight vanillas, but both have that vanillic vibe and are very wearable in warmer weather.
am one hundred percent smitten with ginger ciao and can zero percent afford it.
Ginger Ciao is my favorite Yosh.
i think that’s a common sentiment. its the tester w/ the most missing at the store i first smelled it at
My other Yosh favorite is the now discontinued La Contessa. Why she discontinued it is beyond me.
When I get it together (and who knows when that will be) you can certainly try Gomma; I like it layered with Montale Rose Petals, myself. About TS, I am not really sure; I am mostly familiar with her blog-comments and her own blog: I always found her very witty there, but beyond that I’m uncertain. . . . You may very well be right, though. I think it would be difficult for anyone NOT to be influenced in this sort of situation, IYKWIM. And you are of course right about notes and all. Part of my carping simply reflects the fact that I had a different book in mind than they did.
This was supposed to be a reply to March’s reply to me. Boy, you really have to hit that “reply” button HARD to make it work!
That’s cuz our blog is stubborn.
Or maybe your keyboard is sticky from perfume, like mine is.