On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 12:32 AM, Supriya Nair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Turin and Tania Sanchez' book of perfume criticism is something I have > wanted to read since the minute I read this review of the > > book<http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2008/03/10/080310crbo_books_lanchester?printable=true> > . > > That, it turns out, is relatively mild, as their criticisms go. Consider > 212, from Carolina Herrera: "Like getting lemon juice in a paper cut." > Amarige, from Givenchy? "If you are reading this because it is your darling > fragrance, please wear it at home exclusively, and tape the windows shut." > Heiress? "Hilariously vile 50/50 mix of cheap shampoo and canned peaches." > Princess? "Stupid name, pink perfume, heart shaped bottle, little crown on > top. I half expected it to be really great just to spite me. But no, it's > probably the most repulsively cloying thing on the market today." Hugo, the > men's cologne from Hugo Boss? "Dull but competent lavender-oakmoss thing, > suggestive of a day filled with strategy meetings." Love in White? "A > chemical white floral so disastrously vile words nearly desert me. If this > were a shampoo offered with your first shower after sleeping rough for two > months in Nouakchott, you'd opt to keep the lice." Lanvin's Rumeur gets a > one-word review: "Baseless." > > Admire and appreciate that Turin is apparently a biochemist "specialising in > the creation of new smells."
I suppose these are maestros of scent who know exactly what they are talking about...but such destructive criticism, while it sounds very witty, makes me, personally, very uncomfortable, because it posits a stance of "only my viewpoint is valid and the people who use these scents are idiots". Scents are so subjective that I cannot understand how any one opinion can be the only valid one. And I am with the snobbery of "I am so expert that I can slate every perfume which is popular." "If this > were a shampoo offered with your first shower after sleeping rough for two > months in Nouakchott, you'd opt to keep the lice." Oh, come ON! This sounds so clever and mordant...but Mr. Scent Expert, I would NOT opt to keep the lice after two months in Nouakchott, wherever that may be. Does expertise only mean looking down (looking down one's nose is an apt image here!) on others? I understand that some of us have much more highly educated noses than others..but surely every scent under the sun has its place somewhere in the Universe! "I don't like it" is acceptable to me, "No one should like it" is not. In fact, the same fragrance may affect one differently depending on the context. When I was walking through the State Forest at Devarayanadurga, the scent of the wild jasmine was everywhere. It is a strong and heady aroma, and I loved it; my memories of the day are completely tinged with that scent. But I would never buy such a strong scent as a perfume-in-a-bottle. My earliest memories are of "Tata Eau de Cologne" (applied to my forehead in a folded hanky, whenever I was running a high temperature), and I always associated the smell of "Tata Shampoo" (remember that annular bottle those-who-were-brought-up-at-that-time-in-India?) with clean hair. They were, probably, very hoi polloi scents; but I cannot change my "Tata Aroma" memories. Hmm...this smells like a rant... Deepa.
