open discussion and shocks

Edmond Roudnitska, le ParfumLe beau parfum est celui qui nous procure un « choc ». Un choc sensoriel qui ébranle nos humeurs en première approche, mais suivi d’un choc psychologique d’autant plus durable que le parfum développe alors sa forme posément au fil d’une évaporation ralentie, de telle sorte que si cette forme est originale elle s’inscrira dans notre esprit qui ne l’oubliera pas et la reconnaîtra à la première nouvelle rencontre. Pour être belle cette forme devra répondre à notre attente de nouveauté et posséder les qualités fondamentales du grand parfum : caractère, vigueur, pouvoir, diffusant, délicatesse, clarté, volume, persistance.
(literally and with some mistakes translated into english) A beautiful perfume is the one which brings about a shock. A sensual shock that irritates our senses at first, but followed by a psychological shock which lasts the longer with the perfume developing its form, following a slowed evaporation scheme; this in a way that with the form being original it will inscribe itself in our mind which will not forget it and recognize it at the first following encounter. In order to be beautiful, this form must answer our expectation of novelty and harbour the fundamental qualities of a grand perfume: Character, force, power, diffusion, clarity, volume and lasting power.

This week’s lengthy introduction with Roudnitska again is due to my reading a thread on PerfumeOfLife about my perfumes. It is an interesting debate, even if the bottom line is: There are people writing about my two perfumes that do not like them (at first sight?). Believe it: This is tough reading exercise for me, raising mixed feelings.

Somehow, it is just like sending your blond little baby to school, proud on her new pink ribbon in her beautiful angel like hair and have her come home later, crying because her school friends made fun of her, calling her pony blonde. Thus, the perfumer who spent weeks, months, trying to get the best rose absolue from Morroco and this patchouli that is so hard to get with the expensive sandalwood and trying to balance these naturals with the synthetics to create his dream scent is faced with perfume lovers associating “hemp shop”. Snieff. The perfumer is shocked, too ;-)

But then I read the other comments on this thread and couldn’t but smile because they very much condensed this dislike and unease with my perfumes to Roudnitska’s sentences on the sensorial shock. I talked about it before on this blog and the longer the more I think Roudnitska was very right (see above).

Finally, there are two, three things to add:
-> If a beautiful perfume means one that brings about a shock, the reverse is not true. Not every sensorial shock is an indication for a good perfume.
-> Although I never visited a hemp shop and therefore can not fully appreciate this association, I think I know where this association comes from: It is the smoky underline in the air du désert …..
-> The hyacinth blooms in my garden right now, fighting with rain that pours since 24 hours and it amuses my nose, guides my fingers across the synthetics shelf, trying to come up with a very synthetic, no hippie-hemp shop kind of hyacinth reflection…..
Follow the discussion on Perfume of Life here…