Make Me Beautiful

Happy Friday everyone! What’s your perfume today? I’m going with Jolie Madame . It’s cool and wet today, and supposed to get colder–forty-two degrees tomorrow. Where the heck is spring?

Have a wonderful day!

*image from FragranceDirect

Popularity: 2% [?]

Perfume works well to highlight our individualities. Once you know what smell fits your personality, image and lifestyle, it’s time to go shopping. But be aware - shopping for perfumes usually is not an easy task. Do you know how to shop for the right perfume?First of all, don’t use any fragrance before going to […]

Popularity: 4% [?]

Perfume is simply alcohol with a fixative combined with essential oils or chemically produced scents. Whilst cologne is basically perfume watered down. Perfume typically contains 30% essential oils and colognes only 1-2%

Perfumes you find available to buy may consist of just one scent whilst others contain a blend of a high note (the first scent that reaches you), middle notes (sometimes called heart notes, which is the personality of the perfume) and finally the base note which lingers on.

Always bear in mind that perfumes react differently with each person’s body scent. This is why you should always try before you buy otherwise you could be disappointed. What perfume or cologne smells nice on your friend may not smell as pleasant on you. A good rule of thumb is to never test more than three perfumes at a time.

Fragrance falls into six basic groups:

Spice: cinnamon, ginger, cloves
Wood: pine, sandalwood, cedar
Fruit: lemon, orange, peach
Florals: jasmine, lilac, gardenia, rose
Herbal: lavender, bay, sage
Exotic: musk, ylang-ylang, vanilla

The perfume can have top, heart, and base notes all from one category or mix the notes from different categories.

Home made perfume can be fixed with glycerin or castor oil. Commercially perfume was often fixed with for a longer shelf life with civet oil, or musk. Today chemical replacements have been found.

The most internationally recognized of all perfumes has got to be Channel No. 5. Have you ever wondered why the number is 5? It’s because during the testing period, a bottle was labelled “5″. The fragrance consists of top notes: Aldehydes, Grasse jasmine Heart Notes: Rose, ylang-ylang, iris Base Notes: Amber, patchouli.

Modern perfume making has been taken over by Classic Designer houses such as Christian Dior which offers several perfumes including : J’adore, Diorella, Diorissimo, Dolce Vita fragrance and Miss Dior. While celebrities have always endorsed perfumes, they’re now lending their name to perfumes like “Lovely,” by Sara Jessica Parker.

To keep your perfume smelling beautiful for years to come make sure you keep the bottle away from heat and light as this will help prevent it from turning sour. The best bottles to keep perfume in are small ones and you should always apply it with a spray or stopper. This will prevent oil from your fingers contaminating the perfume.

The cost of perfume ranges from the least expensive colognes around $25 a bottle to $215,000 a bottle for Imperial Majesty, a Clive Christian signature scent. The fragrance is $2,150 per ounce. To warrant a price tag of $215,000, a Baccarat crystal bottle was filled with 16.9 ounces of perfume and a five carat diamond and gold collar.
Beauty Supplements

Popularity: 3% [?]

I continue to ponder this thing, writing about perfume, so I thought I would share with you something I read that really got me thinking. Helg over at The Perfume Shrine was lucky enough to interview Chandler Burr ( Part One and Part Two ), and he was kind enough to respond to comments readers left regarding his interview. Simply, one commenter noted the difficulty of writing about perfumes without using words like “aldehydic.” Mr. Burr responds (in part):

“Brands hate aldehydic only because people don’t know what it means; if the public was familiar with it, there’d be no problem, and they’re going to have to be, sooner or later. Perfume should be taught in classes just like painting and literature. As Luca points out, what’s lacking is simply the vocabulary.”

Now, as many of you know, Chandler Burr is the perfume critic for The New York Times, as well of the author of two books about perfume, The Emporer of Scent about the master Luca Turin, and The Perfect Scent about the creation of two scents, Sarah Jessica Parker’s Lovely and Hermes’s Un Jardin Sur Le Nil. And, as many of you know, I am…uh, me, amateur perfume fan and author of this blog. Clearly, if we met in a dark alley for a perfume-off, Chandler Burr would win.

And still, I’m going to do this. I’m going to disagree. Yes. I. Dare. And now I shall explain why.

*Cue sound of soapbox being dragged across the floor.*

Ahem. On the one hand, I agree completely that perfumery is an art and should be treated as such. How wonderful it would be to take classes in the history of perfume, or to take classes to learn how to compose a scent the way one takes a class to learn to compose music. Where I part ways with Mr. Burr–or really, I guess, with Mr. Turin (oh yes)–is in the area of vocabulary.

Perfume is about experience, not about language. Consider this line: “If the public was familiar with [aldehydes], there’d be no problem…” Okay. Aldehydes are specific types of organic compounds. Now you know what they are. According to Wikipedia , they contain a terminal carbonyl group. Oh, even better! But you have a definition now. You have a vocabulary.

Now talk to me about perfume. You can’t.

But if I told you, “Chanel No. 5 is aldehydic,” and you smelled Chanel No. 5, you might say “Ah!” And then if I let you smell Clinique Wrappings, you might have an even better understanding of aldehydic. The more you experience it, the more you understand it–not the more you talk about it. The problem is, of course, that to be able to talk about it, you have to say “aldehydic.” You can’t say, “a sort of metallic herbal or green quality.” Or can you? Which has more meaning? I would argue for the “metallic green quality,” but I realize that one cannot classify perfumes in such a manner. In this case, aldehydic enables us to classify, and we can say definitively, “Aldehydic perfumes contain aldehydes.” That one is pretty clear cut.

Now take the term chypre, common to the perfume vernacular. A chypre is a perfume with citrus top notes and woody base notes. I’ve defined it for you, right? I could also say to you, “A chypre includes bergamot, oakmoss, and patchouli in its composition.” The problem there, of course, is that lots of perfumes contain these notes, and they are not chypres.

All chypres are not created equal. Guerlain Mitsuoko, a chypre, is nothing like Chanel Chance, which is also a chypre. Of the accords that make up a chypre (remember, we have the definition), Mitsuoko has two, bergamot and oakmoss, and Chance has only one, patchouli. Mitsuoko is a fruity chypre, while Chance is a floral chypre. Each of these have little in common with Chypre de Coty, for which this family of perfumes is named. There are also green chypres, aromatic chypres, and leather chypres.

You know what a chypre is now, right? I’ve explained it to you, and you now have the language–the vocabulary–to describe it yourself.

Now, if I spray some perfume on your wrist, can you tell me definitively whether or not it’s a chypre? My guess is no. My guess is, maybe if you’ve smelled hundreds, even thousands of perfumes, you could pick out what might be classified as a chypre. But that is experiential. If you read the notes, too, and saw that it had the possible composition of a chypre, you might pin it down. But unless chypre means following a specific formula–x amount of bergamot, y amount of oakmoss, and z amount of patchouli–every time, for every composition to which other ingredients are added, no one can say definitively what is and is not a chypre. In other words, there really is no meta-chypre, no ur chypre.

Which means, ultimately, that the term chypre has no meaning unless we somehow make it have meaning. We, the masses, don’t get to make these things have meaning. So who does? Well, perfumers do. And critics do. And, I suppose, marketers, although maybe they have to check with the perfumers first. You and I, we know a chypre is a chypre because somebody tells us it is so. I suppose once we’re told, we can discuss it. The problem is, though, that if it only comes down to a matter of vocabulary, then what we’re saying is that all that matters is the discourse. If we know how to talk about perfume, how to write about perfume, then we know perfume.

And I suppose that’s what it comes down to for me: the difference between the discourse about perfume and the experience of it. The discourse is easier. It’s akin to reading literary or film criticism without reading the book or seeing the film, and then trying to have a serious discussion about said book or film. You might be convinced you’re talking about the book, but really, you’re talking about someone else talking about the book. (Remember Mr. Burr’s comment about how perfume should be taught like art or literature? Hang around with a couple of graduate students in literature for a few days, and see if they discuss books, or criticism of books. Literary criticism gave them a vocabulary!) It seems a lot of the time the discussion is about what we think about perfume, not about how we experience perfume. Sure, we discuss the development of notes on our skin, but that’s often akin to a plot synopsis. I certainly don’t have the answer about how to get outside that loop, but I don’t think a vocabulary is it.

All this is a roundabout way of saying, I think people need more experience with perfume, not more language. As much as I love writing about perfume, I encourage people not to take my word for it. Go on a smelling adventure, figure out what you like, and do not worry about the fact that you can’t talk about it the way you think you should be able to. The language of perfume is as artificial a construct as one can imagine. Own your nose, and say anything you like.

Popularity: 3% [?]

Choosing A Perfume
by: Sara Blackmoore

The choice of fragrances and scents seems to grow wider every day, as manufacturers fight for our attention and try ever harder to distinguish their offerings from the competition. With such a selection to choose from, how does one even begin to know where to start when it comes to buying perfume?

Broadly speaking, all perfumes fall into one of six different categories based on their dominant top notes. Different categories will suit different people or occasions.

Earthy or woody type perfumes evoke smells of the forest, and are usually very refreshing. They often tend to appeal to the older generation, and may make ideal gifts.

Oriental fragrances use strong spicy scents, and are ideal for special social occasions, but be cautious giving them to anyone you don’t know well – these intense perfumes can be a very personal choice.

The so-called “greens” are much lighter than the orientals, and are well suited to more casual wear. Because they make a less dramatic assault on the nose, they are also safer to give as gifts!

Modern “oceanic” fragrances are becoming more and more popular, particularly among younger people who appreciate the intense but often quite unusual scents, which instantly bring to mind seaside scenes. Naturally these are an excellent choice in the warmer months when thoughts turn to holidays.

Spicy fruity perfumes are also a good warm-weather choice, and can be a good all-round choice for the woman who wants to wear something with some traditional base-notes but is a little different to the classic floral scents.

Finally, those classic floral fragrances are suitable for almost everyone and any occasion. But be wary of cheaper brands; this most feminine of all the main groups works best when the ingredients used are of high quality, and that means less expensive brands can smell exactly that.

Ultimately, choosing a fragrance is a very personal choice, and many women prefer to stick with what they know and buy the same thing year after year. But by trying different fragrances from the same group as your favourite smell, you may just discover a new gem.

Sara Blackmoore is a relationship councellor, and a freelance writer. She lives in London, England with her husband and two children. Sara buys her perfume from http://www.fragrancegopher.co.uk

Popularity: 3% [?]

Much ado is made these days about the lack of originality in niche perfumes. Many mainstream perfumers are trying to “go niche,” while other classic perfumers, like Guerlain, are releasing less-than-stellar perfumes in order to find a new audience. As a newcomer who has yet to try even many classic perfumes, I can’t sincerely jump on the bandwagon and complain much about the lack of interesting releases. I’m too busy catching up. That doesn’t mean, however, that I’m immune to suggestion. In fact, quite the contrary, so when I heard people I trust say good things about Michael Storer’s creations, I listened, and I responded.

Michael Storer currently offers six perfumes on his online site, but he’s adding a new release to the mix as well, a fig-based scent called Kadota. I’ve had the pleasure to try all seven (Bob tried three). I’ve listed them below, although I have to say that overall, they’re all stunning. I can see how every perfume lover needs at least one of these scents in his or her collection.

Genviève
A funny story here: The first Genviève I tried was not Genviève at all, but Stephanie. The vials got confused, as did I, so that when I wrote my original review, I was using the correct notes and the wrong scent. That pretty much messed with my head (or my nose, as it were–I thought I had lost my mind when I smelled white flowers but hardly any were listed), but I’m on track now.

The notes in Genviève are:
Top: Damask rose, green tea, muguet, rhubarb, ambrette seed
Heart: Bulgarian rose, raspberry, peach, ylang ylang, mimosa absolute, jasmine absolute, violet leaf
Base: angelica root, tolu balsam, ambergris, musk, tonka bean absolute, sandalwood, civet

I generally get a sense of whether or not I will like a fragrance as I apply it. A sure sign is when I can’t put down the vial and have to keep dabbing it on, as I’m afraid other people won’t be able to smell the magic that is THIS perfume. With Genviève, I dabbed and dabbed, sniffed and sniffed. This is a refined, elegant scent. The rose is soft and fresh, and as the scent deepens, on me the fruit honeys the scent, rather than adding any juice, opening the way for a warm and sexy dry-down. It’s cozy enough to wear in winter, but it also has top notes that lend it to summer, with whispering green notes followed by a scent that never overpowers the wearer.

Monk
Some fragrances don’t lend themselves to words. Ironic then that upon first sniff, Monk makes me think of a Medieval scriptorium, where words are holy. I think Monk is one of the most complex fragrances I’ve encountered. At opening, it’s rather dank, the smell of an old room, of the mildewy pulp of old manuscripts, of the lingering tobacco smoke of ancient scribes practicing their craft late into the night. The animalic undertone here is visceral and almost overpowering, but after an hour or so it mellows to an ancient powder. I thought I detected heliotrope, unusual in a man’s scent but also rather sexy in contrast to the usual wood notes, but none was listed in the notes, which are as follows:

Top: acacia flower, bergamot orange, bitter orange, galbanum
Heart: linden blossom absolute, blond tobacco absolute, cistus oil, ambrette seed, cocoa absolute, Bulgarian rose absolute
Base: Aged Indonesian vanilla, tonka bean absolute, civet, sandalwood, Texas cedarwood, benzoin tincture, jasmine absolute, birch tar

My guess is the cocoa and vanilla temper the woods, but this is decidedly not a gourmand scent. It is the scent of knowledge through time. That may sound overblown, but you must try this scent before you judge.

Djin
As for Djin: When I opened the vial and sniffed, I literally said these words out loud: “Sexy! Awesome sexy!”

That’s right. I turned into Austin Powers.

I took the vial straight to Bob and bid him to try it. Let me leave this little story for a sec to tell you about the notes:

Top: lemon, grapefruit, ivy leaf, muguet
Heart: oolong tea absolute, cardamom seed, pink pepper, galbanum, geranium leaf over roses, lemon verbena
Base: teakwood, sandalwood, castoreum, musk

Bob is always a willing participant in my perfume trials, so he gave Djin a go. Sadly, this fragrance seemed to be all ozone on him, and left what seemed to be hot in the bottle rather cold on his skin. I could see this working better in the heat, as I imagine the ozonic notes would work with the humidity to let out the more animalic notes in the base.

I could not give up on a fragrance that was so stunningly sexy in the bottle (or vial, as it were), so I decided that today I would try wearing it myself, and I am so glad I did. On me, the scent warms a great deal. After a crisp start, the rose and leather are the most prominent, with a light dusting of woods underneath that add a sexy whiff of heat. Chemistry is a mystery. This is a sensual, sexy rose.

Yvette
If you’ve smelled Yvette, and if you’ve spent any time at Sweet Diva, you might be as surprised as I was at how much I like this fragrance. I’ve said before that fruit and I do not mix, and in fact I will go out of my way to avoid any scent I think will be overly fruity or in the least bit gourmand. I’m happy to say that Yvette falls into the same category for me as Pomegranate Noir–in other words, a fruit-based scent I can wear, and even enjoy.

Where Pom Noir begins with dark juicy fruit and ends in warm woods, Yvette begins with a green, almost medicinal opening. As the fragrance warms to the skin, the fruit begins to appear, dark and fleshy, a bit jammy but not overly sweet. A powdery note softens the intensifying fruit, and while the green, herbaceous tones of the opening disappear entirely, the scent remains as fresh as a newly ripe plum, never ripening to the boozy headiness of some fruit-full perfumes.

The notes in Yvette include tropical flowers, rose otto, muguet, heliotrope, tonka, sandalwood, spice and tarragon. I find this one a better scent for cooler weather or drier climates. In the deep South, the rich depths of this scent would be quite heavy for summer. That said, I can see it being an excellent choice for February or March, as one awaits the promise of spring.

Kadota
I’m taking a huge risk with this one, as Michael has yet to list the notes for it on his site, but was generous enough to include it in the sample pack I purchased just before Christmas. I’ve had relatively little experience with fig fragrances, but they’ve been positive in both instances (Diptyque Philosykos and Anthousa Fig & Vetiver), and Kadota is not an exception. I’m finding it much greener than the beachy Philosykos, and heartier than the Anthousa. The top is true fruit that instead of growing sweeter actually grows greener, not unlike a tree that releases its ripe fruit before its leaves have reached full maturity. To me, this scent also smells a bit wet, like the aftermath of a storm in springtime.

Stephanie
The Michael Storer site describes Stephanie as “the headspace of a gardenia.” The first whiff of it in the vial bears this out: This scent is unmistakably lush. This is not a green gardenia, not the experience of the full plant in flower, but rather, the flower itself. The notes in Stephanie include pink pepper, black pepper, galbanum, angelica root, sambac jasmine absolute, tuberose, and chrysanthemum. The top is crisp, but soon passes straight into the white floral heart where the tuberose is prominent but not overwhelming. The pepper adds an unusual and interesting touch to a white floral which would otherwise be rather straightforward (not that that’s a bad thing, not at all). I like that instead of going for fresh or creamy, this perfume dirties the flower a bit. It makes me think of Katherine Hepburn as Tracy in The Philadelphia Story where she worries about being on a pedestal–this flower is not a goddess, but a real woman, and all the more beautiful for it.

il giardino
I found this to be the most straightforward of the bunch, and it’s the only one I didn’t try myself, as green fragrances often do not agree with my chemistry.

The notes in il giardino are as follows:
Top: lemon, bitter orange, cognac oil, green cassis bud
Heart: grapefruit, black currant, neroli, orange blossom absolute, jasmine absolute, philodendron, juniper berry
Base: ambergris, musk, sandalwood, Mexican vanilla, tonka bean absolute

Simply put, this scent makes me think of summer in a backyard at twilight, sitting near a pool, smelling the neighbor’s freshly cut grass, sipping a gin and tonic, staring up at the violet sky. A dog barks in the distance, children on the street are still playing, eking every advantage of remaining daylight. I find this fragrance to be more of an experience than a perfume, but it would blend wonderfully into any summer night.

Michael Storer’s fragrances are very reasonably priced ($75-$85 for 2oz.), especially considering their terrific lasting power, and are available through his online store (with the exception of Kadota, which has not yet been added). You can email Michael at sales@michaelstorer.com with questions. You’ll find he’s very helpful and kind.

Popularity: 3% [?]