031711

17 Mar

The Fragrantica give-away was phenomenal. I got at least 125 comments on the announcement about the give-away. People who were fans of synthetic perfumes exclusively wrote in to say they wondered what my perfume smells like; die-hard natural-perfume lovers wrote to say they’d be delighted to win my perfumes. There was a great deal of discussion–and certain points I’ll have to clarify in yet another article for Fragrantica. I’ve already got two out of five names and addresses (one of whom is a client). Then, I have no idea what will happen with the Facebook perfume give-away; the drawing is later today (Uta will be drawing names from the “hat”/jar). Then I have to get addresses for the five Facebook winners. Everyone of the Fragrantica winners gets the same thing: nine perfumes in .4-ounce bottles, and three solids in 7.5ml tins. The grand prize for the Facebook give-away is nine perfumes in .4-ounce bottles, and three solids in 20ml jars. One perfume I’ve never mentioned is called 10,000 Flowers (in Chinese when you want to say a lot, you say 10,000; in French perfumery it’s always been Mille Fleur (1000 Flowers)). I don’t know about others, but my 10,000 Flowers contains failed perfume experiments, a few individual extracts, combinations of extracts, etc. I want it to be complex and rich. It’s been maturing for at least two years, so I should probably get to bottling it. I got the whole idea from Natural-Perfumers-Guild president, Anya McCoy; she was explaining what she does with perfumes which aren’t quite right. As a perfumer, you want to be very careful about what you discard and what you hold on to; in some cases a perfume you didn’t think much of at first turns into something sublime. I’m still kicking myself about Phoebe: at some point I had a perfect iteration, but I lost the formula. One must be very careful to keep formulas straight! I want to emphasize this fact: natural extracts have life force, as evidenced by the colored halos seen when a photograph is taken with Kirlian photography. Synthetics appear completely blank with Kirlian photography. The waves and halos with naturals correspond to people’s responses to given aromatics, it’s heavy, sharp, it’s pink, etc. Synthetics have no life force, and so they are completely unable to affect us deeply, profoundly, or memorably. It’s not just that synthetics are different; they cannot possibly affect us powerfully. Chemists have been working for more than 100 years; it still is not possible for synthetic jasmine to come anywhere close to the effect of real, natural jasmine. Real jasmine is rich, complex, and powerful; synthetic jasmine is completely lacking. It cannot possibly affect our memory as intensely as the real thing. They’ve been working all these years and the results are lame. Long live naturals!

Advertisements

One Response to “031711”

  1. Naheed March 18, 2011 at 3:42 pm #

    For me Jasmin is such a wonderful flower that it’s almost impossible for synthetic jasmin to stand next to it. In my city Jasmin plantation is ubiquitous and is seen in the backyard and in the garden of every second house. Whenever I pass by a place that has jasmin, I stop by to take a whiff and I never miss this opportunity.

    Another beauty which is grown here is ‘Orange Jasmin’. The plant has miniature oranges and flowers that smell divine.I would love to find Orange jasmin some day in natural perfumery.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: