Christopher Stocks

Perfume

Luxury on the cheap

Much excitement in Weymouth, where the old Woolworth’s site has been transformed, in the last few weeks, into a spanking new branch of T.K.Maxx. Even more excitement yesterday when, on our first visit, what should Roy pluck from the trashy mass-market scents you’d expect to find in a discount outlet but a brand-new bottle of Osmanthus by The Different Company.

What a highly collectible perfume by a fairly obscure, high-end brand was doing in the Weymouth branch of T.K.Maxx I have no idea, but there it was, ours for the princely sum of £16.99 (recommended retail price €135).

Created by the much-admired perfumer Jean-Claude Ellena (now the in-house perfumer for Hermès) for the company he founded in 2000, Osmanthus gets an admiring review in the even more widely admired Perfumes: The Guide by Luca Turin and Tania Sanchez, and you can see why.

It’s a gentle, sweet but subtle scent, whose plush peachy centre is reminiscent of Guerlain’s timeless Mitsouko, though it seems to lack either Mitsouko’s strength of character or its mysterious staying-power. Yet Osmanthus has magic of its own, and its apparent evanescence on the skin proves something of a disappearing trick – for after putting a little on the back of my hand and noting that it didn’t seem to last very long, what should happen but that an hour or two later, as if from nowhere, its fresh, fruity scent would suddenly snap into focus again, almost as strong as when I first sprayed it on.

I’ve no idea how it’s done, or even whether the effect was intentional, but my guess is that it’s got something to do with the way Osmanthus’ peachiness bonds with the perfume’s other elements, some of which are a little surprising, like castoreum, a resinous compound extracted from beavers that has a leathery, animalic smell and is also found in Chanel’s wonderful Cuir de Russie.

Natural osmanthus, incidentally, is an attractive evergreen shrub which, in sheltered conditions, will grow to the size of a small tree. It grows wild in the Himalayas, China and Japan and was first introduced to European gardens in 1771, where it became known as Sweet Tea or Fragrant Olive. In the autumn it bears thousands of small but intensely fragrant white flowers, whose intoxicatingly sweet scent gives the plant its botanical name, Osmanthus fragrans.

Its fragrance, indeed, is remarkably powerful, as we discovered on an autumn visit to the enchanted garden of Brécy, near Bayeux (above). From the massively stepped levels of the formal gardens, which form a kind of vast single staircase up towards the Normandy sky, we recognised osmanthus’ heady scent a long time before we finally located its source, from a couple of dark columnar trees planted close against the south wall of the church, outside the gardens themselves.

Despite the sheer intensity of its fragrance, this is one of the only powerfully sweet scents I know that one can never smell enough (unlike, say, Madonna lilies, whose scent becomes overwhelming after a while): there’s a fresh lemony edge to osmanthus that makes it refreshing and intoxicating all at once. Enjoy Jean-Claude Ellena’s perfume by all means, but plant the tree wherever you can.

Solitary pleasures

One of the things that gives me deepest delight is reeking of perfume. Bottles of the stuff strew my house, and I could easily wear a different fragrance for every day of the week of the year. Perfume is like clothing, dressing up or dressing down, with different outfits for evening or day, summer, winter, happy, sexy, melancholic, stylish, silly, funny, sad.

Perfume in ParisIn the city I could happily wear one perfume in the morning and another one at night, but down here in deepest Dorset on my almost-island I can go all week without spraying on a single scent.

It’s not that I love perfume any less, but rather that, when you come to think of it, perfume is at its heart a social pleasure, best shared with other people, like food and wine. Smelling perfume on one’s own is a bit like eating a gourmet meal or drinking a bottle of vintage wine alone – still a pleasure, certainly, but one diminished by the lack of anyone to share it with.

Even worse, in perfume’s case, its pleasure is diminished yet further by the fact that, after a short while, your nose becomes so accustomed to the scent you’re wearing that it’s often hard to smell it on yourself at all, though other people, hours later, will often catch a drift of it and ask you what it is.

Solitary pleasures have their place, of course, and sometimes when I go to bed at night I spray a favourite perfume on to savour as I drift to sleep, but all the same it’s slightly sad to think that such a pleasurable pursuit has, like fashion, no real place outside the crowded social setting of a city or a town.

Brandy, beach or Benylin?

Once you’ve smelled a lot of perfumes you start to realise when a scent is cheap and nasty – even on the occasions when it’s got a huge advertising budget and everyone seems to be buying it. (Why? Well, a lot of people still get swept up by advertising, but you can be fairly sure they’ll only buy it once.)

But even among the most brilliantly put-together perfumes each person’s individual reaction counts for a lot. Smell taps in to such deeply rooted – and often subconscious – memories and associations for each of us that two people can have completely different gut-reactions to the same scent.

And not only that: it actually smells completely different to each of them, even though their brain is presumably processing the same elements in a fairly similar way. Most scientists seem to agree that, unless we suffer from particularly severe sight problems, the way I see Hèrmes orange is almost certainly the same as the way you see it.

Smell, though, appears to work in a rather different manner. We may well smell the same scents in the same objective way, but the personal associations that specific scents have for us seem to be more powerful than what we actually smell – conceivably for the simple reason that we have such trouble describing them in words.

Here’s a perfect example. Sables was first launched by the late, great French perfumer Annick Goutal in 1985 and was recently relaunched in the UK after one of those mysterious absences that gives the perfume industry its faint whiff of Stalinism.

Sables 1Sables is one of my all-time favourite fragrances. Though its name is meant to evoke the high-summer sexiness of sun-baked sand, this fantastically rich, sweetly luxurious scent smells, to me, of all the best things about Christmas – vintage oloroso sherry, mince pies, the delicious heat of an applewood log fire, flaming brandy, Christmas pudding… All very positive associations, as far as I’m concerned.

I’d be the first to admit that Sables is strong stuff, best suited to opulent winter evenings; apply it too liberally and, like Guerlain’s L’heure bleue or Chanel’s No22, it can easily become overpowering. But while I can imagine choking on No22 in too high a concentration, to be overcome by Sables would, for me at least, be like drowning in a butt of Malmsey – frankly not a bad way to go.

To a friend who knows at least as much about perfume as I do, though, Sables has an unattractively medicinal smell with none of the enchanting connotations that give it such a deep and lasting appeal for me. I can (kind of) see what he’s getting at, and if I try hard I can just about identify a hint of cough-mixture about it, but for some reason that association, in my mind, is completely drowned out by all the good stuff I’ve already mentioned.

The moral? I’m not sure there is one, but I guess it’s always good to remember there’s no guarantee that everyone is going to share your passion for a particular perfume, no matter how wonderful it smells to you.

The perfume industry: welcome to 1972

If there’s one thing I’m totally passionate about it’s perfume – more than poetry, more than parsnips, more than peristyles or pain-au-chocolat. I find perfume, and the multi-billion dollar perfume industry, absolutely fascinating, and I’d love to write more about it, especially as there are so few good perfume journalists out there.

Why this should be is a bit of a mystery, but it means that for most people the subject of perfume continues to be surrounded by as much mystification and snobbery as the subject of, say, wine was a good twenty years ago.

Today, largely thanks to two decades of excellent wine journalism, we know more about wine than we ever did before, and that’s reflected not just in our confidence in choosing from the vast array of choice on offer, but also in the booming health of the industry itself.

Perfume cornerSo why, when wine journalism is so good, is the general standard of perfume writing so pathetic? A lot of the blame lies with the perfume companies themselves, most of whose press releases somehow manage to combine utter nonsense with flights of pretension so other-worldly that one wonders what kind of prescription drugs their copywriters are on. What’s depressing, though, is how many ‘beauty’ journalists simply copy out the crap that the perfume companies send them, which does nothing to help the poor reader understand what the fragrance in question is about.

The result is a sector dominated by the brands with the deepest pockets and the perfumes with the biggest advertising budgets: it’s as if we’re still stuck in the 1970s days of wine, with most people’s choice limited to the scent equivalents of Mateus Rose and Blue Nun.

Is it any wonder shopping for perfume is such a dispiriting experience? With practically no useful information to go on, how is anyone supposed to make an informed decision when they’re confronted by the hundreds of different perfumes on the shelves of an average department store – especially with over-made-up saleswomen bearing down on them from all sides, spraying noxious clouds of the latest big-name scent in their direction?