The Strange Case of Dr.Oakmoss and Mr.Citrus (part 2)

We talked about the latest restrictions and how oakmoss is one complicated issue and tried to disentangle it a bit in Part 1. But there are more resticted ingredients, whose pros and cons we hope to analyse here. Yet revelations happen with the sudden “swoosh” of pyrotechnics.

The very perceptive Pat from Olfactarama sent me this most eye-opening comment:

“I poked around a little and came up with the RIFM's [Research Institute for Fragrance Materials] annual report. You may already have seen this document, but if not, there is a lot of interesting info here. I'm wondering if this organization isn't one of the ways the labs are funneling research funding into these studies, which may then be used to strongarm the fragrance industry. Since annual reports must be available to the public, it's possible to bypass the "members only" logjam at the site's opening -- I believe some of the publications papers are also available for reading. The list near the back gives RIFM's "partners," and most of the big fragrance manufacturers (Chanel, Estee Lauder, et. al.) are on it. Here is the link: RIFM.Org

I urge you to click the link (it's NOT the well known IFRA amendement, it's a different organisation) and read the participating members on the last page; blink a little and read again!

Chanel….The one company who profited by the downfall of Guerlain to the eyes of many perfume enthusiasts. The one company who salvaged their reputation through the hardships of having to appeal to mainsteam tastes and all with easy elegance. Now, there is proof that they do not oppose the restrictions which are set to harm them most: the jasmine restrictions (as well as the coumarin, ylang ylang, eugenol, oakmoss et al). Octavian had succintcly put it:

“Remember that not only the perfume extract contains a great amount of French jasmine but also this is at the heart of all marketing stories of Chanel. Chanel always insisted on the quality of its jasmine, being one of the very few to use the French type, also cultivated by Chanel” and from a marketing point of view, how can you communicate about jasmine now? Can you show the fields, the extraction and write articles about No5 history and quality when IFRA tells that "jasminum grandiflorum" is "poison"?

It’s a problem. The continuation of the myth will necessarily have to be a covert lie.

However Chanel in either an attempt to salvage what they can (how? I’d advise the Wertheimer brothers to make a statement to that) or to retain their market share without increasing prices are condoning the reformulations. I do know that they are rigorous in preserving quality and just as there are different grades of foodstuff so there are in perfumery ingredients, so they will use the best available. But still the question is: what will there be available?

And Lauder is also a member of RIFM. This makes the futile hope of people in the US that American made perfumes might retain their formula unchanged just that…futile. It was plainly to see before, since Lauder fragrances are made by IFF (who belongs to IFRA), but since not all people know that tidbit, it’s worth mentioning now.

On what concerns citrus restrictions, the kerfuffle is too much for no special reason in most cases. Many people exclaim –justifiably-: “Ridiculous! I get more orange essence on my hands by peeling an orange or on my mouth by eating it than by using perfume!”. True, but there’s a catch: Most citruses in perfumes are synthetic already! Yes, yes, even those you think are naturals. Yes, yes, even some very respected brands (Shalimar anyone? Mitsouko?) . And you know, the difference isn't that perceptible to the majority of even discerning noses and bergamot in particular has been substituted for years due to its photosensitizing begaptene. Which is why I witnessed the groves in Sicily and Calabria being a waning craft...
Yet some citrus essences can be realistically replicated. Want proof? Go smell In Love Again by Yves Saint Laurent. Great realistic grapefruit note, huh? 100% synthetic. But that doesn't diminish the artistry of it, nor should it deter you from using it.

Of course there are several niche and small perfumers (notably the all-naturals field) who continue to use natural extracts and they'e taking a hard blow with the latest; this might make them outlaw indeed! Anya McCoy said:

"There are few willing to take a stance on this. I will. I will continue to use all of the aromatics I wish, with a warning label. If, as it seems it will, the regulations come to the USA, and the FDA enforces them, I will protest and am willing to become a legal case, if necessary. I dare others to join me. That is my solution to the oakmoss, orange, rose, ylang ylang (ad infinitum materials) problem."

Of course that means solely Internet sales... No brand which hopes to have their scents in brick and mortar stores can afford this, since they are subject to import laws (from either the EU or the US).

Brands which use a high degree of natural extracts, citrus and otherwise, such as Annick Goutal, Miller Harris, and Ormonde Jayne are facing a very real problem, hitting them like a ton of bricks. Their buying of raw materials will be seriously challenged thanks to the tale-over of the Grasse companies of raw materials (as discussed here) and due to their drastic change in the formula they will have a hard time adjusting to the changes. You might stock up on those as well. In fact a MUA poster, Alabasterkitten, has noticed a bunch of them at Loehmann's last night, $50 for 1.7 oz - Songes (jasmine, ylang ylang), Mandragore (bergamot), Eau de Hadrien (lemon and citruses, oakmoss), Petite Cherie (pear synth), Gardenia Passion (oakmoss, jasmine) and Nuits d'Hadrien (citrus)!

As to other ingredients, there are many but there are ways around them without much compromise. Verbena has been singled out in online discussions, because it's a common aromatherapeutic infusion and oil and it created the question how it could be regarded as a "bad" thing. Well, litsea cubeba has a bracing lemony note that could sufficiently substitute it and in fact it extends the effect nicely into the middle notes, a trick often used by pefumers to extend tangy aspects. So, no problem there.

Hydroxycitronellal (lily of the valley) is on the chopping block, as is majantol. Obviously lily of the valley will suffer as a note, not mentioning Lilial (by Givaudan) and Lyral (by IFF), which have also been examined regarding their sensitizing properties. Lily of the valley is a more common note than one would suspect, because it both opens up the bouquet of classic perfumes and it imparts a collateral “clean” note to modern ones (perhaps due to its mega presence in functional cleaning products). Diorissimo has already changed it packaging to denote the change that has been implemented to the levels of hydroxycitronnelal: the newer white packaging with pink “oval” bearing the name states hydroxycitronellal further behind other ingredients instead of the slightly older batch of pink packaging with white oval. The change is subtle and very cunning: while right now the packaging can be an indicator of batches, the introduction of a different colour schema is an optical blurring, ready for further –and final- chopping off! The consumer will never be able to realise without minutely examining the allergens list, which -let’s face it- is not what most people do.

Ylang Ylang is that rare thing: a comparatively inexpensive natural. Which poses a question over its impending restrictions. Baffled there.

The most serious aspect however and I don't know how it can be bypassed is jasmine....
Jasmine grandiflorum will be limited to 0.7% and jasmine sambac to 4%, under the latest 43rd amendement of IFRA. They are potent, so even a little helps, but 0.7% is getting pretty low...Jasmine is the emblem of quality French perfumery, a whole mythos behind many famous classics (No.5, Joy etc.) as stated so passionately on Grain de Musc and sadly both the grandiflorum and the sambac variety come under the latest restictions. And since Grasse jasmine was used in only the extrait of those classics, if you absolutely love those, you might stock up. Although don't be fooled, they have already been altered numerous times. No.5 has been stated to have changed its musks (eradicating the nitromusks so maligned by environmental studies) but smelling olde batches confirms that it’s not only them that changed. Since P&G (who belong to the RIFM oganisation, as stated in the above PDF) are the licence owners for parfums Patou, Joy is also to be changed irrevocably, probably to the great chagrin of resident perfumer Jean Michel Duriez.

The matter is terribly complicated, but....Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose!

Pic of Dr.Jekyl and Mr.Hyde cover via sbfmedia.relationalhost.com. Diorissimo through photobucket search. Jasmine by Perfumeshrine, all rights reserved.

An Insidious Thought on IFRA Restrictions

Much discussion is being conducted again in perfume loving circles over IFRA restrictions which will surely change things as we know them, should they pass through and become EU directive (Currently they're not one and the same, please note). The alert bell chimed on February 13th, as published in several French papers (You can see one of them here).

There are lots of ingredients on the chopping block, some already rationed heavily, some introduced recently. The list contains many naturals, but (here's the catch) it also includes many synthetics, i.e. man produced aromachemicals. This seems to blow a bit the argument that it's all a ploy to make naturals die and only champion aromachemicals. {IFRA lists the bulk of perfumery ingredients on this link].
It is however dire for many perfumes as we know them and indeed I had written so a year ago myself.

The reigning reception so far is that an expanded labeling system will be put into action anyway. The United Nations have proposed as counter argument that lots of of regional producers will be thus left out of business and out of work, cutting down on significant national revenue in some cases, a good argument that seems convincing to Brussels, certainly more convincing that perfume is a product of the intellect (especially since High Court decided against intellectual properties of the perfumes' formulae in the all too recent past in cases of "dupes").

So here's an insidious thought for you: could the mad panicking and hoarding of recent stock might eventually only benefit the grey market and the companies who will unload all their leftover stock that was sitting unclaimed? ;)

As always this page advises the use of caution and common sense.

It's the end of the world as we know it (perfume ingredients banned)

The above line from a well-known REM song unfortunately does not leave me feeling fine, like the song repeated time after time again in its refrain. Maybe it has to do with my abhorrence for state intervention of any kind in what I perceive as my consumer’s choice. Maybe it has to do with the prospect of endangered aromas, in the manner of endangered species that is looming in the horizon very shortly. Or maybe, just maybe, I am one of those who safe in their well-arranged existence likes to live precariously through the sensual pleasures that are given us, who knows for how much longer: a vivere pericolosamente mentality of eating medium-rare bovine steak, listening to alternative underground bordering on satanistic some would argue rock with covers that might bruise sensitive feministic sensibilities and -last but not least- using perfumes containing real oakmoss in amounts exceeding the prescribed percentage set by IFRA (the International Fragrance Association) and the EU (European Union).

In view of the whole debacle of oakmoss use as stated in a previous article, I was just about to resign myself to searching for vintage bottles of my favourite chypre perfumes such as Mitsouko, Femme, Bandit and Chanel#19. Not an easy task all the same, as perfume unlike wine does not come with a production year, despite the fact that we perfume-users use the oenological term vintage so often to convey a particularly good aged masterpiece. But it seems oakmoss were to be the least of our troubles.
As Anya McCoy, a talented natural perfumer whom I have interviewed in the past in this venue and the president of the Natural Perfumers Guild, brought to my attention, there is a whole list of ingredients that are about to be eradicated or strictly controlled in the formulae of perfumes produced from now on. The control of the percentage of certain natural ingredients to minute amounts in a given formula might bear no great value in the creation of a new perfume, as it could fuel the imagination of a given nose into composing new wilder arpeggios of unprecedented combinations. It would certainly signify however the destruction and bastardization of several revered masterpieces of the past, rendering them but ghosts of their former glorious shelves leaving a generation that has never smelled the originals with a skewed perception of what greatness really is all about in the olfactory kingdom.

The alphabetical catalogue of those nature-derived aromatics that are restricted follows:
Angelica root oil
Bergamot oil expressed
Bitter Orange Peel Oil Expressed
Cade oil
Cedar moss
Chenopodium oil
Citrus oils and other furocoumarins containing essential oils
Costus root oil, absolute and concrete
Cumin oil
Fig leaf absolute
Grapefruit oil expressed
Lavender
Lemon oil cold pressed
Lime oil expressed
Massoia bark oil
Massoia lactone
Melissa oil (genuine Melissa officinalis)
Oak moss extracts
Opoponax
Peru balsam
Petitgrain Mandarin Oil
Rose oil
Santolina oil
Savin oil
Styrax
Tagetes oil and absolute
Tea leaf absolute
Tree moss extracts
Verbena absolute
Verbena oil

Perusing the list one cannot but drop one’s jaw. Lavender? The quintessential essential oil that is recommended for pacifying even babies? Citrus, bergamot and bitter orange peel oils? Seriously, do they know that here in the Mediterranean we make a dessert out of the inedible bergamot fruit, using exactly the peel of the fruit boiled in syrup made with sugar? We eat the stuff for heaven’s sake. How much more harm could it do if we applied it on our skins? Yes, I am aware that those oils are photosensitizing. Surely a warning label on the box on not wearing it on exposed body parts could serve the purpose of protecting us amply? Not to mention rose oil (whose petals we also use in a dessert….the way I am going you must have formed the impression there’s precious few things we don’t make into desserts….well, it’s true, not counting the IFRA executives in those numbers….)

But the whole scenario would not bring doom futuristic Blade Runner echoes in our ears had it been chosen to just use warning labels on the boxes, stating exactly what the dangers are, so that the consumer can make an informed choice and suffer what consequences he/she has brought upon him/herself through that choice. Much like smoking…..
To cut a long story short, this whole dirty business smells more of money and lost revenues for the companies who produce aroma-chemicals and the law-firms that defend cases of demented “victims” of allegedly dangerous perfumes, than real flower and fruit oils.
It reminds me of the notorious case of an electronic goods company who lost a fortune to someone who was sick enough to microwave his cat and then plead his case in court successfully stating the instructions never warned about not putting an animal in the microwave appliance in the first place…I mean, geez…

If you want to make a difference and want to be vocal on the subject, there is a petition issued by Cropwatch, an independent watchdog for natural ingredients used in perfumery; you can vote against the 40th Amendment of IFRA that restricts those ingredients and make them come into discussion about this practice.
You can do it here



Pic of Tim Burton's "Corpse bride" comes from athinorama.

Interview with Sylvaine Delacourte, Art Director of Parfums Guerlain

Much as Sylvaine Delacourte has been a rather controversial figure on the online perfume-community venues so far, she has exhibited a rare eagerness to listen attentively to the pulse of our passionate heartbeat and has impressed me as genuinely interested in fragrances, as attested by her French blog. After all she's head of development in one of the most historical houses in all perfumery, Guerlain. I had taken the initiative to invite my readers into posing their questions to Guerlain and in a rare example of generosity, she has agreed to answer some of the most interesting ones. Here are Sylvaine Delacourte's replies on Perfume Shrine, with a little teaser on the upcoming releases!

Perfume Shrine: Madame Delacourte, first of all thank you for your consideration of Perfume Shrine and our readers. Let me begin by the core issue on our minds: The uniqueness of Guerlain has been standing between historical tradition and searching for modernity. But the problem is the core fan of the brand wants the tradition (the classics, the historical re-issues in Il était une Fois and Les Parisiennes), while obviously the house needs to find a new audience that is younger or less fanatical, ergo more modern in order to survive in a competitive market (La Petite Robe Noire, Mitsouko Fleur de Lotus, Elixirs Charnels, L'Art et la Matiere etc). What balance point is taken between the loyalty to Guerlain traditions and modernization?

Sylvaine Delacourte: From the beginning we have always tried to find a balance between the past and modernity.We try to give wings to our past!! This is shown in different ways. Indeed every year a prestigious special edition is launched to remember the past (for example : Champs Elysées tortue, Sous le Vent, Le Muguet etc..) It is a way to celebrate our past but not to reproduce the past. There is an essential goal in the Guerlain tradition: Innovation! Before becomming classics, Guerlain perfumes have always been innovative and were never smelled before. Jicky created in 1889 wasn't successful at the beginning, but it's become a classic. Habit Rouge , created in 1965, the first oriental for men, wasn't a success but since many years it's become a French pilar that performs without advertising. I could talk to you about Shalimar (1925), Samsara (1989) and many other Guerlain perfumes. In our new creations you always detect an attachment to the past that has been modernized. Insolence has been created as a modern L'Heure Bleue or Après l'ondée. The collection L'art et la matière is a celebration of the noble raw materials so loved by Guerlain : the precious rose for Rose barbare or orris for Iris Ganache...As you can see, regarding our creations, we have a large range of perfumes. Everybody can find his or her fragrance : the core fan of the brand as well as other people who are looking for more modernity. La petite robe noire has been a really big success, even if some of the bloggers don't like it; but the younger generation loved it, therefore it appealed to a segment of the market.

PS: I admit that I am not a great fan of La Petite Noire myself even if not middle-aged, but I understand your point. What ideas and motives stand behind the recent modernizations and reformulations? Many of the newer releases have been accused of being "dumbed down" and far less interesting than the old beauties. Does this assessment surprise you, or do you find it legitimate? To what would you ascribe this perception - difficulties in obtaining excellent raw materials? Changing consumer tastes in much, though not all, of the market? IFRA regulations? Something else?
SD: At Guerlain, perfumes are alive. We are still a brand that uses a lot of natural raw materials and as you know nature can't be controlled. That means that even if you don't change anything in a formula, each production is subtly different. For example we have a lot of natural rose in Nahéma. Depending on the weather, the ground, the conditions ... the smell of the rose will be slightly different from year to year, so the odour of Nahema would change a little bit. That's why at guerlain we create our "communelle" or "the rose blend "; it describes a careful assemblage of different roses to ensure constant, consistent quality from year to year. Concerning refomulations, I hear you, but the matter is very complex. We have to conform to IFRA regulations of course and as you know those change often. It is much complex for Guerlain than other brands, because the brand is 181 years old and you can imagine that some old raw materials have disappeared. We have to find good substitutes. So it's a huge permanent work. But be assured that our perfumer Thierry Wasser works on this very carefully and is aware of the latest discovery of new raw materials that could be interesting as good substitutes of some components. Our goal is not to betray our fragrances' soul as much as possible in the frame of the above. Even if Guerlain were still a family-owned brand we would still be obliged to respect the law and to reformulate...

PS: When 68 Champs-Elysées was refurbished and relaunched, several of the legendary perfumes from the early 20th century were to be re-launched as limited editions (Cachet Jaune, Ode etc). Is this still the intention or has the plan been abandoned? And why have Métalys, Guerlinade and Chant d'Arômes in extrait been discontinued all of a sudden?

SD: We have more than 750 creations written on the secret book, so naturally we are obliged to select some of them in current rotation. All our perfumes catalogue can't be sold at all times, even if it is very important for us to show to our custumer that we have a wonderful past of beautiful creations. Chant d' Arômes extrait as well as Après l'ondée extrait and Parure have been discontinued because it was not possible with the IFRA reglementation to rebuild them whithout irreparable damages! We preferred to stop production than to give a substitute of the original extracts. Regarding Metalys, unfortunately the results of the sales were very bad!

PS: Is there any prospect of new releases which fall into the signature Guerlain category, or is the line now dedicated solely to modernization and "light" fragrances? (for example the new Mitsouko Fleur de Lotus is lovely in my opinion, but very fleeting!). Men fragrances are also becoming increasingly lighter, as attested by Guerlain Homme recently. Is this part of the new Guerlain direction?

SD: In 2007 when we analysed our masculine fragrances portfolio, it was obvious that freshness was missing from the line-up. And today it is a very important element for men. A large category of men don't feel comfortable with "round" or sensual fragrances like our older ones. That's why Guerlain Homme has been created. But if you are looking for a another interpertration of Guerlain Homme , with more body and more oomph, due to the very present woody facet, you will have a surprise next September!

PS: In last year's L'Express there was a mention that Annick Ménardo would collaborate on the upcoming "major Guerlain feminine launch". It would seem that that would be the new Idylle. Did she collaborate indeed or not?

SD: Idylle has been created and signed by Thierry Wasser.



PS: How has LVMH's acquisition of Guerlain affected your own role? If you have been the creative director since before acquisition has your responsibility changed at all, or has your approach been affected in any way? I can imagine heightened work pressure just because Guerlain has had so many new releases lately. So how do you manage to find inspirations at that rate? Are you solely responsible for coming up with an idea which is then executed by Mr. Wasser or is there a panel at Guerlain now? And what have been your latest inspirations: a film, a book, a journey?

SD: My own role is to work beside Thierry Wasser who is the successor of Mr.Jean Paul Guerlain. Today everything can be an inspiration source : a dessert, a raw material , a drink, a travel, a colour, a film, a feeling...life in general is a source of inspiration!

PS: Many perfume buyers report having no access to established classics in most department stores where only some best-sellers or very recent releases are stocked. (ie. often no Mitsouko, no Jicky parfum, no L'heure Bleue, no Après L'Ondée....) Are there any plans to change that? There is a complaint of older loyal clients regarding the disappearing of ancillary products such as soap or powder, too.
Also several people suggest making the Paris-only fragrances available online, although I realise that their vantage point has been their covetability due to exclusivity. Chanel USA has recently made such a move with their Les Exclusifs. Are you thinking of a similar move? And if so, would you direct it only towards the US market?

SD: Our porfolio is so wide, that the department stores or independent boutiques cannot carry all products or lines; this is due to their own space allotment and they opt for their bigger sellers. That's why you can find many references in our own Guerlain boutiques , in Paris , and now in many boutiques worlwide: Tokyo, Moscow , Hong Kong, Spain, Belgium, Germany, Canada, US,etc...there you can find approximately 100 product codes! Which is a huge selection! In certain exclusive scents the initial production is limited, we have little quantities ourselves, but 10 boutiques worldwide carry them.
Regarding ancillary products, it is not realistic to have them in 100 fragrances. Therefore we keep them for the major references such as Shalimar, Samsara etc. The Shalimar powder for instance is only sold in England. Unfortunately, every time we tried to reintroduce soaps in our lines, the sales were very low. Our customers preferred the body gel.

PS: In times of economic recession luxury brands raise their prices or increase the size or both. Yet according to recent articles in WWD, The Financial Times and The Times the fragrance market has taken a blow in lessened sales in the first quarter of 2009 and consumers are rationing their perfume-buying quota accordingly. Guerlain has been issuing lots of super-expensive releases lately, often substituting previously reasonable products with the same composition in costlier bottles and with tighter distribution: Coriolan, Derby, Mahora, Terracota Voile d'été, even the Les Saisons coffret which reprised 3 out of 4 scents, one of them being a previously Aqua Allegoria scent. Do you see Guerlain becoming a superluxury house abandoning more economic releases? What is your own opinion on this?

SD: Guerlain is a master perfumer, our catalogue is wide and all women and men can find their Guerlain suiting their personalities. The higher prices on the exclusives are easily explained however: to create a bottle , it costs a lot , we have to spend a lot of money to create the design, the outillage, the mould for the flacons; additionally most often the exclusives are more concentrated ~Eau de parfum, not Eau de Toilette, as well as bigger quantities, and they come packaged in a gorgeous box which costs a lot too.

PS: Although you have previously made your position clear to us, there is still lots of misinformation in the Guerlain sales force as well as in the press, when they claim several innaccuracies such as Mitsouko never having been reformulated since its 1919 creation for instance, Insolence being the first composition by a non-Guerlain family member etc. It makes the informed consumer feel stupid at the counter when they're met with such conviction!

SD: I see what you mean. Indeed it was L'instant for women which was the first big launch created by a non- member of the Guerlain family. We have taken action and our sales force are now getting informed about the reformulations, so they should be able to explain. However, regretably we can't always control what is said in press articles. We are making fragrances for the consumers and it is not our purpose to misinform them.

PS: Last but not least what is your position on fragrance criticism? The Internet boom in the blogosphere and the reviewing in print has created a lot of buzz around the brands resulting in renewed interest, but has also brought criticism beyond the control of the firms; something unprecedented in the perfumery business! Do you find it annoying (especially when it's amateurish and non fact-checked) , stimulating, interesting or something else entirely? What do you answer to that?

SD: We can't avoid criticism. When you sell a creation, it can be a perfume, a painting, a film or something else, you have to face criticism that can be positive or negative of course. And naturally it is becoming more and more important, since we now we have the Internet with its wide circulation of news and opinions and the breakthrough of blogs. But art criticism in general is largely subjective. One person can give his/her own opinion but that's all. Specifically a perfume is an emotion: Either you feel comfortable with it or not...

My sincere thanks to madame Sylvaine Delacourte for alloting us some of her precious time!

Related reading on Perfume Shrine: the Guerlain series, Guerlain news, Interviews with industry professionals.

Iso E Super, its merits, its faults, Geza Schoen and Jean Claude Ellena

The chemistry of fragrances seems like an arcane side-path in the vast avenue of pretty smells. Those who venture there are either chemists, eternal students or people reading perfume boards. On those last ones, Iso E Super is nom du jour due to recent rumours of restricting its use to specific ratios in products (and they're many!) and due to its increasing popularity, some of it attached to the work of master perfumer Jean Claude Ellena who has experimented with its magic properties many a time in the past to glorious effect: Terre d'Hermès, Poivre Samarkande and Déclaration are utilizing lots of it, exploring minimalism: the play of scents note-for-note with no sentimentality attached. Even an entire composition, Molecule 01 by perfumer Geza Schöen of niche brand Escentric Molecules (his Escentric 01 also features it in high ratios along with pink pepper, lime peel, orris and incense) is composed of nothing else but it, diluted in solvent, because the perfumer loved it so! I am hereby reminding you that he is the perfumer who created HSIDEWS for artist Sissel Tolaas and he has collaborated with the London-based niche brand Ormonde Jayne. The theory behind Molecule 01 and IsoE Super was that it would create an appealing effect to those smelling it on the wearer without it being perceived as a "perfume"; the ultimate skin-scent, much like natural ambergris to which it mimics certain aspects would act. Another scent which officially contains it is Maitresse by Agent Provocateur, while the masculine fragrance Fahrenheit by Dior (1988) iincludes a 25% Iso E Super in the compound. In the legendary woody oriental Féminité du Bois by Shiseido, under the maestro Serge Lutens's direction, the material serves as an harmoniser between the plummy effect of the fruits with the violet ionones and the cedarwood bottom notes. Iso E Super is used in so many fragrances today that it would be hard to compile an actual list that would not bore everyone silly! But what the hell is Iso E Super?, you might ask. Let's take matters at the top.

Iso E Super® is the trademark name of aromachemical 7-acetyl, 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8-octahydro-1,1,6,7-tetramethyl naphthalene and I guess it's pretty obvious why it's called that instead of its long organic chemistry name. According to International Fragrances and Flavors Iso E Super is

"Smooth, woody, amber with unique aspects giving a ''velvet'' like sensation. Used to impart fullness and subtle strength to fragrances. Superb floralizer found in the majority of newer fine fragrances and also useful in soaps. Richer in the desirable gamma isomer than isocyclemone e".

Arborone is the odor active enantiomer of Iso E Super, with its clean woody and pleasing aroma.[1] The uses of Iso-E Super are legion: from bleach and deo sticks to soaps, shampoos, laundry detergents and fine fragrance. Given that its colour is almost transparent to very light yellow it poses no problems in being incorporated in formulae and is also used in the pharmaceutical industry.
Despite the IFF being the company to trademark it, Chinese companies such as Zhejiang Winsun Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd. do provide it at a concentration of 90% for various uses. Home-made mixes would suggest one part Iso-E Super to 9 parts base, such as dipropylene glycol/perfumer's alcohol (therefore a 10% concentration). Although neat use on skin isn't recommended, minor "accidents" of spillage have not produced anything sinister. Taking in mind that it is quite inexpensive, it is perhaps of interest for apprentices and amateurs alike to experiment themselves at high dilution.

Smelling it in itself one is surprised by how almost non-existent a smell Iso-E Super has; not something one would describe as a smell in so many words, it's unapologetically synthetic and perhaps vaguely cedar-like, slightly sweet. It seems to vanish very quickly and resurface on skin in intervals from time to time very discreetly: The heat of the skin is intergral to its volatilising properly and it seems that any test on paper would not give an accurate perception of its true nature. It is however quite recognisable once you get to sample it and you will have fun detecting it in many major fragrances on the market todat. This subtle "skin-scent" effect is what in perfume-lingo is used to evoke that a fragrance stays close to the skin, not projecting in a wide radius; but also that it has some skin compatibility effect that makes it smell not like a usual perfume. Therefore IsoE Super soon gained the reputation of it acting like a pheromone, that invisible aroma that is supposed to attract same species potential sexual partners and ensures recognition of compatibility between mates. Plainly explained, pheromones act to the vomero nasal organ ensuring that pigs mate with pigs and not rhinoceruses for instance! Much as the matter is exciting and intriguing hower, the scientific community has not been able to conclusively establish validity in the theory of pheromones working in humans so far, although popular mythology is rampant with examples of products aimed to achieve this magical attraction (such as Androstenol, Androstadienone, and Androsterone). In an interview given by perfumer Geza Schöen on the creation of Molecule 01, he intimated:

"When I was introduced to ISO E Super in 1990 I gave it to a friend of mine to wear. We went out to this bar in our hometown and it took only a few minutes until this woman steered straight into our direction to inquire about who smelled so lovely! Since then I knew that this stuff is special indeed. I suggested it to the guy who was in charge of Diesel back then and he said that he felt that this is a bit too much - even for them!" [2]

He's quick to elaborate however that it does not act as a pheromone (that's a misconception if scientifically examined) but that simply it's "not possible not to like it", as no one has ever commented he/she doesn't like its particular smell per se.

Perhaps the most vexing matter to perfume enthusiasts however has been how Iso E Super is one of the 14 chemicals that have been recommended for study by the National Toxicology Program (NTP) with impending restrictions on its use. Ever since as early as 2000 the matter has been in discussion. In a letter by Betty Bridges, RN Fragranced Products Information Network (http://www.fpinva.org/) addressed to Dr. Scott A. Masten, Ph.D. from the Office of Chemical Nomination and Selection, Environmental Toxicology Program of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences in 2002 we read the following:

"International Flavors and Fragrance's suggested use levels of Iso E Super is up to 10% of the fragrance formula and is recommended for use in a variety of products (IFF, 2002). Isocyclemone E's (a material with a different ratio of isomers, same CAS# 54464-57-2) suggested use level is up to 30% and is recommended in a variety of applications.(IFF, 2002) [...] Considering Iso E Super's similar structure to AETT and AHTN, two polycyclic musk compounds with known concerns, it is likely that Iso E Super and other chemically similar materials would also bioaccumulate in human tissue, persist in the environment, and have health concerns. There are concerns related to AHTN causing liver toxicity and discoloration. Galaxolide, another polycyclic musk has similarconcerns, but to a lessor degree (SCCNFP, 2000) Chromogenic properties have been associated with neurotoxicity (Sabri, 2002)"

Before publication of the 43rd amendment issued by IFRA it had been rumoured that Iso E Super should be a restricted raw material. This doesn't mean that it is not to be used any more as novices often assume erronesouly. It simply means that it should be incorporated in a formula below a certain level for it to be commerialised (and of course one could do whatever they pleased if they made a do-it-yourself formula at their own labs/homes!). On the other hand another aroma material, Boisvelone (C16H26O) closely related to Iso E Super (but reportedly a little more elegant; I haven't tried it myself while one source[3] reports it as the exact same thing) has disappeared from commercial use. According to one perfumer currently teaching [4] however, a feminine "alcoholic" product (that means an eau de toilette, eau de parfum or extrait de parfum ~generally any product with an alcohol base) there is a limit of approximately 20% of Iso E Super in the final product. Although it might seem like a lot, if you are composing an Eau de Parfum, which means a 15-20% dilution, you're well within limits still even if the entire fragrance consists of Iso E Super. Luckily for all of us, the latest amendement of IFRA can be downloaded here and it seems to make us sigh a sigh of relief for now: Iso E Super is not yet restricted. ** [Please see addition on the bottom for current info on IFRA approved ratio]

Hot on the heels of the sinister rumours was the prevalent concern of perfume lovers whether the fragrances that feature it (with Jean Claude Ellena's most prominently) would suffer from it. It was only the other day that the matter was brought again to the table on this very venue, while discussing Déclaration by Cartier, one of the most influential of Ellena's fragrances. Since the objective of Perfume Shrine is to be very clear in what is only a hypothesis on our part and what is a matter of fact, we took things in our hands to further investigate and the resulting message is even more assuaging, discouraging you from frantic stocking-up of fragrances which you would fear would be unrecognisably altered. The fragrances by Jean Claude Ellena will not be altered or influenced by any -as yet only suggested for the future- restrictions of Iso-E Super ratio as they are already well below the ratio proposed for the restrictions. The information is official and comes from mr. Jean Claude Ellena himself. I hope this article proves useful to you!

Here is a table of Top Ten Fragrances with Regard to Their Content in Iso E Super
No., Fragrance Name (Company, launch year), Iso E Super
[NB. the percentage is in regards to compound, not diluted ready to use product]

1 Molecule 01 (escentric molecules, 2005) 100%
2 Perles de Lalique (Lalique, 2007) 80%
3 Poivre Samarcande (Herme`s, 2004) 71%
4 Escentric 01 (escentric molecules, 2005) 65%
5 Terre d'Hermes (Hermes, 2006) 55%
6 Incense Kyoto (comme des garcons, 2002) 55%
7 Incense Jaisalmer (comme des garcons, 2002) 51%
8 Fierce for Men (Abercrombie & Fitch, 2002) 48%
9 Kenzo Air (Kenzo, 2003) 48%
10 Encre noire (Lalique, 2006) 45%

Ref for table: Schon G. 2008. 'Escentric' molecules. Chemistry & Biodiversity. 5 (6) :1154-8. In June 2008. Verlag Helvetica Chimica Acta AG,Zurich


EDIT TO ADD/AMEND 2011: At the time of writing this was the correct info. As of 2011 however the IFRA industry regulating body has set a maximum dilution limit of 21.4% in the compound. Jean Claude Ellena's scents and the majority of scents using it are relatively safe, as a mere 1% in the formula in enough to provide the qualities it's famed for, but it is the updated info for anyone caring to use it in their own formulae.


References:
[1]Helvetica Chimica Acta, Volume 82, Issue 7, Date: July 7, 1999, Pages: 1016-1024
[2]I heart Berlin.de
[3]Nextbio.com
[4]J'aime le parfum!

Pics from Iheartberlin.de and Hermes.

National Toxic Encephalopathy Foundation respond to IFRA opposition

The National Toxic Encephalopathy Foundation (NTEF), at the request of the Nevada Assemblyman who introduced the bill, AB234, has provided the science and legalities regarding the bill.

The fragrance industry is grasping at straws, over the Nevada Bill that addresses indoor barriers under the Americans for Disability Act. (ADA).
The bill entitled "Revises provisions governing places of public Accommodation", expands upon an existing state statute regarding accessibility for disabled residents.
The intent of the bill is to remove all air fresheners, air scented branding, fragrance, candles, etc., to comply with both state and federal laws regarding the ADA. Industry's standard response to any type of impediment to remove fragrance is by referencing Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, which is acknowledged on a case by case basis by various government agencies. The bill is for the protection of those with clearly defined and fully covered disabilities relating to the brain, neurological and respiratory systems. IFRA-NA's letter just muddled through with nothing to prove that their products are indeed not barriers, under the ADA.
The NTEF's response cited numerous independent peer-reviewed studies and government agencies, referencing that these have negative effects, even when used as directed.

The fragrance and air freshening industries, would like the public to think they are safe and fully researched. When in fact they are not required by law to test or list all the ingredients. The public needs to realize that the number of people with hidden/non perceivable disabilities outnumber the more readily identifiable ones.
No disability should ever be denied access to public accommodations.

The full response can be read at NTEF-USA.Org.

National Toxic Encephalopathy Foundation is a 501(c)(3) , non-profit organization
whose core purposes are to provide research, education and services to the growing segment of the population who are adversely affected by everyday chemicals and toxins in our environment. Established in 1998

info via press release

Yves Saint Laurent Belle d'Opium: fragrance review

When the perfume gods are chastising your Hubris (in this case taking the original Opium and changing the hell out of its familiar, groundbreaking spicy bouquet "thanks" to IFRA restrictions), Nemesis comes in the guise of bland innocuousness meant to flop, namely Belle d'Opium. Long forgotten are the droves of protest ~and inevitable adoration~ on the addictive powers of the original Opium by Yves Saint Laurent; the almost contraband repackaging in certain countries so that it wouldn't pose challenges at customs; and the Australian peanut growing governor who banned its sales in his county. Belle d'Opium merely raises an eyebrow at best with its almost masculine structure, which isn't wholly intentional and belies the fanfare and the Romain Gavras commercial (watch here) with which it was launched to the scene a little while ago.


It's no fault of the competent perfumers, Honorine Blanc and Alberto Morillas, but rather a capitulation to the sacrificial pyre that the "Intentional Fragrant Abyss" (our own patented IFRA acronym, which seems more like it) is pushing most modern perfumes into. Firmenich, who produces the juice for bean-counters L'Oréal, is obviously too afraid to bypass these new restrictions and given a cheapskate budget they are following the bland and confused brief to the letter: Make a programatic spicy floral-oriental for people who are afraid to venture outside Lahore for fear of coming to terms with real poverty and those who think visiting Paris means shopping for scarves signés, stuffing on croissants and doing Le Louvre in under 3 hours.
Oddly, the perfumers were obliged to pronounce such silliness as "the fragrance was inspired by France's cultural references such as the Belle de Jour film or Belle du Seigneur book [they wish!] but also international references, like Bella Swan in Twilight [there you go!] who is a fresh-faced young woman, a romantic figure later acquiring dark psychoses." [sic, I kid you not]. It's very bad timing that Armand de Villoutreys, president of Firmenich, was put on record in the September issue of Cosmétique Mag admiting there is no time for the company to work properly: "We receive an avalanche of briefs and the whole chain is overheated. It's mechanical, in the sense that we ought to be very quick and we don't have the necessary time to devote to each step". Uh huh...

Although the listed notes of Belle d'Opium include jasmine, gardenia, peach, sandalwood, lily and pepper, I'm scared to report that the whole smells of neither, but rather an abstract and shapeless spicy-woody composition, beggining with a muted fruity-cardamom note and ending in the familiar woody-ambery-patchouli drydown of myriads of modern fragrances, plus an incense hint. Spicy perfumes, like masterful ganster films, have the great advantage of having a core duet of players who battle for reign within the gang crossing each other and siding with other forces in order to prevail; you're at the edge of your seat to see who will overpower whom. Just observe the majestic (and statement-making) Poivre by Caron with its pepper & clove shot-down at dawn. If only Belle d'Opium had the guts to double-cross its partners, we might have something memorable in our hands. As it is, we're not only far from -even- PG13, but firmly into the Nickelodeon channel.

To add insult to injury, neither the sillage nor the lasting power are technically adequate for an Eau de Parfum, which ~with said perfumers involved~ suggests a quickly churned out "generic" please-the-masses deodorant for the price of a proper perfume.
What bugs me most? According to inside info I have the name Belle d'Opium was chosen to ride on the heels of Yves Saint Laurent's best-seller and will be eventually pulled in favour of simply "Belle". If Belle reminds you of... B'Elle (a fictionary flanker of Elle by the same brand maybe?), it's because that's the concept to begin with. Be Elle? Nah....Shame, really!

Available at major department stores in Eau de Parfum concentration (from 53 to 90 euros).

photo collage originally uploaded on stylista.gr

Perfume-Makers Fear EU Legal Blow to the Industry Due to New Restrictions

"(These ingredients are) the spine of about 90 percent of fine fragrances," said Pierre Sivac, Chairman of the International Fragrance Association (IFRA), whose members include America's International Flavors & Fragrances and Switzerland's Givaudan. [source thanks to T.Sanchez]

Perfume-makers fear EU legal blow to the industry and the fear of restrictions is increasing:“All citizens are entitled to the same protection,” SCCS Working Group chairman Ian White, said. It recommended restricting the concentration of 12 substances – including citral, found in lemon and tangerine oils; coumarin, found in tropical tonka beans; and eugenol, found in rose oil – to 0.01 per cent of the finished product. And it proposed an outright ban on tree moss and oak moss, which provides distinctive woody base notes in Chanel’s No.5 and Dior’s Miss Dior."

“It is essential to preserve Europe’s olfactory cultural heritage,” LVMH said in an e-mailed statement, stressing nonetheless the well-being of consumers was a “major concern”.

What's more important is this: Any new laws curtailing the use of natural scents would also impact fragrance-producers such as Givaudan and Firmenich as well as Germany’s Symrise, Japan’s Takasago and Robertet in France’s scents-producing town of Grasse. Basically all the bulk buyers of raw materials, making the growers and developers of the banned essences obsolete and irrelevant in the market game.

Industry sources say they expected regulatory proposals by January 2014. However, the Commission declined to comment on a time frame for possible legislation. Trade associations including IFRA and Cosmetics Europe, whose members are perfume and cosmetics companies such as LVMH, are aiming to submit a joint industry proposal to the Commission by the end of 2012.

Of course it needs to be pointed out that the classic Miss Dior is nowhere to be found (at least on the mainstream circuit, it's still visible on the official site under Miss Dior L'Originale tag) in favor of the re-named Miss Dior Cherie (which circulates as simply Miss Dior now, so a marketing decision sounded the death knoll rather than the formula itself) and Chanel No.5 has been changed as well through the years.

"You never stop learning in this craft" IFRA video The Story of Fragrances

In IFRANA's (IFRA North America) documentary "The Story of Fragrances," experts from the fragrance industry reveal how artistry and passion combine with science and technology to create the world's most innovative fragrances and best-selling perfumes.

Why Crusading Against Perfumery Restictions is an Exercise in Omphaloscepis

In regards to my previous post Perfume Restrictions and Why Everything We Say in Public Matters, Tania Sanchez, the co-author of Perfumes the Guide and a logical mind to be reckoned with, had the good manners and grace to honour me with a direct response. She brought many interesting points to the discussion and although I replied to her in the comments section I do feel that some of my points deserve some air-time for the benefit of those who do not customarily read the comments section. So, bear with me and we might disentangle some finer points.

Tania told me:

"The *future* of perfumery is not the issue. Perfumers have a massive palette and their creativity is proven every time we sit down with new perfumes full of ideas we've never smelled before. It's the obliteration of the past that is the wretched shame. As someone who has suffered all my life from a lot of allergic contact dermatitis (oddly, not to fragrance but mostly to skincare and cosmetics) I understand from my own study and experience that it is impossible to create a product that causes no allergies. The word "hypoallergenic" has no regulated meaning and something that causes rash in one person of "sensitive skin" will be the perfect product for another such self-confessed. We understand, when it comes to all other cosmetics, that when we try something and it gives us a rash, the sensible thing is to abandon it. Not ban it. The question is why these grand works of perfumery art, about which some of us care very deeply and which give us such happiness, must be vandalized solely to prevent some people's rashes, when those people can simply avoid the product by choice. Toxins, carcinogens, and other things that cause irreversible injury absolutely should be eliminated from the perfumer's palette, no question. But skin allergens? Why, when there is a very simple alternative: (1) a full list of ingredients and (2) advising a 24-hour patch test?"

Certainly this is the level-headed approach it is a pleasure conducting dialogue with. So let's take the points one by one, so my ~perhaps nebulous before~ stance becomes clearer.

Since perfumery as an art form has been proclaimed dead, there is of course the rush of panic in an average person's mind of "Hell, what now?? Shall I abandon my pefume hobby? And will everything produced from now on be soul-less?" The focus of my article therefore was to dispel a little of that panic. I think it managed it in some degree, if I say so myself. Then, there is the greater issue of the massacre of classics. There is no dispute on that as I am as much a collector of classics myself, several of them vintage or rare. I collect them, dust them, look at them with dreamy eyes and wear them with a nostalgic pang of someone who was born long after the Summer of Love. A nostalgic pang which is unexplicably shared by many. It is the nature of man (and woman!) to "gloss over" the past and idolise it as better times. Ah, the Golden Age of Cronus...and the continuous decline of man... subject of mythological themes in as far back as 1000BC. Nothing new. We idolise that which we have not experienced first hand. But even if we have, psychology tells us we like to forget the bad, hold on to the good and reminiscence life in idyllic terms. The more we age, the more we do that and it is a sign of our vanity and coming to terms with mortality. We want to be able to say "I had it good, I saw the beauty, reaped its core!". It's understandable.

So what does all this have to do with perfume? It does, in relation to our collecting classics and insisting on their unaltered state of eternal beauty, their own immortality being a small indication of the belief that we, too, can be immortal if only in a small, miniscule piece: that of the beauty ideal we hold. But here is the catch: When wearing a vintage classic I do not claim to re-live an experience of a woman who wore the same juice in the 1930s. It doesn't matter if my juice is authentic, if it is well-preserved, if I am in the right frame of mind or even if I am holding a bakelite cigarette case and wearing a Lelong gown! In essence (no pun intended) I cannot replicate the experience of wearing a classic of that time the way the people who wore it in that age did. Like we discussed with Jean Claude Ellena in our interview, it's not possible to make this "true" to either the maker's intention or the spitit of the era, as numerous factors conspire to make the experience different. How's that? One cannot have read Satre or Genet and go back to seeing things the way people saw them before WWII. The bleak and the existentialist gloom has changed our souls, even if though the memory of written, not lived, word. One cannot have lived through women's movement or reaped the benefits of it in their personal and professional lives and graft themselves back to the time of La Belle Epoque when women didn't always think for themselves. One cannot see the vintage classics (and for our purposes here I mean the ones which are bought in this almost contraband business of ebaying and antiques scouring) as anything else as a glimpse of history. Are they accurate? They are only in the degree which we allow them to be; which we are able to allow them to be. Seeing (even carefully touching, if you're on the inside frame of the business) the Cloisters Apocalypse manuscript at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in NYC is not the same as being a monk fixing the gold-leaf in a musty, wooden bank-seat at Cloisters wearing the monk's cloak. The experience is vastly different! Imagine therefore how much more different the experience is when a classic pefume's formula has been already adjusted numerous times through its history ~sometimes even right after its official launch!~ and not only in the last 10-15 years!! Those reformulations, which ALL the classics have endured at some point or another, are due to other factors than the latest IFRA regulations: lack of "bases" for the perfumers ("bases" are ready-made and commercially available "accords" that give a specific "note" or effect, so that the perfumer doesn't have to sit down and start from scratch each and every time); loss of materials due to suppliers' changes; arid or wet seasons influencing the naturals' quality, yield or vibance, much like in wines; adjustments that have to do with economizing or tastes when the brand changes hands.... The hunt for the perfect photocopy of a 1919 Mitsouko (or any such) is therefore impossible! Unless we were transpoted back to 1919 à la H.G Wells ~while being at an age with our full capacities intact~ sniffed some, taken a little with us and then being transported back to the present to analyse, see how to replicate 100% and manage to actually do it, everything else is basically an exercise in futility. We can regard the classics not as the classics that were, but as the classics we loved. The one version which we have liked, which we have come to love ~whatever that might be and however time-specific it might be. (You all realize that it is getting more and more difficult, now I broke this down in those terms, huh?) Man and woman loves what they are familiar with. They love that which has first touched their heartstrings and even if it was not perfect it will always hold a dear place in their memories. It's almost impossible to pin down what version each of us loves however, so perfume companies adjust to the widest denominator. And plus, not even L'Osmotheque has the 1921 Ernest Beaux Chanel No.5 and that's a fact!

So, what do I propose? Eradicate the classics? Of course not! But insisting on our part, our perfume enthusiasts' part, our perfume connoisseurs' part (call it whatever you like) that we want the real Joy, the real No.5 etc is a populist stance that reminds me of a kind of "free fragrance!" activism. Is this viable and what's more is it effective? I think on the whole pefume companies want to please the consumers, if only because they rely on them for sales -yes, even the discerning ones sometimes!- and if they see an interest they will adjust to the best of their margins from a business point of view (I realize miracles cannot happen). Therefore it's good to provide some actual means of voicing that concern, which is what I did by providing some data on how to reach some people. I'm sure more people will chime in and offer theirs as well.

I don't know if the authors of the Guide are already lobbying in a "free fragrance" campaign and therefore are preparing us for something on which they will need our support in whatever form. I only recall the now defunct blog of Luca in which he had said something along the lines of there being an hierarchy of worries: First you worry about the really big things: war, death, famine, etc. Once those are out-of-mind, we start to worry about smaller things: cars, safety seats, allergens. In a turmoiled world in which the economic crisis is having several people sacked and jobless with families to raise and when earthquakes destroy whole blocks of flats collapsing in L'Aquila, Italy while the Baths of Carakalla in Rome suffer damages, the matter of IFRA and reformulating is becoming small potatoes. But even if there is a crusade going on concerning the irrationality of the spirit of the restrictions, the latest Spring Supplement to the Guide which is full of mentions of reformulations is proof positive that the previous pleas by the authors, in the first edition of Pefumes the Guide and before, have met with deaf ears.

Concerning allergens there is some confusion among the public. Let me straighten it out to the best of my non-medically trained ability. Allergen is something that causes an allergy. Allergy is according to Medicine Net:"A misguided reaction to foreign substances by the immune system, the body system of defense against foreign invaders, particularly pathogens (the agents of infection). The allergic reaction is misguided in that these foreign substances are usually harmless. The substances that trigger allergy are called allergen. Examples include pollens, dust mite, molds, danders, and certain foods. People prone to allergies are said to be allergic or atopic". Allergies are largely hereditary and usually manifest themselves fairly early on in life. Sensitizers on the other hand is a completely different issue and this is what IFRA is trying to regulate. Let's see the definition according to the Occupational Health and Safety Administration: "A sensitizer is defined by OSHA as "a chemical that causes a substantial proportion of exposed people or animals to develop an allergic reaction in normal tissue after repeated exposure to the chemical." The condition of being sensitized to a chemical is also called chemical hypersensitivity. Therefore here is the interesting part which a perfumer highlighted in the comments yesterday: "Sensitization is the term used to describe a sudden allergenic reaction to something that you previously tolerated well. The chemical substance builds up in your system, and then, on day 563 of use, perhaps 10 years in (days and years chosen randomly, of course) you get a bad response. It may even occur with a new perfume that you've never worn before, but it contains the lavender oil that you've been using for 10 years, and bingo - now you're sensitized to lavender. You're not allergic to it, you're sensitized."

Potential allergens therefore do not perform in the either/or way suggested. One thing could be perfectly all right for yeas and through repeated exposure it can escalate into becoming a sensitiser. So a patch-test is not enough. Even in hair-dyes where a patch-test is de rigeur, one can accumulate a sensitivity and it might burst at any second (this is why they advise doing a patch test EACH AND EVERY TIME! Even for products which you have been using all the time) Can you imagine that for perfume use? I can imagine the labels "Spray the product on a dot on your elbow or behind the ear each time you want to wear the perfume and if you feel no redness, prickling or burning sensation within the next 24 hours, you can wear your perfume ~THIS TIME!" Yeah, great bunch of help that would be!! So, although theoretically I am agreeing that labelling is allowing an informed choice (and I'm all for informed choices!), the matter is more complex than that. Simplistic "easing it up" along the terms of "just slap on a label, for Pete's sake!" is not very helpful.

Listing the full ingredients list isn't very helpful either. First because of the obvious, as explained above: one can be perfectly fine with something and yet get a reaction out of the blue. Life is scary and then we die. We all take our risks and I don't advocate not to. But perfume companies already list the most common allergens and therefore if one knows about something specific not agreeing with them, they can avoid it. The rest they have to risk. Yet the full ingredients list is not something companies want to do for another two reasons: Even in food-stuff (which is scarier to use compared with perfume) you cannot find out the exact formula down to percentages or origin of any ingredient. And sometimes there are cryptic labellings such as "natural aroma of fruit" (what exactly? how was it derived? how much?) or even misleading "no added salt" (yeah, but the sodium percentage is huge anyway!). Fragrances are not going to list everything because the mystique is a great part of the whole business. And also because the consumer is not at ease or has sufficient knowledge to know what anisaldehyde or Iso-E Super is etc. Several people ~on perfume boards even~ protest "I don't want my pretties converted into a chemistry lesson!". And just think what the listing of a full list of ingredients would do to consumers and a few perfume critics as well: No more smart-ass stuff!!

Basically the outcry for the latest regulations is justified because they stand to close some of the little guys (always a bad thing in a democracy), and they are threatening to have several raw materials suppliers out of business ~and therefore even if the little guys want to construct a perfume that bypasses the regulations they will not have the materials to do so!

But it also opens up two interesting arenae, which to me sound full of job potential for specific people: legislative consultants (people who will deal with all the paperwork necessary for the implementations in big companies and with prior experience in law, insurance, that sort of thing) and an ultimate atbitrer of taste who is equipped in chemistry, has a connoisseurship of perfume and a couple of publications on the subject under their belt.


We will continue with posts on the oakmoss and other ingredients problem and offer some clarification and altenatives.

"New" Dior fragrances? Les Creations de Monsieur Dior

Browsing the aisles of my local Sephora today I came across two new bottles of Christian Dior fragrances which made an impression. They're both decidely not new, but they were clearly presented as "new" with the matching light blue tags that Sephora puts on their just-arrived merchandise on the shelf. What's up? I decided to investigate.

One of them (and perhaps the most interesting) is the classic 1953 Eau Fraîche [click for review] of which Edmond Roudnistka himself had attributed as the ancestor of Diorella (Although popular notion wants Diorella to be the feminine version of the masculine Eau Sauvage)

It's intriguing to note that it never went away but it had become a scarce "secret" commodity to be shared among cognoscenti. Roudniska's agility in creating magnificent citrus scents (see also Rochas Moustache for its use of lime) is evidenced in the classic mandarin and rosewood accord of the original, and unfortunately the newest version is not quite it what it once was in its murky depths of chypre tonalities (The background of oakmoss has been cleaned up a bit). However it still radiates with a pitch that is both melodious and crystal-clear from both blotter and skin and is one of the best dry citruses on the market currently, so I cannot be but rather pleased for reasons I will elaborate on a bit.

The mania for Eaux Fraiches has taken the market literally by storm with Dior themselves (and therefore in essence ~no pun intended~ the giant LVMH) issuing an Eau (very nice) spin on Miss Dior Cherie, an Eau Cologne Florale version for their best-selling J'Adore and two classic Eaux, inspired by exotic locales: Escale à Portofino and Escale à Pondichéry. Several other brands, Hermès among them, also issue Eaux with increasing tempo, with Chanel Cristalle Eau Verte trying to inject a new classiness which ~surprisingly~ Dior just outbid! Clearly the market for eaux is thriving: My sunny Mediterranean soul cannot but applaud this rekindling of this centuries-old tradition of singing citruses from Sicily & Calabria which brings back to mind memories of my mother drenching my little hands with Eau de Cologne on just about any occassion, casual and formal alike.

The other bottle I noticed is the Forever and Ever, a limited edition sweet floral from a few years back re-introduced in 2006 in pink packaging. Its notes encompass ivy leaves, freesia, water jasmine, rose, almond blossom, geranium, vanilla, musk and ambrette seed.
This one remains as I recalled it.

So what's the deal?
The whole Dior line of classics is rejingled as Les Créations de Monsieur Dior with new packaging and apparently even newer rearrangements of the juice inside. I had predicted the reformulation hiding between such a move as far back as last spring (when there was ever so slightly a re-arrangement of the packaging) and here we are faced with it most decidedly. In the case of Diorissimo, Dioressence and Diorella (to a lesser degree, thank God) it bears rather ominous results, their complexity alightened. But at least not all is irrevocably lost!
Interestingly, François Demachy, head perfumer at Dior, has reorchestrated the classic Diorissimo into a new version of Eau de Parfum (to the original Eau de Toilette and parfum, latter of which is rarer and rarer) touted as "richer, deeper and intense, with a dominant jasmine floral heart note" (Without a doubt the IFRA restrictions on natural jasmine quota hint at the synergistic use of several synthetic alternatives.Both of the "new" fragrances are below a little 80 euros and come in big 100ml/3.4oz bottles, revamped in outer packaging, a uniform look which is the newest "dress" for all Les Créations de Monsieur Dior products (a niche "collection" idea): The box is all white with a big oval of gold circling the name in pink for Forever and Ever and in acid yellow for Eau fraiche. The bottles, coloured accordingly, are a slight twist on the classic bottle which houses the older fragrances of the house (Diorella, Diorissimo, Dioressence) and exhibits a faux threading in silver on the bottle neck which is quite elegant! This would be also quite handy when later on collectors will want to date their Dior bottles. Mark the year: Les Créations de Monsieur Dior came out in late 2009...

Addition: The line includes Diorama perfume in the same design, issued in 2011, and will include Diorling in late January 2012 as well.

Pics via Dior.com.