New Luca Turin book - your thoughts? Here are mine. - Page 3

It does.

See ya.

Now there's a commendable approach to making an intelligent assessment of a book. Did you have time to slip Anna Karenina in while you were there, too?


Perhaps if you'd spent a little more time in your local bookstore reading through the book you'd have discovered that many of the highest recommendations in Perfumes are given to fragrances that are neither big, eccentric, aldehydic, nor powdery. . .and likewise some of the harshest criticism is reserved for frags in those particular categories.

I'm confused how a careful reader of The Guide could conclude that "Turin seems to fall into" the category described above. A careful reader would notice that many old fragrances -- even aldehydic ones -- get trashed. A careful reader would also notice that many new fragrances -- even light, spare ones -- get recommended.
--------------------------------------

I'll save you the time: She throws herself under a train.

Well, you folks make me doubly proud that I never spent a scent on this book. It's repellent to see people practice the same kind of nastiness that they obviously relate so closely to in this book. Congratulations - pat yourselves on the back! I questioned the honor always attached to the "Greatest Scents of All Time" as models of perfume art and perfection - NOT to every single old or obscure fragrance in history. It was a valid question to a topic that seemed like it COULD have been interesting. But in the end it WASN'T a thread about "your thoughts." It was about falling in line and worshipping this book, and this style of criticism and bias. In the end, 99% of the population don't know or care who Turin is, and seeing where this thread has headed, the world is definitely a much nicer place because of that.

In the end, a majority of the worlds population are starving, and do not have clean water, nor adequate housing, that should put it all in perspective.
You have a super day now

May I point out that you appeared on this thread with a dismissive "review" of a book that (1) was based on a cursory reading in a bookstore, and (2) misrepresented its content? Were you expecting everyone to respond with a Group Hug?

Just a quick little update, in my own little mystery solving search for the truth on the matter of Bourdon being listed as creator of GIT.


Got this mail back from the Creed website.
Thank you for contacting the Creed fragrances UK website.
> As we are only the British distributors of Creed fragrances and not the
> manufacturer, we are not in a position to comment on this matter.
> However, I will contact Olivier Creed and bring the matter to his
> attention.
>
> I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for your obvious
> appreciation of Creed fragrances.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Severine Allain


Now I wonder what the man himself has to say. If mr. Edwards is right, I'll wear Pepperspray as my SOTD (or worse,...Kouros)

To be continued.

P.S.forgive me if this a bit off-topic guys, and to everyone who purchased the book, just enjoy reading it and respect each other .

I do wonder who the target audience is for the book besides us.
I find it too casual in its content and organization to really function as a reference guide.While it's a fun read,there is a smugness hanging over it. I'm sure they've made plenty of enemies with their snarky comments.

Agreed. I got a chance to look through it for about an hour at the bookstore today, and aside from the articles at the beginning, and despite the fact that the nasty sense of humour is really sharp and funny (pi holds your interest for about 3.14 seconds) most of it just seems really flippant and careless on top of smug.

More importantly, in a great many of the reviews I felt like they weren't really familliar with the fragrances under consideration - as if they'd just tested it on a paper strip and gave it one sniff and then wrote a snarky review, or even a rave one.

Often they miss a huge, central aspect of the fragrance under review, and sometimes the whole essence of the fragrance iself. You really don't get a sense of what the fragrance is about. For example, the (relatively) longish 5 star review of Sarrasins didn't even mention the civet which completely dominates the end of the fragrance. One of the striking aspects of this fragrance, love it or hate it, is that it tranforms from a velvety jasmine with green and ink, into a subtle aura of sweat and filth. Filthy civet is half the reason the fragrance is called Sarrasins in the first place!

And I can't believe that someone with an expert nose can say that there's no vetiver in Creed O.V. and no sandalwood in Creed O.S. I hear that alot on basenotes and just attribute it to lack of familliarity with the fragrances. I'm no kind of expert and even to me those notes are loud and clear at the heart and base of those fragrances after the deceptive Mugler and Joop! clone openings. Again it just makes me think that many of these fragrances were just tested on paper, or else very quickly to meet the deadline.

Their tastes and perceptions about the fragrances are so far removed from mine that the good reviews didn't at all make me interested in testing those fragrances out, and neither did the bad reviews make me want to avoid those. By the end, all I cared about was seeing how their take on my wardrobe or other fragrances I'm very familliar with compared to my own. The only reviews (out of the ones I read) that in my opinion were really accurate and gave a real impression of what the fragrance actually smells like, and how it devellops, etc were Virgin Island Water, Equipage and Borneo 1834.

I didn't see one mention plus or minus of longevity issues in any of the reviews I looked at and I'd guess it's because most fragrances weren't tested in depth enough for them to know.

All in all I've found that basenotes is a much better resource. While the quality of reviews varies, in general they are much more in depth and elaborate, and even many of the cruder ones do tend to capture the essence of the fragrances. Plus with so many reviews per fragrance you really get a sense of what the fragrance is about, and whether or not you're likely to be in tune with the reviewers likes and dislikes.

On the plus side the book is really funny though.

Thats the biggest positive.

The overall impression I get is, this is a book that was rushed to meet a deadline. The short, ad hoc reviews come across like filler, and they, unfortunately, undermine the more considered and insightful reviews, of which there are plenty of. I'm still suspect over all the raves for Estee Lauder's frighteningly synthetic monstrosities that smell more like virtual fragrances than real things.
And, alas, poor Mona di Orio; she surely must have been driven to tears after reading the attacks on her capabilities as a perfumer.

A blushing thanks to all. Having published one not terribIy succesful book myself, I felt that Perfumes: The Guide deserved a balanced and relatively objective review. You know - the kind that might actually help you decide whether to purchase it.

It amuses me to think that Turin and Sanchez are in all likelihood reading this thread, and falling over one another laughing at the controversy they've stirred up. I sure would be!

They probably are reading it but won't be for long, because there isn't much to see.

There are some decent threads out there in the forum. I would rather they post some of their expert thoughts on topics discussing things other than their book ..or maybe even start new topics, if they feel that the topics aren't cerbral enough for them.

Unfortunately that probably won't happen.

Thanks, old dog, for letting this young pup know that he's not chasing his own tail. I bought it right away because I'm a noob to serious fragrance appreciation. I like the book a lot, and it's already helping me to understand fragrances far better than I did before reading it. I wasn't sure if I was just imagining how useful it is to me.

Although sometimes brief to the point of pain, the descriptions are really helping me to appreciate a wider variety of notes. E.g., I didn't understand "milky" before, but the review of Tokyo by Kenzo ("milky woody") has turned me into a veritable milk detector. Ditto "soap" (Vera Wang for Men = "soapy nightmare"). Although the excellent fragrance reviews here on basenotes are very helpful, it's like cinema - everybody needs to find at least one reviewer whose viewpoint "works" for them. This book works for me.

If the second edition comes out with the ones that were missed, plus the fragrances to come, I'll be buying that one, too. It's like a climbing guide - the one back at base camp cannot be too big or too recent.

My only beef with this thread (really with ourselves, collectively) is that I think we should call it Turin & Sanchez, the way my classic organic chem book was called Morrison & Boyd, and not just "Luca Turin's book". Tania's reviews provide balance, humor, a refreshing second style of writing, and female insight. A good number of the real gems are hers. If she would have written the whole darn thing, I would have bought it. I may be a redneck, but my inner feminist feels the need to comment... :-)

I wasn 't impressed by the writing, the reviews are often too concise but Luca Turin did a good job at pointing out who 's doing a good or a bad job when it comes to reformulations in the industry. I agree with him that Richard Fraysse at Caron, it 's such a disaster. I also agree with his Creeds low scores, these scents are so dull.

Absolutely right! We shall get into that as more time passes and we really learn to discern when Tania is talking or Luca through her. Don't forget she edited his comments in this book also. So it's not easy to know exactly who did what. Take the Caron Tabac Blond review (TS) as an example: it contains a lot of detail that appears to have been contributed by Luca. Tania signed many or all of the Lutens reviews. They are fine. But I miss some affection in these. LT would have been warmer in tone, is my impression. He used to write about Lutens often. I particularly remember one article in NZZ, titled 'Dream Team'. That's the kind of appraisal which sent me shopping. Unfortunately, nobody knows what Tania has written on perfume outside this book, do we? The book campaign used her reviews on MUA as reference. But these reviews have disappeared from the eyes of the public.

Thanks for the compliment. I'm not anywhere near as knowledgeable and entertaining as Turin and Sanchez, but I appreciate the thought.

Got a chance to scan the book, admittedly not enough time to form a justifiable opinion regarding the whole, but from what I have read and already know about Turin from his blog, there do seem to be certain characteristics of fragrance that predispose them to favorable, or unfavorable as the case may be, reviews—just as I have preferences in fragrance, just as anyone does. That said, Turin and Sanchez provide incredible insight and exhibit great knowledge from which I hope to benefit. They lampoon one of my favorites, Floris Vetiver, but conversely, from their otherwise exceptional top ten masculines I have been embarrassed by wearing the strange, spicy and sour Timbuktu often enough that I have wrote it off forever. No harm, no foul. No need for unjust attacks or total dismissal of the book, this is just part of identifying with a critic, developing a relationship so that you may understand where they’re coming from, and ultimately benefit by their words.

I am, however, a perfume fanatic, and I love the book; it will be interesting to see how the general public reacts to it though. The short, albeit entertaining, dismissals of certain fragrances are at odds to the erudition and illumination that the book otherwise provides. The comedy, as presented then, seems directed to those more willing to dismiss fragrances outright, that is the fragrance counter consumer, but will someone spending $50 annually on a fragrance spend $26 on the book to figure out what that annual fragrance is going to be? Seems unlikely, but I don’t know. If the book is intended for people who already have an interest in perfumes, it is a little light for an encyclopedia. Also, why not include discontinued fragrances. The pursuit of a long lost gem can be very exciting and, like rare animals or beautiful women, obtaining one can often be more rewarding than the product obtained.

I agree that it takes a lot of time sorting through the bull of these forums to find anything worthwhile here, but I also agree that the breadth and scope of the reviews contained on this site have been of significant value.

Perhaps after reading the book, we can take an educated stance on it, become more informed because of it, and bring these forums up to the level of the aforementioned reviews.

i went back to the wal-books today and almost had a panic attack; they no longer had the book out on the new hardbacks table. a very nice attendent that was passing by asked if i needed help. when i told her the name of the book she told me she knew right were its at. picked up the last two copies. she said they had sold a bunch of them already. frankly, i am a bit surprised at that.

so the fun part- she said that she had just finished reading it and loved it! we had a very nice chat about it. she thought that lt and ts had nailed the sad fact that a number of her favorites had gone through several reformulations. she also really like the mention of a few cheapies that received 4 stars from them.

she also really liked my sotd- no88.

really nice to have a chat about frags that didnt take place online (no offense meant). made my day!

cheers,
ryan

There is pointed criticism toward the Caron reformulations, whereas, to give one example, the reformulated Coco, which is a complete shambles compared with the original, isn't so harshly judged. I attributed this to cronyism; however, I must admit that I am looking for a way to organize The Guide reviews in a way that makes sense to my experiences and my perceptions. Cronyism was the easiest explanation, but it may not be an accurate one.

Ruggles; you have made me ever so sad, I am actually getting all verklempt. I love Youth-Dew, Azuree and Cinnabar. I would actually rather wear my Youth-Dew than my Guerlain Djedi. I find their scents to always be reliable; Youth-Dew smells as lovely now as it did when I was younger, and Azuree smells as wonderful as my aunt's ancient bottle from the 60's. I guess that is the joy of all the selections we are offered. This past weekend my husband and I were in this shop called Blue Mercury, and I sprayed Serge Lutens-Fleur d'Oranger on a mouillette, and it smelt nice. I proceeded to spray my arm with one squirt, and the rest of my day was plagued by nausea, my husband also. So sometimes it is not the quality, or cost, just ones own preference.

Sorry Doll. Please don't think of me as a schlemiel. I'm actually a huge fan of Youth Dew, Azuree, Cinnabar, too. You can also add White Linen, JHL to that list.
I was making reference to his ***** ratings for Beyond Paradise and Pleasures. To me, they smell like they were created for Femme-bots.

I do have to agree with you on Pleasures, I really never liked it, it is a mass-market type of release. This past weekend I sprayed on some Beyond Paradise, to see what it was all about, and it became very 'strange' after 10 minutes. 'Strange' would probably be an understatement, bizarre would be a more appropriate way to characterize how it changed on my skin. Now when I think of the Femme-bots in Austin Powers, I think of Metal or Calandre by Paco Rabanne. The Femme-bots would not enjoy Pleasures, they are too hip for that stuff.
Take care

SEND IN THE FEMME-BOTS!!!!!!!!

Interesting idea. Encyclopedia Olfactoria? Maybe it's a wiki project. Who knows. But I agree completely - discontinued frags are a complete subject of interest to about half the fragrance world, it seems. I would wager that everybody who picked up the book looked for some "old flames". In fact, the longer reviews in T&S where older scents are discussed in detail are one of the best parts of the reviews. I rubbed my hands in evil glee every time I saw a full-page review with 4-digit numbers popping out.

Thank you. Odd accusation to make on such flimsy evidence. But you said "A strong thread of cronyism runs throughout the book" (I'm quoting from memory). Any other instances ?

I would like to invite Dr. Turin and/or Ms. Sanchez to comment on the method(s) of application (back of hand, paper etc), estimates of amount applied and time(s) in general allowed for the different notes to appear for the fragrances reviewed in Perfumes: The Guide.

I am surprised at the questioning of a lack of reviews due to a failure to receive samples. As it is not possible for any two people to find every fragrance on the market, a request for samples would seem to be the only way to include as many reviews as possible. Regarding the controversy about Beyond Paradise, it would seem that every comprehensive book of reviews would have at least one or two incidences of "jumping the shark". I love the book, respect the authors for a fantastic work, and look forward to the next book.

I pre ordered the Guide and have read a great deal of it with pleasure. The one jarring entry for me was the one star given for Tabac Blond since the extrait that I purchased from a fellow basenoter about a year and a half ago had the effect of catnip on me. It was "my first," when it comes to thrilling experiences with a fragrance (as an adult.) Was I lucky to get my hands on some before it was reformulated, or am I just a cheap kitty?

Also, I admit that I was looking for my Ava Luxe favorites like Madame X and Love' True Bluish Light, not to mention Rasa or Rasa Extreme. What would Luca and Tania think of these, I wonder?

It's the general tone.

I believe there is a place in the Introduction or Acknowledgement section (I don't have the book with me now) that specifically mentions a couple of perfumers names as friends (I may not be using the exact term). It is wonderful that is the case, however, that particular statement within the first few pages may set the reader up to look for or expect favoritism in the reviews that follow. This is because the reader would suspect that the actual review and rating could have significant consequences for the fragrance and people involved with it.

'The reader' ? That could be you, and your self reflections could be correct, I guess. 'The reader' could also be me, in which case your assumptions would be totally wrong, seattlelight.

I believe there is a place in the Introduction or Acknowledgement section (I don't have the book with me now) that specifically mentions a couple of perfumer's names as friends (I may not be using the exact term). It is wonderful that is the case, however, that particular statement within the first few pages may set me up to look for, or expect, favoritism in the reviews that follow. This is because I would suspect that the actual review and rating could have significant consequences for the fragrance and people involved with it.

That assertion is, of course, far too vague to counter.


I have some friends who happen to be perfumers. I mention them in the acknowledgements, specifically Chris Sheldrake and Calice Becker. Sheldrake did all the Lutens, which by inspection you will see were not particularly favored. Calice Becker did many fragances I love, and I think she is one of the best, as do the millions of people who have made her work so commercially successful. Am I supposed to disparage a talented person simply because I have the good fortune of knowing her ? Should I have kept our friendship quiet ?

I received my copy yesterday from Amazon.

He really gets the boot in with Caron. I know I love so many of these yet they really get a mauling in the Guide. If I love them now the gods know how wonderful they must have been.

Just got mine from amazon - haven't read it yet

I'm truly interested to see how the follow-up edition to The Guide will differ from this one. A better index, release dates, note pyramids, the inclusion of more obscure houses, a Montale review?

"Am I supposed to disparage a talented person simply because I have the good fortune of knowing her ? "

Of course not! It is fortunate, in fact I'd say a blessing, to have colleagues you enjoy and admire.

"Should I have kept our friendship quiet?"

I don't know if you should have.

Thanks for your answer. I suspect what may have given the impression of cronyism is the fact that TS and I mention many perfumers by name. This was deliberate: they are artists, they should in my opinion "sign" their work (few can, Malle Perfumes being a notable exception). Michael Edwards' online database was a priceless resource in finding out who did what. In most cases I have never met them, though I did speak to a couple on the phone, chiefly to congratulate them on work of theirs I had discovered that I liked very much.

That explanation makes tremendous sense. Mentioning the perfumers by name did seem suspect to me. I understand the motive and hope that your publication helps perfumers receive acknowledgement for their talent and creations, as they rightfully should.

All in all, it was highly enjoyable reading. To be sure, I agreed with some reviews and disagreed with others. Such is the nature of personal taste, especially in sensory choices.
One surprise for me was that the English version was written in a more direct and literal style. After having painstakingly translated portions of the French version, I wanted to read a direct translation, even though the author announced long ago that no such attempt would be made. I still looked for those same poetic images.
Personally, I was pleased about the plaudits earned by the laudable House of Lauder for maintaining its line so well. Many Basenoters have been subjected to my figurative hair-tearing and clothes-rending over reformulations. Clandestine reformulations are like alien abductions in which our beloved partners are whisked away and replaced by Stepford Wives. Yes, I know that we sometimes "must" change ingredients, but I have no sympathy if Caron or anyone else botches the job.
I hope that Estee Lauder returns its classics to the top side of the countertop, and that Chanel rescues Bois des Iles from the obscurity of its far-flung boutiques.
Furthermore, I was overjoyed at the high ratings of some of my "vulgar" favorites such as Aromatics Elixer, Youth Dew, and Knowing (which also brought mention of my long-lost love, Sinan.)
I could go on talking because the book was full of practical information and fun topics for conversation. Probably everyone here should read it.

You have stated it perfectly, 'alien abductions'-'stepford wives'; doppelgangers if you will. May those fragrance houses burn.
I also love Sinan, by Jean-Marc Sinan, it is not as well known over here in the states; it should be better known, it is yummy. I am in complete agreement with you on all the other scents also; Lauder deserves all of the accolades M. Turin has given them.

I view him like I view Simon Cowell of American Idol. Cowell is an expert in his field, just like Turin. He is hilariously blunt and sarcastic. He can be wrong sometimes, but most of the time, his comments are spot on. People boo him on the show, but he does not care. Ultimately, people will vote the American Idol contestants based on their own perception, not Cowell's opinion. Cowell is definitely more fun to watch than Paula Abdul who only says good things about everyone. In the end, we will continue to love the perfumes we love, regardless of what Turin says.

[QUOTE=luca turin;121353... TS and I mention many perfumers by name. This was deliberate: they are artists, they should in my opinion "sign" their work (few can, Malle Perfumes being a notable exception). ... In most cases I have never met them, though I did speak to a couple on the phone, chiefly to congratulate them on work of theirs I had discovered that I liked very much.[/QUOTE]

Bravo! Reading this literally warms my heart. Hard work that produces a great result certainly deserves recognition!

I pick the book up, read a little, put it down. Over, & over & over. It's fun! Do I agree with every single review or comment? No, but that's ok. Rarely do I agree entirely with anything I read.
I'll keep it & we'll agree to disagree on a few frags.

Here's what Slate has to say:
http://www.slate.com/id/2190277/pagenum/all/#page_start

I'm thrilled because I just ordered the book myself. I can't wait to read reviews about all the new fragrances.

This is exactly the same thought I had.

I've enjoyed reading the book a great deal, and it's nice to see some of my favourites get some recognition. I also appreciate the foregrounding of the noses behind the fragrances.
I generally like the tone of the writing - I particularly enjoyed the opening essays. Some of the snarky one liners struck me as just being space fillers, and in my view gave the impression that the book had been rather hastily finished.

My wish list for the next edition:
I would have liked to have seen a few more he said / she said reviews.
I also felt that some of the 1 star reviews could have been dropped, particularly if slamming the likes of Paris Hilton / Britney Spears, in favour of more comprehensive reviews of other lines.
I'd also like to see lists of notes and an easier to navigate index.

would this be a good starter book? i think i've read somewhere that there is an intro before the reviews.

My personal opinion is the book can be appreciated by anyone who enjoys fragrance! It is a fun and easy read, and pretty much timeless. I've already given it as a gift to a friend who is not a 'fanatic' and his comments have been very positive. As for myself, the guide has introduced me to a new point of view regarding some old faves and introduced masterpieces I just haven't gotten to yet...I would'nt hesitate to purchase this one.

Absolutely, it is essential reading at any point, even for starters.
Also make sure to read reviews in the Basenotes Directory. Another source of reviews is Makeupalley (but probably not as much for masculine frags.)
Please reference Bois de Jasmine's website for this wonderful introduction to aroma materials and the fragrances that best represent them:
http://boisdejasmin.typepad.com/_/ar...als/index.html
Osmoz is Firmenich's website that includes info about olfactory families, raw materials, and reviews:
http://www.osmoz.com/Encyclopedia/Olfactory-groups
Have fun!

Oooh goody! The Book arrived at long last. I can't wait to get stuck in, I've been at a bit of a loose end since I finished the DVD of "Rome", now it's time for some high drama for my nose. I love the two word summary of each fragrance, neat idea.

Rome! That is like *the* best series I've ever seen on TV! At least season one was!

Great Review!!

OK - I have lived with the Guide for a few weeks now ... I absolutely find this thing indispensable, as when I buy a sample from Perfumed court, and Luckyscent (my weakness, heh), I am finding my "good-to-bad frag" ratio to be much better!

I have one little peeve, though. I wish the guide was indexed so I do less hunting! 2nd edition suggestion, perhaps?

A very nice, easy to read, informative book. A pleasure to read.

Of course, there are lot of thing to agree and a lot - not to.

At least one I completely don't agree with LT - 2 Ropion's creations - Sisley Soir de Lune and Lalique Le Parfum got 1 star. No no no. Should be at least recommended.

p.s. Nice to here that LT liked Vilnius

I tell ya, a lot of the reviews in the book read like a fan of Johann Strauss trying to review London Calling. If chypre is your platonic ideal of fragrance, you will agree with pretty much all the reviews.

If you've smelled most of the 5stars, you get a pretty good idea of what turns the authors on, and what doesn't. You would be foolhardy to take LT's word, or CB's word...or anyone's word, for that matter, as the final word.

The writing style is another bone I have to pick. LT really strains at his rivets to appear erudite sometimes, and his high-culture name dropping often gets in the way of his explanations (see this post's opening simile, and many following, for my emulation of this).

For instance, in one of the reviews, LT refers to the maturity of waltzes (was it sonatas? I can't remember exactly) by Brahms to describe the sophistication of a perfume. So now I have to go figure out what LT considers "mature" for a waltz or a sonata, just so I can figure out what his opinion of the perfume is.

You know, it's like me saying "if you're wondering who the nickel is, he is usually the guy who covers the slot receiver in a 5 back set," or better yet, "an isomorphism is a bijective map f such that both f and its inverse f^-1 are homomorphisms (that one's from Wikipedia, lest you think I'm that talented at obfuscating)." I just think that capsule critiques written in the same vein as Dennis Miller's jokes are as useful and instructive as Dennis Miller's jokes are funny.

(before you ask: yes, I am jealous that LT understands that much more about beautiful art and machinery and quantum mechanics and music and poetry and god knows what else than I do ;-)

TS's writing is a different issue, basically, it reads like the transcript of what it would be like if VH1 did a show on perfumes. I appreciate the internet gamer slang and tabloid culture references and all (I even got a few of the jokes :-P), but I feel a bit of editing would have helped, you know, along the lines of "what about the perfume in question?"

Someone who bought this book thinking it's a beginner's guide is going to be terribly disappointed, and a beginner's guide is what the fragrance market needs for its own good more than a two author blog in book form. The star ratings seem to be appended haphazardly to the reviews (Amarige-one star, yet in the top ten for best loud fragrances? Did I remember that right?)

So, all those bones thoroughly aside, I heartily recommend this book to anyone that is intermediate or advanced in perfume experience, because it's hilarious, and informative (assuming the reader has smelled many of the perfumes in question as a baseline). It's not as good for someone who is a beginner (even the explanatory chapters).

The only fragrance opinion that really matters is the wearer's, of course, but it's a real treat to have such a ready reference of informed opinions at hand, and I value LT's and TS's so much, especially because I know what they like (for the most part. I don't get the grade inflation on the Lauders, though. Do you guys owe them some money?)


Also, I meant to ask (maybe someone else brought this up already)-there is a quote that appears at least twice in the book: "when I do vanilla, I get creme anglaise, but when Jacques Guerlain does it, he gets X" in one instance, X is Jicky, and in another, Shalimar. Which was it?

Also also...man, I really really want to smell PdN NY.

It's Shalimar. (The person quoted was Ernest Beaux.)

Thanks :-)

That makes more sense than Jicky too.