Is weirdness in a scent so important?

Wait, are you trying to influence me in liking mainstream frags?

Well I do like a lot of them, actually. And am considering Gucci PH 2 for my wardrobe.

What I really LOVE is finding a mainstream frag that is cheaper than a very similar niche frag that costs thrice as much. I find Gucci PH 2 too similar to Annick Goutal Duel to shelf out money for the latter one.

Selfishly, I was hoping your post was just the subject question: Is weirdness in a scent so important? because I read that on the forum list and thought, god, what a great question, why didn't I ever think of it before, and now I can't wait to answer just that question.

Indulge me by letting me, and then I'll get to your comments on the super members and what you feel is a dismissive attitude.

Yes, I say, weirdness in a scent is important to me. It makes me love a scent. It makes me not tire of it. It takes me where another scent hasn't gone and it makes one instant of the same scent different from other instants of the same scent. I love it when I wear one scent for the day but it changes through being three scents during the day. That is a party and a nose trip for me--a vacation no matter how much work I'm doing that day.

Yes, weirdness in a scent is fantastic for me, and it is trippy in other ways--in how people react to me by how I smell (in some cases, as I've written about Yatagan, for example on a thread I started about it) and how I get to watch those reactions change.

I love it this way and I like it that a scent teaches me how to smell all over again, teaches me beauty by contrast, for example, as in the amazing way Amen shows me sweatness and powder coupled with tar. How neat, and whoda' thunk?

Now, on to your second point about how it seems like your super members are dismissive and don't give new people or new scents a chance, and even look down on members who like the scents that the super members look down on. I sincerely think you're wrong.

It can look that way, sure, since we talk about things in ways that try to seek out the special and the different, and the odd, and the things that change us, or change our noses or change our perceptions of what our noses lead us to think about, but we're not giving lip service when we say everyone should find the thing that makes them happy.

If a scent of whatever non-weirdness makes you happy, all super members here will say, damn, go forward. Your nose says you like some scent, that's a party, and the way it should be.

Truth is the forum has a history of newer members calling elitism here, and feeling like judgment is against them. It isn't. Many of us have smelled a few thousand commercial scents and we do find we want to be provoked, and sure, just like anyone, we have things we don't like and sometimes we don't like things because they don't meet our taste for complexity or weirdness--you could say that--but in all frankness and candor, we have our opinions and can have them. We can talk about them and when we say recently released scent-X is dull, commercial, feed the masses, unspecial, we're saying that's the way it appears to us, or even just the one of us who says that. It's a legitimate way to have an opinion and it's a reasonable thing to think.

It doesn't mean we think the same thing of anyone who likes the scent though. Because we think a scent is mainstream, common, ordinary, done before, not-weird, not-interesting, in no way, in our minds, does that mean anyone who likes Scent-X is those things either. We might not agree, but we're sincerely going to want you to rejoice in liking the scent. No lie.
--Chris

That is a beautiful paragraph, and mirrors how I feel.

Hey, if you want cheap, "mainstream" frags that smell nice, just check out my sales thread. I have no incentive to try to get you NOT to buy those kinds of frags! LOL.

I agree with Turin's notion that discordant accords are often where true beauty is found. I think you can apply this to music, the visual arts, food, etc., as well as perfumery. Symmetry is overrated and not found in nature.
Some of the 'super members' perhaps prefer to be challenged rather than comforted.
That said, comfort is not a bad thing at all.

Symmetry is found in nature and can be heart-piercingly beautiful. The symmetry of a butterfly's wings. The symmetry of a flower. Symmetry in a fragrance can also be a very desirable, very beautiful thing.

Now, although we disagree about symmetry... we do agree on assymmetry and contrasts! I fully concur with Turin's comments also. As much as I can't bring myself to love some of the 'weirder' notes in certain frags, I respect them and am glad that perfumers are exploring the boundaries.

For the original poster... don't hold it against the "super members"! Everyone enjoys the "simpler" scents, just know that there are other more "interesting" things waiting in the wings. I for one appreciate the super members' attempts to bring them to our attention. In the end, what you end up liking is down to you.

I have never seen a symmetrical flower. If you look closer at all those symmetries you'll find uniqueness in each petal and wing. Just like a tree's branches and leaves. My right leg is slightly longer than my left, as I suspect is true, to a certain extent of every living thing. Symmetry is artificial.

I think in terms of "rough edges." Adidas Victory League has an odd combination of notes, but they balance out and there is very pleasant dynamism, for instance. Lomani is also well balanced (no roughness), but smells too typical. However, if we were raised to smell AVL type smells at barber shops, and never smelled the Lomani notes together, would it be the other way around?

Jonny: I can say with absolute certainty that even as a BN newbie, I am not influenced by the veteran BN'ers tastes at all. Have a look at my BN wardrobe and I bet you that no veteran BNer would agree that the top 2-3 in my wardrobe are the greatest ever - but I swear by them when the chips are down.

And for the record, I've tried YSL Homme and got an immediate "Meh - like Cool Water but doesn't make me want to scrub it off right away" reaction out of me.

Like Chris, I feel a need to address both the thread's title question and the body of the post.

"Is weirdness in a scent so important?" Well, if by "weirdness" you mean a distinctive or unusual character, then yes, to me that's a point of interest and attraction. I admire originality and I enjoy provocative scents. Given a choice, I'll usually reach for something imaginative to wear. Even so, I don't always want to wear an unusual scent. There's a time and a place for Muscs Koublai Khan, and a time and a place for a good traditional Eau de Cologne. Wearing a relatively conventional scent does not indicate a lack of taste. It merely means someone enjoys, or is in the mood for something that's not challenging.

As for the body of JoNnY 4's initial post, I'm surely guilty of dismissing a great number of conventional fragrances, but that's not because I like to condescend. Fact is, once you've smelled and reviewed hundreds, if not thousands, of fragrances, you find many that are similar enough to be redundant. How many fruity-aquatic fougeres do we really need? How many aquatic "sport" fragrances can you distinguish blindfolded? (I've got a reasonably discerning nose, and I can't tell most of them apart.) Given the crowded market and the degree of sameness among scents, here's my manifesto: if a scent is relatively conventional in structure and character, it had better be outstanding in quality or offer some original twist on the commonplace formula. Otherwise, what need is there for it to exist? At this point in my exploration of scent, I can't show much enthusiasm for any but the best examples I encounter among the very popular fragrance types.

If I must confess to an agenda of sorts when discussing fragrances with newcomers, it's not to belittle their tastes, impose my own, or bully them into wearing something they don't like. It's to encourage exploration and give others license to define their preferences through experimentation. It's to help emancipate and eduacate their noses, if you will. Others here have done that for me, and I want to pass along the favor. I'd be saddened if encouragement of learning were taken as hostility, and while I can't speak for other established Basenoters, I'd like to think they feel the same.

All you need to do is trust your own nose. Fragrance is only good if it makes you happy. Opinions are abundant and you can't agree with every one of them. Sample before you buy a full bottle without taking hype as the truth. Truth is what you make of it. I can't tell you how many times seasoned basenoters have raved about certain scents enough to make me purchase a sample. And low and behold, I hate it. Or it's not strong enough to be noticed by anyone but me, and so on and so forth. And there are many frags I adore that others deplore, I could care less! That's the beauty of the world, all the differences. We won't ever agree on anything. You need to stop worrying about what everyone else thinks and follow your own path. Sample away and buy what YOU like regardless of what anyone else thinks! Presto! Instant happiness!

Since I'm a classical musician I want to relate it the issue to music. I love classical music, from Mozart and his beautiful symmetry and perfect balance of tension and release as much as I love Brahms' lush, gigantic soaring romantic textures and melodies to Shostakovich's harsh, fierce symphonies with wailing brass instruments and percussion you can feel in your chest, to modern composers like Schonberg whose atonal music is both almost mathematical and thought provoking. That said, I actually also like hip hop and rap, salsa, jazz, etc.

I find a direct parallel with fragrance. Sometimes one is just in the mood for something challenging, something harsh, something luxuriously rich, something luscious, (any number of Serge Lutens, Parfumerie Generale, or Montale fragrances for just a few examples), but I also like my Bulgari Aqua and a couple Creeds and several department store fragrances (though I admit I like the weirder ones haha if I might go as far as to call Declaration and Terre d'Hermes "off the beaten path").

I think when one comes to the hobby level or collector level, the nose starts to want more adventure. It's not even necessarily about preference but the idea of experiencing new and daring or exciting accords that can be daring for the sake of being daring or be daring in effort to evoke something outside of the realm of just smelling good. I haven't really bought a full bottle in about a year because I just want to smell different things. My nose has gotten greedy and when I read some of the incredible reviews here and elsewhere, I just have to experience that as well.

There's nothing wrong with enjoying mainstream fragrances. I think looking for weird in fragrances comes from the adventure seeker in the fragrance enthusiast. Though I've been actively seeking some of the more interesting fragrances out there, I've also started coming back around to enjoy more traditional fragrance compositions as well. I think any agenda might be just that we all want each other to experience these fragrance "oddities" as well, just for the sake of trying them and broadening our horizons. This community and these forums are populated by enthusiasts so there's only so much you can say about the certain genre of mainstream fragrances. I don't think you are so far off by mentioning that there is a certain naysaying involved when approaching mainstream offerings (especially, fresh, aquatic, "sport" fragrances). But I think that's mostly because once you smell those, there's just not much to say. That doesn't mean they aren't enjoyable.

In answer to the title...

It's not important at all. In fact, I'd say a fragrance in a popular style that stands out from the crowd impresses me more than a freaky fragrance.

That being said, I often love fragrances that are "weird" by others standards. Sometimes I don't really smell what others see as weird ( CdG Original is spicy and interesting, but not outright weird to my nose ), sometimes I do and love it ( Tubereuse Criminelle's wintergreen-tuberose accord ).

Sometimes people don't smell something as weird that I do, for example the horror known as Velvet Gardenia that others seem to tolerate, and even love.

In answer to the post...

I talk about the fragrances I do and don't enjoy. That is my standard - how I feel about a fragrance. There is no agenda here other than that.

I think after a person has smelled hundreds to thousands of scents, it becomes rarer to find something original and unlike other things. That's why it's exciting and refreshing to discover a "novel" scent (you call it "weird").

When I first smelled A*Men, it was maybe the 10th frag I've ever smelled and certainly unlike any of those previous ones. Its boldness instantly put me in heaven, and I was never the same again.

The old dog hits the nail on the head yet again. Excellently put.

Super Member is an unfortunate name choice, I agree, it's best to just ignore it. Everybody is tagged that way at a stage between 'New Member' and 'Dependent', a tag indicating a certain number of posts somebody has written. (Maybe there is a time factor too, but I wouldn't know anything about it.) You will be able to change the once you have been here for a while. Since I discovered that possibility I use varying text instead. And recently the number of members who do the same has grown.

Vibert has just written a very careful answer which reflects thoughts many other longtime members may share. Most of my own posts are a response to other members I have known for a long period of time, not seldom on matters that have a little history on BN. Regrettably, I seldom consider the needs young and new members may have. But never has ignorance or bad will been the cause. When I started to buy perfume I chose what was new and available. But years of practice taught me that in perfumery 'new' isn't a synonym for good! I joined Basenotes at a much later stage, when I knew a few things about perfume already. I joined, because this is the only place where they also discuss older, and hard to obtain perfumes for men.

I am still more focused on those, but if you look at my wardrobe, or any wardrobe of longtime members, you will find fragrances that you are familiar with, and which are neither too expensive nor too difficult to buy. Often they get the same 4 - 5 stars as those with the 'snob appeal' (I try to get rid of three star fragrances. Three star fragrances are not the same which get lesser ratings here or in some publication. Only I decide which they are, and I only rate them for my own wardrobe!

I don't own Acqua di Gio pH, but I am one of the few who keep defending this fine cologne, like I defended Old Spice, Brut and Kouros. That said, I may add: Writing the same posts for new generations of BN members year after year can be tiresome, and I am glad when younger Dependents feel more motivated to do that nowadays.

This topic is pretty cool, because I have been thinking about it quite a bit lately. Not in terms of the members here being pretentious mind you, but my own taste from a comparative standpoint. All of my life, I have had a tendency toward "intellectual" interpretations of subjects that border on elitism (at least in the opinion of the various people around me), and my foray into the fragrance world has had a different outcome. My taste in perfume, by comparison to seemingly most of the basenotes community, is pretty pedestrian. I am o.k. with it. It probably has to do with social conditioning or whatever. I like frags that are "likable." Creed, Bond no. 9 etc. I want quality, long lasting fragrances that are fresh, clean and inoffensive (which around here is always meant as a slam). I want to smell nice more than I want to be unique. I guess that I just like what I like, and I'm not always going to be the smart guy in the room. Meh.

It is discussions like this one that keeps me returning. This is the one place I know of where people with a common denominator genuine interest in the world of scents come. In that world, there is bound to be some some "wierdness". Guerlain Homme (which I also own), for example, is "wierd" - wouldn't you agree? I mean - a scent with mint and lime resembling a mojito...it doesn't get much wierder than that!

I absolutely must add my 2 cents to the discussion of symmetry which I found thought provoking. I've been in a phase where I've made an effort to not be symmetrical when arranging furnature etc. But there is a proven biological tendency in many species (including our own) in "choosing a potential mate" to look for symmetry. People generally tend to buy symmetrical clothes.

Perhaps balance is a better word when speaking of fragrance? With what is patchouli symmetrical? - vetiver? ...amber?. Natural landscapes are generally asymmetric. Perhaps a fragrance landscape is a better representation(?).

I do not try to influence anyone. I just state my opinion.

Also, I do not care for weirdness. I look for pure awesomeness. An awesomeness not found in Armani, Hugo, Guerlain Homme, any of the Polos, etc, etc, etc)

Regarding perfumes, I mainly look for high scores on two dimensions:

1. Intelligence-Understatement

2. Coherence-Balance

"Weirdness" without high scores on these two irritates me.

My appreciation of any art form, and perfume is an art form, is usually quite broad. My wife who loathes most modern art will certainly testify to this when I drag her to an exhibit and am enraptured by a piece of abstract art she just can't enjoy. On the otherhand we both feel the exact same joy at Marc Chagall's stained glass work which we both think is brilliant.
This example addresses both the question stated in the topic and the assertion from the body of the OP.
When it comes to "weirdness" in a scent I think that term could be as frought with debate as "niche vs. designer" if it came down to it. The rubber note in Bvlgari Black would probably universally be acknowledged as weird. Would the use of pepper in many scents like Armani Prive Bois D'Encens be considered weird? Depends on where you're coming from. For someone who is experiencing a pepper note for the first time it is weird. For someone who has worn Caron's Poivre, Heremessence Poivre Samarcande, or L'Artisan's Poivre Piquant it becomes another interesting take on pepper in scent. Weird like anything we experience is in the eye, or nose, of the beholder and it can be a wonderful discovery or an off-putting expereince depending on the beholder. For me, I wear so many different things and try so many different scents because I want to experience the full pallette of what these artists attempt to use to create these scents. That being said each one of us here should have a different raison d'etre for wearing perfume and in some of those cases "weirdness" is going to be prominent in one's personal exploration.
To the other point expressed by the OP. I use an example that I start every wine class that I teach off with. My nephew's father-in-law is a very wealthy man and has a wine cellar that is the best I have encountered. On the occasion of my nephew producing the first man grandchild at the christening we were down walking through his wine cellar. On the floor was a wooden crate and I asked him what it was and he said a case of 1961 Chateau Petrus he had picked up at auction. Being very suave and thinking he might be in an expansive mood and knowing darn well my chances of ever trying this bottle of wine were slim I asked if he had tried a bottle yet. He responded no why don't we open one up. Inside I'm jumping up and down like my team has won the Super Bowl and World Series. Outside I'm saying all cool why don't we go try it. We go upstairs, we decant, we pour ourselves glasses and we ooh and aah and compare it to everything from fine jewelry to the Empire State Building. At this point my mother walks in and asks what we are doing. It is at this point that I lose my cool and in a burst transmission that takes about two seconds to come out of my mouth I say. "Mom! This is a 1961 Chateau Petrus it is probably one of the greatest bottles of wine ever made and I can't believe I'm drinking this!!!" My mother says really I'd like to try a glass. Our host pours her a glass, she swirls, she sniffs, she sips and she says, "Not Bad, you know what my favorite wine is?" Now I do know what my mother's favorite wine is and I know what she's about to say. My mother says "I love that Ernest and Julio Gallo Rhine Wine" OMG, OMG she just compared what might be arguably one of the finest bottle of wine ever made to a $6 jug wine quick call the taste police. Ahhh but here's the rub and I'm going to put this all in caps because I stress this when I say it in class, SHE'S NOT WRONG.
My mother knows what she likes and she has tried other things and she still knows what she likes. That is the key here to say you like something over other things after you have tried them means you know your own taste and that is the key to enjoying anything. What I am doing and I assume other "super members" are doing is sharing our experiences. Have I tried things that others have raved about that I'm not crazy about, absolutely. Tauer L'air du Desert Marocain is the one scent that I keep convincing myself I'm just not getting but it leaves me cold every time. Alternatively I love Carthusia Uomo and it gets one star from Turin and Sanchez and is not well-liked here but I love it on me and that is all that matters. Any review I write is as much for me to get my thoughts out and to share in a conversation about something that we all love. It is no reflection on anyone if they like different scents from me. Everything we do here should be in using scent to make ourself happier and that is going to mean different things to all of us. For some it will be the search for the weird, for some it will be the search for a compliment, and for others it will be the search to just smell good. Whatever it is your searching for just remember to have fun while you're doing it and to tell us about it because it is the shared experience that makes Basenotes a special place.

A fragance doesn't need to be wierd, but it does need to be GOOD. There's a classic test that is applied to perfume and it's the simplest one in the world: Does it smell good? If a fragrance smells great it doesn't matter if it's mainstream or niche, cheap or expensive. There's a woman's fragrance from Rochas called Tocade which was a surprise hit because it... smells good. Luca Turin is very voluble on this subject and I agree with him on this point.


Yup, me too. I do try to challenge myself by trying things I wouldn't usually try - like celebrity perfumes and men's fragrances - and I am often surprised and delighted. I try very hard not to be a perfume snob and I think there are a lot of fellow Basenoters who similarly try to keep an open mind on anything we smell.


And yes, it's easy to get carried away by some strange combo you've never smelled before and that gives you DustB's brilliant 'Wow, who'da thunk?' reaction. Sometimes we get swept off our feet by a delightful new thing that we met for the first time and we get a big crush on it and just can't stop talking about it because we're so excited to have discovered it. We're all human!

I often turn to the many mainstream fragrances in my wardrobe when I feel fragile or I can't cope with the complexity of wearing something I have to think about. Kenzo Flower is pretty and easy to wear, Kenzo Amour is cozy and comforting, Opium is a stunner, Rykiel Woman is utterly pretty as is Westwood's Libertine. I wear these a lot. In fact, I'm wearing Coco today - I don't know if you'd call that a mainstream fragrance or a classic.

Having said that, I still like my wierd. I have days when I need to wear Bulgari Black or Dzing! or Bal a Versailles and just let the skank out. I found the wierd that feels good to me. But I still like pretty and I still love classicism. It's just that adding in a bit of wierd gives me more to play with and to me perfume is fun.

I think we sometimes don't appreciate the mainstream fragrances because they're there. It's a bit like not appreciating your Mum until you leave home and have to cook your own dinner and wash your own socks.

This reminds me of one of my most memorable experiences smelling someone else's fragrance sillage. A young couple sat down next to us at an outdoor restaurant in southern Europe late summer 2005. The young lady was wearing something utterly novel (read 'wierd') - yet so perfect for that setting. I wish I had had the courage to ask her what fragrance it was. I'd almost give my right arm to know what fragrance it was. As I recall, it seemed either rubbery or leathery or a combination of the two. I've been wondering lately if it was Bulgari Black, Dzing, or maybe even Tea for Two.

I am also new here but I have been a fragrance aficionado for 20 years.
I got tired of the lack of creativity among designers, once in a while I will find something different and I will buy it. The truth is that I got a point where I had tested and bought hundreds of fragrances and seemed nothing new under the horizon seemed to get me really excited.
I found Basenotes and I discovered a new world. I was scratching the surface for 20 years, a lonely walk in the desert... until now.
Yes,weirdness is important, maybe not weir but originality, creativity, surprised factor, that amazing feeling of smelling something unique that makes you go WOW.
I have to thank everyone here for giving their opinion and tips of great new and old fragrances. There is people that know best, have more knowledge and nose. They have tried many niche fragrances and they make our (my) fragrance life much more interesting. They do not have better or worse taste, they just know more than others.

You will buy whatever I say and you will shut your mouth and like it!

by that way most of my fragrances are designers also apart from a few creed, Caron , Knize and niche samples that I have

OK, at the risk of sounding redundant, I'd like to add my quick .02. I don't understand the notion that elitism exists on this board. On the contrary, I find this board to be rather exempt from this. The long-standing members on this board (as well as some newbies) are incredibly experienced, and I have found most, if not all, to be incredibly patient and willing to pass that knowledge along to the rest of us, without the slightest bit of elitism.

On the topic of the question regarding "weirdness" in a fragrance. I feel that it has its place and time, and I greatly appreciate it in those times. When you have reached the point where you are appreciating fragrance as an artform as opposed to a "chick-magnet" you learn to enjoy seeing how beautiful something that is seemingly different or odd can be. I for one often times like to go for something that just plain smells good, something that is comforting in its relative simplicity, but at the same time I own, and enjoy exploring scents that cause me to think because of the complexity or "weirdness" that is implemented.

I don't think weirdness is important in a scent, but I do think uniqueness is... That's not to say there aren't any "common scents" that smell great. I just think if there are hundreds of aquatics out there to smell (just an example), chances are there will be very few, if any that will stand out enough to make you want to repurchase that same bottle when it's finished. However, if you're lucky enough to find something that smells great and also happens to be unique enough that it would be almost impossible to replace if that scent were ever to disappear, then chances are you will have a friend for life... (Or at least till they discontinue or reformulate it... )

Weird will not get you far. Weird and awesome will get you very far....

The only, truly weird fragrance I could think of is Secretions Magnifique. I call it weird because the famous bilge note is without end. Weird because of its unnatural longevity.

Weirdness: strikingly odd or unusual character; strange. Could be interpreted as being distinct.

A scent should have its own identity, and what makes it distinct is therefore important, especially if what makes the scent distinct is nice-weird, not cringe-inducing. But what do i know?

Since becoming aware of BN, I have always looked forward to the opinions of all contributors and feel I have benefitted from a tremendous amount of knowledge. I have purchased fragrances "blind" due to their reviews and opinions and have not looked back. To me the ones that have been reviewed as "strange", i.e. Yatagan (celery note), L' Anarachiste (blood?), etc. have been some of the most enjoyable in my wardrobe. Another wonderful and, to my nose, different and highly regarded fragrance is "R" de Capucci which I absolutely adore.

Weirdness is overrated. It´s comfort I search for in a fragrance. Weird is great for a few hrs,or days, but after that it gets anoying. In the end I just want to smell nice, and if that´s with a boring designer fragrance or a expensive niche fragrance, that doesn´t matter. Do I want to smell like smoke, burned tires dipped in candy all day? Do I want people to think I smell awfull? Hell no, but if you´re comfortable or don´t care about that then good for you.
We all have (had) our rebelious phase in fragrance, but I´ve been there, done that and I´m bored with that now.At a certain time you just wear what you like and if that´s with smelling weird,or smelling mainstream, it just doesn´t matter anymore.

Yes.

No.

you know
I realized that one thing that is very unique to each individual is cologne
The best thing to do is this
Find a long time BNer who has a very close or similiar taste you have and see how he rates others
this is probably the safest way to blind buy going off of BN reviews
trust me
there are alot of members here that have weird tastes
and I learned the the hard way

In thinking about the subject question rather than the body-of-the-post question, I found it helpful to define a few terms (which may sound familiar if you've studied literature, which I did; forgive me): picturesque, beautiful, and sublime. Now, the first may not typically be applied to fragrance (or anything other than, well, pictures), but in aesthetics, it has a specific meaning, that of being just so, comfortable, balanced, charming, quaint, perfect, etc. If this were a painted landscape, you'd leave out the telephone lines. This is Thomas Kinkade, this is Clinique Happy, this is Nicholas Sparks. There are scents like this, and there's nothing wrong with them. They are what they are, and that is something nice. Then there's beautiful, which is sort of similar, though it goes far beyond, picturesque. Beautiful things give pleasure, they exalt the senses, they're excellent, refined, etc. This is Claude Monet, this is Coco de Chanel, this is Milan Kundera. There are scents like this as well. And then there's the sublime: lofty, grand, transcendent, awe-inspiring, etc.; this is beauty near the edge of fear. This is Picasso, Da Vinci, Dali, this is Black, Angel, Shalimar (in my opinion), this is Shakespeare, Dostoyevsky, Cummings (Edward Estlin, not Alan). There are different levels of (I want to say beauty but can't) aesthetic pleasure, and those different levels can be had from different artists, whether they be painters, authors, or pefumers. Some people are content to hang and appreciate Kinkade, just like some people are content to spray and smell Happy, and they're welcome to. I don't want to disparage those who do; those things are just not for me. Perfume, like all forms of art, is a matter of taste, and to each his or her own. But, tastes can change, tastes do change, and as we branch out from the safe and familiar, we often find new, exciting, life-changing things. And if those things are weird at first, that's okay. If they stay weird in an unpleasant way, that's okay too. The most important thing is to find what you like and enjoy it.

So much of what determines what you think is "weird" is the accident of personal and historical taste. I guess that "weird" has a sort of useful social meaning if what you mean by "weird" is stuff that most people haven't been exposed to enough to feel that's it's acceptably familiar. But let's not confuse this with some sub-group of substances that were smuggled to earth from Planet Weirdo and that any clear-thinking, red-blooded man of the people will unfailingly turn up his nose at.
It's more like if you're from a Western culture the first time somebody serves you sweet beans it's weird; and if you're from an Eastern culture the first time someone serves you savory beans it's weird. The Man of Total Equilibrium will breathe deeply until his heart stops racing madly. He will smile and and ask questions and make discrete yummy noises for the benefit of the Mom present who made the beans. He knows that she is trying to please him, and that she is merely formed by a different culture. He will give it a try before he concludes anything.

curtis.w, great first post. Say more! Stick around!

(deleted)

for me i look for weirdness 1a and scent 1b, so some of the bn members have helped me a lot in that regard, because at least 95% of my purchase are blind buys.

Just some comments on the body-of-the-post inspired discussion:

I've never found any elitism among the longtime BNers. I value their opinions; I don't always agree with them. Nearly everyone around here affirms the importance of exploring perfumes on your own, reaching your own conclusions, discovering your own tastes. Some people get frustrated when they buy something blind on the basis of BN raves and discover they don't like it. Well...that's the danger of blind buying. But BN is also great for those like me who like to buy blind. I've come to have a pretty good idea of whose tastes I share and what reviewers I usually end up agreeing with. And that's the most valuable possible foundation for a blind buy. That being said, I always take responsibility for my own purchases, even if they don't work out.

Some people seem to simply hate negative reviews...especially of fragrances they like. That tendency contributes to the Turin-and-Sanchez bashing that occasionally breaks out around here. And lately it seems also to have spurred some attacks on longtime basenoters (some of which, it should be said, are unintentionally hilarious, though perhaps everso wouldn't agree!). My response: everyone should chill. There are almost certainly some fragrances you like which some SuperMember will one day denounce. It's not a big deal. You're still entitled to your opinion.

No. Thank you Johny...

Now that this thread has taken wing (hurrah - it's a good one!) I want to elaborate a bit on my initial late might response. In that post I said I valued novelty and originality (which could be taken as "weirdness") in fragrances. However, novelty alone does not make a good fragrance, or even one that will appeal to me. Originality might make me try a scent, but it won't necessarily make me wear it again - or like it. For that the scent must, as Guy Robert has been quoted, "smell good." Using an example cited elsewhere in this thread, consider Secretions Magnifiques. There is no doubt that it's original - it smells like no other scent I've tried. But its combination of stagnant pond, calone, and aldehydes is nothing that I want to smell again, much less wear. On the other hand there's the aforementioned Tubereuse Criminelle, which Galamb_Borong accurately describes as "wintergreen-tuberose." It's just as novel and far fetched, but I think it smells good. I think it smells good on me. So does my wife. If someone else (Dr. Turin perhaps?) wants to smell like Secretions Magnifiques, let them. I'm content to have worn it a couple of times, to have reviewed it, and to be rid of it.

All that said, tastes change and evolve. When I started reading Basenotes, I wore Jaipur Homme, Bvlgari Blv, and Tuscany almost exclusively. When I later began reviewing scents for the Directory, I was shocked and repelled by many scents that are now staples in my wardrobe. Oh how I laughed as I revised my old reviews of Santal Noble ("expensive suntan lotion"), Muscs Koublai Khan (something about "homeless people" and "unwashed orifices"), and Carnal Flower, about which I wrote "Sadly, Carnal Flower is also too resolutely floral for me to pull off. I'm just going to have to sell it to my wife ;-)." I did. She liked it better on me, and I've been wearing it ever since.

In closing, I'll repeat what I've said again and again when corresponding with newcomers: test fragrances, and follow your own nose. Test lots of them, and you may discover things you never thought you'd like. Just don't blame me when you start spending too much money...

No, weirdness or uniqueness is not necessary. I know what I like when I smell it. I wear what I like.

This hobby is totally subjective, so you should always rely on your own nose, and not the reviews or comments of others. Of course you can consider the comments of others, but I find that I often like frags that are not universally loved by others (and vice versa).

Sample everything.
Wear what you are attracted to.
Also, enjoy the diversity of opinion you can get here on BN.

Kind of funny, I just saw this thread.

Last night I went to a gallery for a big erotic art show in town. I put on a black jacket and jeans and spent about 20 minutes thinking about what fragrance would be appropriate for an over-the-top kind of vibe of such an event. I thought about my Comme des Garçons fragrances... Maybe Skai with its fake leather/PVC fetish smell... or Avignon with its rumors of Catholic guilt. Then I thought maybe something dirty and sexual-- maybe Kouros or one of its spinoffs...maybe a Creed like Acier Aluminium perhaps... How about something crazy like the gasoline smell of Santa Maria Novella Nostalgia?

I had all these great eye-popping choices circling around in my head. Then I cleared my head, walked over to my ample drobe and found myself getting out my Yves Saint Laurent L'Homme and spraying myself twice with it.

I didn't regret it. Sure, I might have enjoyed wearing one of my zanier colognes, but sometimes I'm just in the mood for L'Homme. I don't know why, but sometimes it really satisfies me. I thought it was a sad day for YSL when it was released, but once I experienced it I really came to like it. It's not really as boring as it seemed on first impression. L'Homme is really good.

I like the weird ones and I like the ones that smell good. Some manage to do both. It just depends what kind of mood I'm in.

I'll lay my thoughts out

1) I always try and believe that this board is so diverse that there will be pure niche people, pure designer people and in between

2) Since joining I have gone way outside my bounds and tried many niche and different fragrances and have enjoyed this part of the journey. Many of the different ones were unwearable to me but I got to see what they were all about. The differences made them special in many ways

3) #2 actually made me appreciate my simple tastes for designer ones more. Instead of heading into the niche or different phase I have gone back to loving the simple ones because simple makes me happy.

4) My main goal when coming here was advice, counsel and smelling goods. So being different didn't matter in the grand scheme of things but I loved smelling the differences to find my personal loves and to decide with more knowledge. In the long run, simple designer was good for me.

I just try to make it simple and when it comes down to it, I do think there are some snobs when it comes to different but I enjoyed being pushed to try many things. It help me discover what was important to me. I'm sure others will tell me I'll change..but I won't.


I'm with JWS below..Bravo!And it goes to my whole thing above. I came here to smell good, not make a statement about how different I can smell. I enjoy the journey byt it just brought me back to the same place..smelling nice no matter the rating or scent.

Amen brother!

Eric, TC, Indie, and Jock,
It is hereby ordered that you guys turn in your weird scents forthwith. For the purposes of verification your compliance, you'll need to send them to me. PM for address.

Oh, what a great thread!
Guys, I`m glad to be here - just to read that.

Weirdness is important. It awakes our noses and gives knowledges and broadens our scented horizons.
It could sell frags too, but much less than least common denominator scents.
And sure - weirdness alone just makes us curious. Then we could love it or loathe it.

As a side note - if Super Member feature does disturb someone, maybe it could be eliminated?

Johny, you live in a hot climate. The frags you mention above as being weird are suited for a cold climate...like where I live. Climate ( to me) is everything. Just because the fragrance is not suited for your climate does not make it weird.

To me, many hot weather fragrances smell weird. CSP Aqua Motu or Aramis Bermuda Tonic or Acqua di Gio pour Homme all smell weird to me. I had to give them away. I found them to be unwearable. At times, I regretted it. But most of the time I realize why I had to give them away.

Sure, it gets hot where I live. It is common to have 28 Celcius weather in summer ( where I Iive). But I tend to use more versatile fragrances for summer, such as Rive Gauche pour Homme and hopefully soon Mugler Cologne and Versace Baby Blue Jeans.

And as far as the fragrances with the "weird note" in them you mentioned, I find that not only do a lot of people like them, but a lot of people do not like them. And to say that YSL L'homme, Guerlain Homme and GpH 2 are "decent smelling frags", well some may say that they are not. Some fragrance users are revolted by the smell of tonka, black tea, myrhh or my all time worst enemy ...violet.



Better yet, just eliminate the "Super Members".

Excellent point! Something that smells weird at 80 degrees F may seem perfectly ordinary at 45 degrees. I often forget what the idiosynchratic temperatures (low) and humidity (high) in my "natural habitat" might do to a fragrance. As I think about it, even regional context could impact how "weird" a fragrance seems. For instance, the "lumberjack" aura of Parfum d'Habit might seem truly odd in say, Singapore, but it's perfectly natural in the context of the American Pacific Northwest's mountains and conifer forests.

Even in a moderate climate, seasons can change the experience of a fragrance, too. Victoria's seasons are fairly mild ( around 5C in winter and 20C in summer ), but Fleurs de Sel smells sour on me in summer and nicely green in winter.

Interesting discussion. Thank you for all who have participated so thoughtfully. It's refreshing to read a thread that brings out the thoughtful posters who think so clearly on the question.
Interestingly, I was just involved in a very similar discussion on a music forum, and I can remember having an almost identical, although much more heated argument in a Faulkner class many years ago. As a poster above pointed out, the issue of strangeness, novelty, and quality in art and its relation to the mainstream or the "comfortable" has been an issue in most areas of artistic endeavor Usually it becomes an opportunity for claims of elitism on the one hand and ignorance on the other. It's a testament to this community that we can avoid going there.


-Slim

For some people the whole "I smell like no-one else I know is important"; however, I think that some of us got into "weird" fragrances not as an act of rebelion or as an expression of individuality but as explorers of what the world of scent can offer. I came here looking for a nice musk scent and something light and citrusy for summer wear but before too long basenotes had taken me on an olfactory rollercoaster ride. The suggestions of the "super members" opened my eyes to the world of niche perfumery, without them there is no way I would have found Serge Lutens, Parfumerie Generale, Montale, Histoire de Parfums or many other houses that I consider an integral part of my current wardrobe.

I may be way off base, but I don't think many new members want Basenoters to suggest stuff that they can go check out at the local Perfumania or Macy's. Complaining that "super members" suggest "weird" fragrances or seem to discount many mainstream frags on a board dedicated to all things fragrant that has quite a few fragrance experts is a bit like going into an exotic restaurant and complaining that the wait staff only suggest "weird foods."

May I add that 'weirdness' in life is important, too!