Originally Posted by Diamondflame Bond No.9
entire line. I think I'm seriously put off by their packaging.
For me the kitsch of Bond is the same, but the effect is quite the opposite. I agree - many scents and bottle designs are kitschy - but in such an intentionally humorous way that it's hip. I just love that aspect of Bond. I swear, I'll bring my subway token-covered bottle of Wall Street with me when I go see the sequel to the movie. I might even spray my bottle around in the dark!
Originally Posted by WildThingy
Yeah, hard to tell. What in a scent - for itself letting the ads and descriptions, even the notes aside - could be considered kitsch? If we don't know that, what about art?
The people having tons of Creed-experience and hence a vast amount of upper class taste fumble around with notes that they take from a scent. What about good notes and bad notes. Which notes are boring, and which are kitsch?
Is perfumery an art that structured, well defined that certain takes on something can be neglected as kitsch?
It's weird with notes - I think it's so personal. One person's kitsch is another person's mainstream. Take the candy floss down under Oriental Lounge. Yes, it strikes many as kitschy. But it's great! It's like a classic ambery feminine with a "Like, let's hook up!" candy note sweetening it. And to all those people who go "Huh?" at the idea that candy floss has become kitschy, it's not even a question.
I think there are stages, where things transition from popular to boring and then dated and then retro. Depending on one's point of view, kitschiness enters somewhere around boring, but I think a lot of people have to be "not bored" for it to still have enough popularity to be kitschy. Hello Kitty is kitschy, but Dakko Chan is so dated and subject to historical and sociological debate, that it simply can't be kitschy in our current time.
Great subject, BTW.