Code of Conduct
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 128
  1. #1
    Moderator

    Redneck Perfumisto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Spiritually, Kansas
    Posts
    13,379
    Blog Entries
    37

    Cool Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    OK, people - who's back in the game? This one sounds pretty darn good. I already have ideas who he's talking about. In any case, let's get started on the fifth of Chandler Burr's Untitled series: S01E05

    Here's the new URL on OpenSky: https://opensky.com/chandlerburr/pro...-series-s01e05

    Chandler's description:

    The fascinating thing about S01E05 is that Mies van der Rohe’s famous dicturm of modernism, “less is more,” applies to it perfectly, yet so do the philosophical musings of pop singer Heidi Montag: “more is more.”

    S01E05’s artist is in my view one of the most exciting and talented around today. He is a quintessential contemporary perfumer, and I find his work, which is uniformly good-to-great, a guide to the future, seemingly effortless forward movement. We are, here, in the hands of neither a modernist (you don’t perceive the slightest interest in re-understanding the past from a different angle) nor a post-modernist (no tearing down, no violence, no temper tantrums). If he has absorbed the medium’s canon, here is a creator who never once looks over his shoulder.

    This is one of a number of works he has created for a spectacularly serious and well-directed house—a house intelligent enough to be awarding him numerous commissions—and one of the best in their collection. That is saying something because their collection is one of, I’d say, six or seven best in the world.

    E05 is a work in the literalist style, contemporary figuratism, almost photo realism. The name contains the object that the artist is ostensibly photographing, but like all photo realism this is aesthetic trick. The work is so much more. Its creator obviously knows the plush, gold-leaf-and scarlet-velvet romanticism of Aimé Guerlain’s Jicky (1889) and the 1999 version of Jicky, the brilliant synthetic-curtain post-Romanticist sensuality of Michel Almairac’s Rush. E05 is an ingenious 21st century romanticism that uses the olfactory photo to paint shadows within light, sensual and pungent nature, a realist dark green from an enchanted garden with rich soil and sinuous vines—a garden you retreat to with pleasure—and a beauty that looks you in the eye and smiles.

    The artist has made the technical choice of designing the work for evolution on skin. Wikipedia tells me, of Montag’s oeuvre, “Lyrically, the song is about going to the club with friends, drinking and receiving male attention. In the second half, the lyrics switch…to more sexual.” Sums it up.

    The turn-of-the-century Guerlains made statements. In the French style, they said something, specific and purposeful. They didn’t disappear like a cloak of nanoparticles on your skin. E05 makes a statement, but it does it without the French ego, vanity, or pomp. It is relaxed, it is intelligent. I suspect that if Guerlain were living now he’d either be creating this work or sincerely envying its artist.
    Good stuff. I'm all in!
    * * * *

  2. #2

    Somerville Metro Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Poolesville, MD
    Posts
    4,883
    Blog Entries
    13

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    Obviously I'm in.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Obviously I'm in.
    More writing on fragrance by me to be found at http://www.cafleurebon.com/

  3. #3
    Basenotes Plus
    PalmBeach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    3,214

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    In.

  4. #4
    Dependent Birdboy48's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Bend Oregon USA
    Posts
    1,132

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    As he so succinctly put it, "Soon".

  5. #5

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    I just received an email saying mine shipped. That was quick!

  6. #6
    Basenotes Plus
    PalmBeach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    3,214

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    ^^^ Same here.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    With all respect to Red, whose thread this is, I thought I'd post some questions that I'd like to see us all try to answer as we start experiencing this fragrance. Blame it on the fact that I'm in two book clubs and therefore have gotten in the habit of bringing questions for each book

    1. How does S01E05 make you feel? What mood does it create? When would you see yourself wearing it? Do you think others like it on you?
    2. In what way would you describe this fragrance as “less”? Is it minimalist?
    3. In what way is the fragrance “more”? Is it plush, rich, saturated? Is it sexy or sensual, and why? Is it romantic (in the 18th century sense), and why?
    4. Burr says the fragrance is literal, almost photo realism. Do you experience that characteristic, and if so, what do you think it is about the fragrance that causes this impression?

    Thanks!

  8. #8

    Somerville Metro Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Poolesville, MD
    Posts
    4,883
    Blog Entries
    13

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    Mine is also on its way according to my e-mail and I will attempt to answer these questions once I have a chance to wear it.

    The one thing in the intro which has me intrigued is that Chandler has mentioned he thinks this perfume house's collection is one of the top six or seven in the world.

    If we sort of take as a given that Guerlain and Chanel are probably one and two on his list which might be overextrapolation on my part anyone want to hazard any guesses on which house this could be before we have anything to sniff?

    I would think Frederic Malle would qualify but the price makes me think that isn't it.
    Maybe Annick Goutal and Isabelle Doyen? Or Cartier and Mathilde Laurent? i can see fragrances from both of those fitting his description.
    More writing on fragrance by me to be found at http://www.cafleurebon.com/

  9. #9

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    The text from CB uses the pronoun "he" to describe the composer. I think that eliminates Matilde Laurent and Isabelle Doyen.

    Way back when I got an art history degree. I feel uncomfortable using art history language to describe fragrance, but I want to be open minded and give it a try. With respect to the owner of the thread, here's my best shot.

    E05 is a romantic scent in the tradition of literal, figurative artists like Ingres. These artists use technique to try to solve some of the challenges painters have - like displaying a 3D figure on a 2D canvas. E05 was not created by a modernist, who like Manet, would flatten out the image and use technique to exaggerate the fact that paintings are 2D. In addition, E05 is not abstract, meaning that it is objective, again like Inges, but also like Manet. Pollock is a non-objective, abstract artist. So E05 uses scent to depcit an object in the 3D manner of the romantics. This literal figuratism is taken far enough so that is can be described as photo-realism. In photorealism, the painter paints a photo, and by doing so adds some of his or her internal reactions to it.

    There is some garden imagery in the description. Let's assume this is a rose scent, just for this example. The rose is literal, so much so that it is an olfactory photograph of a rose, but with some touches that come from the composers own internal ideas of a rose.

    This is my best first shot at using my art history to describe fragrance. Do others agree? Disagree?

    Note - I read a website to refresh myself, and that site mentioned Manet. Don't remember the URL.
    Last edited by Babsvs; 6th October 2012 at 04:15 AM.

  10. #10
    Moderator

    Redneck Perfumisto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Spiritually, Kansas
    Posts
    13,379
    Blog Entries
    37

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    Great posts, and - honestly - just because I started it, please don't feel like I own it. The way I see it, I just rented the space - y'all bring the party!
    * * * *

  11. #11

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    Perfume_Addict, good idea and good questions. Thanks for this.

  12. #12

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    Quote Originally Posted by Babsvs View Post
    The text from CB uses the pronoun "he" to describe the composer. I think that eliminates Matilde Laurent and Isabelle Doyen.

    Way back when I got an art history degree. I feel uncomfortable using art history language to describe fragrance, but I want to be open minded and give it a try. With respect to the owner of the thread, here's my best shot.

    E05 is a romantic scent in the tradition of literal, figurative artists like Ingres. These artists use technique to try to solve some of the challenges painters have - like displaying a 3D figure on a 2D canvas. E05 was not created by a modernist, who like Manet, would flatten out the image and use technique to exaggerate the fact that paintings are 2D. In addition, E05 is not abstract, meaning that it is objective, again like Inges, but also like Manet. Pollock is a non-objective, abstract artist. So E05 uses scent to depcit an object in the 3D manner of the romantics. This literal figuratism is taken far enough so that is can be described as photo-realism. In photorealism, the painter paints a photo, and by doing so adds some of his or her internal reactions to it.

    There is some garden imagery in the description. Let's assume this is a rose scent, just for this example. The rose is literal, so much so that it is an olfactory photograph of a rose, but with some touches that come from the composers own internal ideas of a rose.

    This is my best first shot at using my art history to describe fragrance. Do others agree? Disagree?

    Note - I read a website to refresh myself, and that site mentioned Manet. Don't remember the URL.
    Awesome description! I can't wait to try the fragrance. In the meantime, this is what I'm picturing based on the descriptions:



    Don't you love the glimpse of seashells in the drawer?
    Last edited by Perfume_Addict; 6th October 2012 at 03:52 PM.

  13. #13

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    I'll be following along, that's for sure.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Perfume_Addict View Post
    With all respect to Red, whose thread this is, I thought I'd post some questions that I'd like to see us all try to answer as we start experiencing this fragrance. Blame it on the fact that I'm in two book clubs and therefore have gotten in the habit of bringing questions for each book

    1. How does S01E05 make you feel? What mood does it create? When would you see yourself wearing it? Do you think others like it on you?
    2. In what way would you describe this fragrance as “less”? Is it minimalist?
    3. In what way is the fragrance “more”? Is it plush, rich, saturated? Is it sexy or sensual, and why? Is it romantic (in the 18th century sense), and why?
    4. Burr says the fragrance is literal, almost photo realism. Do you experience that characteristic, and if so, what do you think it is about the fragrance that causes this impression?

    Thanks!
    You bring up such an interesting topic. How do we (or perhaps how SHOULD we) perceive and describe perfume? I've been fascinated by my own reactions to the Untitled series versus how I react to scents I pick for sampling. I've touched on this before, but it's worth repeating because I think it's helpful to put more thought into how we judge what we smell in a perfume.

    When I pick a scent to sample, such as Molecule 01 (of which I'm expecting a sample to arrive any day now), I judge it as a piece of clothing. It's as if I'm standing in a dressing room with a pair of jeans or a shirt. I've seen the price tag. Now I judge the fit. Would I wear this?

    For some reason, when I smell these Untitled scents, I don't judge them as items of clothing. Hell, initially, I don't even know what piece of clothing it is.

    Maybe a restaurant analogy would fit better. Sampling a scent I've picked is like sitting at a table and receiving a plate with my dinner. I pick up a fork and knife to cut myself a piece, and I eat. But sampling an Untitled scent is like being in the kitchen and having the chef hand me a fork with something on it. I'm not sampling for the sake of eating. I may not even know what I'm trying. OH! YES! It reminds me of a time when I was a regular for Sunday brunch at a new restaurant years ago. One day, the chef came out to our table and dropped off some bread and a small bowl. He said "Hey, I've seen you in here a lot. Here's a little something to try. I'll tell you what it is after you've had a chance to taste it. It's just a little something neat that probably won't ever make it on the menu." It was bizarre. At first, I hated it because it didn't make sense. But it was strangely addictive and actually quite delicious. When he returned and told me what it was, I realized why he didn't want me to know before trying. If he'd said "It's orange marmalade and horseradish" I would have assumed it was going to be pretty gross. And yeah, my first taste really threw me for a loop, but wow was it tasty! And it was fun to taste without expectations.

    Many people get caught up in hype and they judge a scent based on its hype. They judge expectations. Aventus is a perfect example. So many smell it NOT to decide if they like it, but rather to decide if it lives up to their expectations based on the hype. I don't care about hype. I just smelled it to see if I liked it and if it wore well on me.

    I really thought this Untitled Series was Mr. Burr's attempt to teach people to ignore hype and just smell for the sake of smelling. But I was wrong. I was wrong about the hype part, anyway. I'm not entirely sure he's trying to teach us anything. I think he's just presenting scents with as few expectations as possible. I suspect this is as much a learning process for him as it is for us.

    ...getting back to the questions in the list above...

    Question #4 is particularly tricky. I can guarantee the answer for me would be no, not because I'd disagree with Mr. Burr. It's just that I don't experience scent as a physical object, like a painting for this example. I don't experience taste that way either. I experience scent as an experience, redundant as that may sound. Scent takes me to a time and place and memory. To my nose, literal would mean natural - a smell I know from the real world. And abstract would mean a scent that can only be created in a lab. I don't see a picture. I feel myself in a place.
    "Follow your nose. It always knows." -- Toucan Sam

  14. #14

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    Quote Originally Posted by L'Homme Blanc Individuel View Post
    You bring up such an interesting topic. How do we (or perhaps how SHOULD we) perceive and describe perfume? I've been fascinated by my own reactions to the Untitled series versus how I react to scents I pick for sampling. I've touched on this before, but it's worth repeating because I think it's helpful to put more thought into how we judge what we smell in a perfume.

    When I pick a scent to sample, such as Molecule 01 (of which I'm expecting a sample to arrive any day now), I judge it as a piece of clothing. It's as if I'm standing in a dressing room with a pair of jeans or a shirt. I've seen the price tag. Now I judge the fit. Would I wear this?

    For some reason, when I smell these Untitled scents, I don't judge them as items of clothing. Hell, initially, I don't even know what piece of clothing it is.

    Maybe a restaurant analogy would fit better. Sampling a scent I've picked is like sitting at a table and receiving a plate with my dinner. I pick up a fork and knife to cut myself a piece, and I eat. But sampling an Untitled scent is like being in the kitchen and having the chef hand me a fork with something on it. I'm not sampling for the sake of eating. I may not even know what I'm trying. OH! YES! It reminds me of a time when I was a regular for Sunday brunch at a new restaurant years ago. One day, the chef came out to our table and dropped off some bread and a small bowl. He said "Hey, I've seen you in here a lot. Here's a little something to try. I'll tell you what it is after you've had a chance to taste it. It's just a little something neat that probably won't ever make it on the menu." It was bizarre. At first, I hated it because it didn't make sense. But it was strangely addictive and actually quite delicious. When he returned and told me what it was, I realized why he didn't want me to know before trying. If he'd said "It's orange marmalade and horseradish" I would have assumed it was going to be pretty gross. And yeah, my first taste really threw me for a loop, but wow was it tasty! And it was fun to taste without expectations.

    Many people get caught up in hype and they judge a scent based on its hype. They judge expectations. Aventus is a perfect example. So many smell it NOT to decide if they like it, but rather to decide if it lives up to their expectations based on the hype. I don't care about hype. I just smelled it to see if I liked it and if it wore well on me.

    I really thought this Untitled Series was Mr. Burr's attempt to teach people to ignore hype and just smell for the sake of smelling. But I was wrong. I was wrong about the hype part, anyway. I'm not entirely sure he's trying to teach us anything. I think he's just presenting scents with as few expectations as possible. I suspect this is as much a learning process for him as it is for us.

    ...getting back to the questions in the list above...

    Question #4 is particularly tricky. I can guarantee the answer for me would be no, not because I'd disagree with Mr. Burr. It's just that I don't experience scent as a physical object, like a painting for this example. I don't experience taste that way either. I experience scent as an experience, redundant as that may sound. Scent takes me to a time and place and memory. To my nose, literal would mean natural - a smell I know from the real world. And abstract would mean a scent that can only be created in a lab. I don't see a picture. I feel myself in a place.
    Really really loving this piece LHBI It resonates perfectly with how I feel about fragrance and its link with memory, actually 1 of the few things that have been scientifically investigated and there is progress in that area: scent and memory are indeed neurologically and neuro-psychologically linked!

    It also explains perfectly why I have no idea how to place scent into any art history context, unless I have strong memories linked with particular art pieces or art movements. For me, not something that occurs often.

    So thank you, for sharing your view!!!

    Great questions btw @Perfume_addict!
    @SomethingSmelly

  15. #15

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    Quote Originally Posted by L'Homme Blanc Individuel View Post
    Question #4 is particularly tricky. I can guarantee the answer for me would be no, not because I'd disagree with Mr. Burr. It's just that I don't experience scent as a physical object, like a painting for this example. I don't experience taste that way either. I experience scent as an experience, redundant as that may sound. Scent takes me to a time and place and memory. To my nose, literal would mean natural - a smell I know from the real world. And abstract would mean a scent that can only be created in a lab. I don't see a picture. I feel myself in a place.
    I completely agree with the comments (your and Irina's) about scent and memory. Its what made me a perfume_addict: I became enthralled with fragrance when I had a sort of flashback experience. I sniffed a fragrance I hadn't worn or smelled since college, and was transported back the the moment I last remembered wearing it, complete with a memory of the Diane von Furstenburg-style dress I'd worn and my shoes and hair style. Ah, if only it really could take me back!

    But not every moment of our life is highly-charged with emotion, and therefore not every scent/smell becomes entwined with an emotionally powerful memory. It seems like there should be smell-references (memories?) that are more analytic, or purely functional, like vocabulary. And in the case of some of those, they might be associated with images or sounds which are themselves associated with defined art movements (e.g. Romanticism.)

    But if that's not how you experience scent, that's okay. It can certainly be interesting to learn how other people do. And don't assume that the way you perceive scent will always remain the same. I've been exploring fragrance for over a decade, and there have been many evolutions in how I perceive scent. Ultimately you smell with your brain, and therefore you "learn" as you experience scent.

  16. #16

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    I'm in! I played with S01E02, but skipped the others. I look forward to answering Perfume_Addict's questions, which seem a good way to start talking about it, based on Mr. Burr's description.

    It's very interesting, this question of "how" we perceive scent, and what makes us want to own/wear something. When sniffing something new, I don't usually have an emotional reaction, unless it reminds me very powerfully of something I already own. Rather, I find myself, much like I do with music, trying to understand how it is put together and how it relates to my specific aesthetics. Is is beautifully/arrestingly/humorously composed? Can I see myself wearing it (i.e., can it exist both on its own merits and also become part of my day-to-day identity, or is it too unlike me), and does it hold my attention into the dry down? Dry downs are everything to me.

    Emotion only comes into play as I begin to wear it and accumulate experiences while wearing it. If I leave a scent for a while and then put it on, I'm reminded immediately of what I was doing and who I was with the last time I wore it. If it's a scent I continue to wear, those memories are always being overridden by new ones.

    Which is why it becomes almost impossible for me to wear something that I haven't worn in many years, maybe even a couple decades. The memories associated are too strong, or too beloved, and I don't want to supplant them. The perfume serves instead as a kind of snapshot for me and must be preserved as such.

  17. #17

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    PerfumeAddict - The piece you posted is exactly the sort of painting that I see 05 as! It is literal, there are definable objects in the paiting, and the painter is using his technique to make the objects look more realistic. The only small tweak I might make is to choose a photo realists depiction of the still life, but I think that is a small matter of taste only.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Perfume_Addict View Post
    With all respect to Red, whose thread this is, I thought I'd post some questions that I'd like to see us all try to answer as we start experiencing this fragrance. Blame it on the fact that I'm in two book clubs and therefore have gotten in the habit of bringing questions for each book

    1. How does S01E05 make you feel? What mood does it create? When would you see yourself wearing it? Do you think others like it on you?
    2. In what way would you describe this fragrance as “less”? Is it minimalist?
    3. In what way is the fragrance “more”? Is it plush, rich, saturated? Is it sexy or sensual, and why? Is it romantic (in the 18th century sense), and why?
    4. Burr says the fragrance is literal, almost photo realism. Do you experience that characteristic, and if so, what do you think it is about the fragrance that causes this impression?

    Thanks!
    I am eager to answer your questions on the 9th or 10th when my E05 arrives. I paticularly love questions 2,3,4.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Somerville Metro Man View Post
    Mine is also on its way according to my e-mail and I will attempt to answer these questions once I have a chance to wear it.

    The one thing in the intro which has me intrigued is that Chandler has mentioned he thinks this perfume house's collection is one of the top six or seven in the world.

    If we sort of take as a given that Guerlain and Chanel are probably one and two on his list which might be overextrapolation on my part anyone want to hazard any guesses on which house this could be before we have anything to sniff?

    I would think Frederic Malle would qualify but the price makes me think that isn't it.
    Maybe Annick Goutal and Isabelle Doyen? Or Cartier and Mathilde Laurent? i can see fragrances from both of those fitting his description.
    I like your question. I am thinking Bertrand Duchaufour for L'Artisan Parfumeur. I like his olfactory photos of Timbuktu, Bhutan (Dzongkha), Havana (Vanille Asolument) and Istanbul (Traversee du Bosphore). I think that these fragrances describe literal subjects, in this case cities. Also, LAP has awarded him with multiple commissions, and LAP is a by most accounts a well run house.
    Last edited by Babsvs; 7th October 2012 at 02:00 AM.

  18. #18

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    Quote Originally Posted by Babsvs View Post
    PerfumeAddict - The piece you posted is exactly the sort of painting that I see 05 as! It is literal, there are definable objects in the painting, and the painter is using his technique to make the objects look more realistic. The only small tweak I might make is to choose a photo realists depiction of the still life, but I think that is a small matter of taste only.

    I like your question. I am thinking Bertrand Duchaufour for L'Artisan Parfumeur. I like his olfactory photos of Timbuktu, Bhutan (Dzongkha), Havana (Vanille Asolument) and Istanbul (Traversee du Bosphore). I think that these fragrances describe literal subjects, in this case cities. Also, LAP has awarded him with multiple commissions, and LAP is a by most accounts a well run house.
    I couldn't find a still life that was Romantic and used photo realism, so I settled for Romantic.

    Now that you mention it, L'Artisan Parfumeur is one of the perfume houses I appreciate most, and the only one that often rates the wearing of multiple scents in the course of a week. (This week included L'eau d'Ambre, Premier Figuier and Dzing.) I wouldn't be disappointed if one of the Untitled Series scents was from L'Artisan.

  19. #19

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    Quote Originally Posted by Perfume_Addict View Post
    I couldn't find a still life that was Romantic and used photo realism, so I settled for Romantic.

    Now that you mention it, L'Artisan Parfumeur is one of the perfume houses I appreciate most, and the only one that often rates the wearing of multiple scents in the course of a week. (This week included L'eau d'Ambre, Premier Figuier and Dzing.) I wouldn't be disappointed if one of the Untitled Series scents was from L'Artisan.
    I wouldn't begin to know where to find a photo realistic, romantic painting. The painting in my reply is in my mind only, and I hope I did not offend you. I thought the piece you picked was great, and yes, I do love the shells.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by PerfumePorMoi View Post
    I'm in! I played with S01E02, but skipped the others. I look forward to answering Perfume_Addict's questions, which seem a good way to start talking about it, based on Mr. Burr's description.

    It's very interesting, this question of "how" we perceive scent, and what makes us want to own/wear something. When sniffing something new, I don't usually have an emotional reaction, unless it reminds me very powerfully of something I already own. Rather, I find myself, much like I do with music, trying to understand how it is put together and how it relates to my specific aesthetics. Is is beautifully/arrestingly/humorously composed? Can I see myself wearing it (i.e., can it exist both on its own merits and also become part of my day-to-day identity, or is it too unlike me), and does it hold my attention into the dry down? Dry downs are everything to me.

    Emotion only comes into play as I begin to wear it and accumulate experiences while wearing it. If I leave a scent for a while and then put it on, I'm reminded immediately of what I was doing and who I was with the last time I wore it. If it's a scent I continue to wear, those memories are always being overridden by new ones.

    Which is why it becomes almost impossible for me to wear something that I haven't worn in many years, maybe even a couple decades. The memories associated are too strong, or too beloved, and I don't want to supplant them. The perfume serves instead as a kind of snapshot for me and must be preserved as such.
    Your discussion is so interesting. I respond to art, perfume, and music all in the same way. I remember being in 5th grade and' the art teacher got some slides and did an art history lecture. Two of the pieces he showed were Bonnard's The Breakfast Room and Turner's Norham Castle at Dawn. The best way to describe it is that I felt like something in me melted from being in the presence of the pieces and I felt instantly close to the painters. I have reproductions of these pieces framed and hanging in my home. I don't have anything by Raphael or Picasso. They are masters, but they don't make me "melt". I have a more intellectual appreciation of their work.

    I choose fragrances in exactly the same way. At about the same age as Turner and Bonnard, I smelled Houbiagant's Chantilly and was just knocked away by it. Over time, I've had the same "melting" response to LHB, Jicky, Colony, Eau de Guerlain, Maharanih, Vanilia, Timbuktu, Jeux de Peau, Fille en Aiguille, La Petite Robe Noir (2009), and recently Talisman and Rumba. I'll wear a fragrance that I don't have that response to, but I probably won't buy a FB. If it's reformulated or d/c, I could live with that.

    So for me, I have the same non-verbal delight in both art and fragrance that just knock me over.

  20. #20

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    Quote Originally Posted by Perfume_Addict View Post
    I completely agree with the comments (your and Irina's) about scent and memory. Its what made me a perfume_addict: I became enthralled with fragrance when I had a sort of flashback experience. I sniffed a fragrance I hadn't worn or smelled since college, and was transported back the the moment I last remembered wearing it, complete with a memory of the Diane von Furstenburg-style dress I'd worn and my shoes and hair style. Ah, if only it really could take me back!

    But not every moment of our life is highly-charged with emotion, and therefore not every scent/smell becomes entwined with an emotionally powerful memory. It seems like there should be smell-references (memories?) that are more analytic, or purely functional, like vocabulary. And in the case of some of those, they might be associated with images or sounds which are themselves associated with defined art movements (e.g. Romanticism.)

    But if that's not how you experience scent, that's okay. It can certainly be interesting to learn how other people do. And don't assume that the way you perceive scent will always remain the same. I've been exploring fragrance for over a decade, and there have been many evolutions in how I perceive scent. Ultimately you smell with your brain, and therefore you "learn" as you experience scent.
    So very true indeed. With 'memory' I don't necessarily mean a highly emotional experience but simply human experience. Like I will forever associate E03 L'Etrog with this project and our discussions here, the way the movie 'Inception' and the book 'Fifty Shades of Grey' made me feel and the yoga class where I first wore it. Some other scents I associate with specific materials and how they came into my life through olfactory training, indeed like smell-references. There are certain pieces of art that I associate with a particular smell, simply because I was wearing/smelling that fragrance when experiencing them for the first time.

    The abstract functional fragrance, for example when I design a fragrance for an air refresher is the most cerebral of all, but even then I have a memory in my mind that I associate with 'fresh', 'clean', 'seasonal' or whatever the brief is. I also often imagine how my fragrance would make people feel.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by PerfumePorMoi View Post
    It's very interesting, this question of "how" we perceive scent, and what makes us want to own/wear something. When sniffing something new, I don't usually have an emotional reaction, unless it reminds me very powerfully of something I already own. Rather, I find myself, much like I do with music, trying to understand how it is put together and how it relates to my specific aesthetics. Is is beautifully/arrestingly/humorously composed? Can I see myself wearing it (i.e., can it exist both on its own merits and also become part of my day-to-day identity, or is it too unlike me), and does it hold my attention into the dry down? Dry downs are everything to me.

    Emotion only comes into play as I begin to wear it and accumulate experiences while wearing it. If I leave a scent for a while and then put it on, I'm reminded immediately of what I was doing and who I was with the last time I wore it. If it's a scent I continue to wear, those memories are always being overridden by new ones.

    Which is why it becomes almost impossible for me to wear something that I haven't worn in many years, maybe even a couple decades. The memories associated are too strong, or too beloved, and I don't want to supplant them. The perfume serves instead as a kind of snapshot for me and must be preserved as such.
    Wonderfully worded, thank you for sharing! I recognize so much in what you tell. Besides that I'm all about top notes, materials and construction are very very important to me (duh cos of my profession )
    @SomethingSmelly

  21. #21

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    Quote Originally Posted by Irina View Post
    So very true indeed. With 'memory' I don't necessarily mean a highly emotional experience but simply human experience. Like I will forever associate E03 L'Etrog with this project and our discussions here, the way the movie 'Inception' and the book 'Fifty Shades of Grey' made me feel and the yoga class where I first wore it. Some other scents I associate with specific materials and how they came into my life through olfactory training, indeed like smell-references. There are certain pieces of art that I associate with a particular smell, simply because I was wearing/smelling that fragrance when experiencing them for the first time.

    The abstract functional fragrance, for example when I design a fragrance for an air refresher is the most cerebral of all, but even then I have a memory in my mind that I associate with 'fresh', 'clean', 'seasonal' or whatever the brief is. I also often imagine how my fragrance would make people feel.

    - - - Updated - - -
    Yes, that seems to be it exactly for me as well.

    Although, now that I've thought about it more in depth, I have had a couple highly charged emotional responses to perfumes--ones that I'd never smelled before. Tauer's Lonestar Memories and Guerlain's Après L'ondée. Lonestar because it smells so much like where I live and Après because it is so, so melancholy and full of longing. But I can't think of any other perfume, even the most beautiful and treasured in my collection, that evoked a response in quite that way.

    For the most part, my "emotional" responses to works of art, including perfumes, are more in the vein of what you describe. More than anything, I am trying to relate them to myself and my view of the world. Does it fit my sense of self and, for lack of a better word, my sense of life?

  22. #22

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    Quote Originally Posted by PerfumePorMoi View Post
    Yes, that seems to be it exactly for me as well.

    Although, now that I've thought about it more in depth, I have had a couple highly charged emotional responses to perfumes--ones that I'd never smelled before. Tauer's Lonestar Memories and Guerlain's Après L'ondée. Lonestar because it smells so much like where I live and Après because it is so, so melancholy and full of longing. But I can't think of any other perfume, even the most beautiful and treasured in my collection, that evoked a response in quite that way.

    For the most part, my "emotional" responses to works of art, including perfumes, are more in the vein of what you describe. More than anything, I am trying to relate them to myself and my view of the world. Does it fit my sense of self and, for lack of a better word, my sense of life?
    Can totally relate. I think I wrote about this somewhere calling fragrance art as provoking a 'visceral' reaction, like you either 'love' a fragrance or 'hate' it. Non-artful fragrances can be 'nice', 'lovely' or any more medium or mediocre adjectives. Visceral art hits me deep (like in my gut, the quintessential of me). It certainly is a very subjective point of view and that makes it hard for me to actually categorize fragrance within the frames of art history.

    But maybe that's how art works? That one can learn to appreciate artfulness in a cerebral way minus the visceral reaction?
    Art connoisseurs please help?
    @SomethingSmelly

  23. #23

    Somerville Metro Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Poolesville, MD
    Posts
    4,883
    Blog Entries
    13

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    My most emotional reaction to any piece of art I ever had was to Marc Chagall's America Windows at the Chicago museum of Art.
    It was the first time I felt tears roll down my cheek at the impact of art, it would not be the last.
    At first it was the subject matter but it was the subject matter and the manner of it which reached inside and gripped me to show emotion. But after the emotion faded I began to analyze what was special about it. The use of stained glass as a medium. The choice of a deep color of blue as the spatial filler to enhance the non-blue pieces resonated to my sight with a particular beauty.
    The last few sentences are me speaking about the "notes" of this particular piece of art but it is the context of the emotion it evokes in me and in my mind the relating of my response requires both aspects.
    More writing on fragrance by me to be found at http://www.cafleurebon.com/

  24. #24

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    Quote Originally Posted by Irina View Post
    Can totally relate. I think I wrote about this somewhere calling fragrance art as provoking a 'visceral' reaction, like you either 'love' a fragrance or 'hate' it. Non-artful fragrances can be 'nice', 'lovely' or any more medium or mediocre adjectives. Visceral art hits me deep (like in my gut, the quintessential of me). It certainly is a very subjective point of view and that makes it hard for me to actually categorize fragrance within the frames of art history.

    But maybe that's how art works? That one can learn to appreciate artfulness in a cerebral way minus the visceral reaction?
    Art connoisseurs please help?
    What an interesting point that you raise. I think as either the nose or eyes are exposed to more fragrance or visual art, they learn and become more able to take in and appreciate more. As an example, Northern Renaissance art has never made me gasp at it's beauty. I love learning about the detail of painters like Van Eyck, but I don't feel a need to have a van Eyck reproduction in my home. On the other hand, a fishhook made by an anonymous Eskimo fisherman just did me in. It looks like a sculpture to me. With fragrance (or art or food or music) I think that our ability to appreciate and like more and more evolves as we smell more. One of the fragrances that really strikes me and helped open my mind is CdG Stephen Jones. I am intrigued by this "modern art" scent. I always have a decant around. It's not FBW for me though, as it doesn't send me over the moon. I consider this to be completely subjective. Duchafour's Timbuktu sends me to the moon and back. I wore it all summer. Some days, I have to consciously reach for something else so that I am not wearing it every day. Five days ago I tried Jubilation XXV for the first time. It is the first scent since Timbuktu that a scent just knocked me over. I wish I knew why some art from every discipline moves me, and other art may interest me intensely, but I do not have the same deep reaction to it.

    I once took some Jungian training. Their theory (I may not have this completely right) is that we all have unconscious parts within in our psyche that are party from our personal history, and partly from the history of our families going back over the generations. These parts (complexes) cause us to be infatuated with a person or a piece of art.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Somerville Metro Man View Post
    My most emotional reaction to any piece of art I ever had was to Marc Chagall's America Windows at the Chicago museum of Art.
    It was the first time I felt tears roll down my cheek at the impact of art, it would not be the last.
    At first it was the subject matter but it was the subject matter and the manner of it which reached inside and gripped me to show emotion. But after the emotion faded I began to analyze what was special about it. The use of stained glass as a medium. The choice of a deep color of blue as the spatial filler to enhance the non-blue pieces resonated to my sight with a particular beauty.
    The last few sentences are me speaking about the "notes" of this particular piece of art but it is the context of the emotion it evokes in me and in my mind the relating of my response requires both aspects.

    Oh wow yes. It is this way for me too. The deep emotion comes first, and then I want to learn the details.

  25. #25

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    Quote Originally Posted by Somerville Metro Man View Post
    My most emotional reaction to any piece of art I ever had was to Marc Chagall's America Windows at the Chicago museum of Art.
    It was the first time I felt tears roll down my cheek at the impact of art, it would not be the last.
    At first it was the subject matter but it was the subject matter and the manner of it which reached inside and gripped me to show emotion. But after the emotion faded I began to analyze what was special about it. The use of stained glass as a medium. The choice of a deep color of blue as the spatial filler to enhance the non-blue pieces resonated to my sight with a particular beauty.
    The last few sentences are me speaking about the "notes" of this particular piece of art but it is the context of the emotion it evokes in me and in my mind the relating of my response requires both aspects.
    OMG Chagall is my all time favorite artist, it moves me sooo deep, just like you describe! I love how you link that to the artistic details, and the mind & soul connection, totally agree.

    Quote Originally Posted by Babsvs View Post
    What an interesting point that you raise. I think as either the nose or eyes are exposed to more fragrance or visual art, they learn and become more able to take in and appreciate more. As an example, Northern Renaissance art has never made me gasp at it's beauty. I love learning about the detail of painters like Van Eyck, but I don't feel a need to have a van Eyck reproduction in my home. On the other hand, a fishhook made by an anonymous Eskimo fisherman just did me in. It looks like a sculpture to me. With fragrance (or art or food or music) I think that our ability to appreciate and like more and more evolves as we smell more. One of the fragrances that really strikes me and helped open my mind is CdG Stephen Jones. I am intrigued by this "modern art" scent. I always have a decant around. It's not FBW for me though, as it doesn't send me over the moon. I consider this to be completely subjective. Duchafour's Timbuktu sends me to the moon and back. I wore it all summer. Some days, I have to consciously reach for something else so that I am not wearing it every day. Five days ago I tried Jubilation XXV for the first time. It is the first scent since Timbuktu that a scent just knocked me over. I wish I knew why some art from every discipline moves me, and other art may interest me intensely, but I do not have the same deep reaction to it.

    I once took some Jungian training. Their theory (I may not have this completely right) is that we all have unconscious parts within in our psyche that are party from our personal history, and partly from the history of our families going back over the generations. These parts (complexes) cause us to be infatuated with a person or a piece of art.

    Oh wow yes. It is this way for me too. The deep emotion comes first, and then I want to learn the details.
    The last line, yes, absolutely! I must say though that a less desirable effect of spending intimate attention to the details that compose fragrance (cq ingredients or actually meeting the artist), for me, is that some fragrances lose their 'magic'. Sometimes is better to not know and just imagine and experience.

    And I totally get your desire of changing fragrance, even when you dearly love that one so much. It's wonderful to come back home to a beloved after a short separation

    Also big fan of Jung, to me he is the magical realist of psychology. Very much like Chagall. Absolutely non-relevant from a scientific point of view but so wonderful to dream about the possibilities. There is so much we still don't know nor understand. There's where art comes in, imho, it gives us hope and understanding that we are all connected on a subliminal level that simply cannot all be explained intellectually.

    p.s. wouldn't be awesome to get a fragrance in this series that would fit 'magical realism'??? I would totally buy that!
    Last edited by Irina; 9th October 2012 at 07:16 AM.
    @SomethingSmelly

  26. #26

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    I received my E05 today. I am not ready for any kind of real description of it. I can say that the opening is unique. For about 5 seconds there is some wood, and then there is a green, vegetable sort of note with some lemon and salt. I have to be honest, it smells like cucumber to me.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Perfume_Addict View Post
    With all respect to Red, whose thread this is, I thought I'd post some questions that I'd like to see us all try to answer as we start experiencing this fragrance. Blame it on the fact that I'm in two book clubs and therefore have gotten in the habit of bringing questions for each book

    1. How does S01E05 make you feel? What mood does it create? When would you see yourself wearing it? Do you think others like it on you?
    2. In what way would you describe this fragrance as “less”? Is it minimalist?
    3. In what way is the fragrance “more”? Is it plush, rich, saturated? Is it sexy or sensual, and why? Is it romantic (in the 18th century sense), and why?
    4. Burr says the fragrance is literal, almost photo realism. Do you experience that characteristic, and if so, what do you think it is about the fragrance that causes this impression?

    Thanks!
    I now feel ready to answer perfume addict's questions

    1. I am sorry to say that S05 did not evoke any feeling in me, and I can't see myself wearing it. That might change, and I might change toward it, but I didn't get a strong feeling of any sort. It certainly seems well contructed with a green/citrus opening, a floral green heart and a very long lasting wood drydown.

    2. It is minimalist in that I did not smell a bouquet of notes. I got citrus, something green (cucumber?) and salt up top. The cucumber proceeded into the heart, and became a green floral. The drydown seemed like one wood note for quite a long time. I did get more is more only in the duration of the wood drydown. The scent is not at all sensual in my opinion. I did not get the reference to the song Mr. Burr referenced in E05.

    3. E05 does not strike me as plush or rich. The wood and cucumber/citrus are saturated. As mentioned above, this is not my idea of sexy or sensual, but surely that is subjective. It is not at all romantic in the 18th century sense of the word. Romantics like Goethe (Young Werther), Byron, Keats, Whitman or Delacroix were concerned with the beauty of nature, the sensitivity of the artist, and spirituality. To quote Whitman from Song of Myself

    Houses and rooms are full of perfumes, the shelves are
    crowded with perfumes,
    I breathe the fragrance myself and know it and like it,
    The distillation would intoxicate me also, but I shall not let it.

    The atmosphere is not a perfume, it has no taste of the
    distillation, it is odorless,
    It is for my mouth forever, I am in love with it,
    I will go to the bank by the wood and become undisguised
    and naked,
    I am mad for it to be in contact with me.


    When I think of a scent that is in the romantic tradition, using pretty much anything by the painter Delacroix as a reference, I think of Jubilation XXV or Portrait of a Lady.

    4. I did get a very strong literal image of a cucumber. I think that it is very possible that I have this note completely wrong. I did spend a fair amount of time with the top, but I need to try it again. I think that I may have had a literal image in my mind from the text. I saw an overgrown garden with rich dark earth and vines that were climbing up the side of a house or even the trees. I didn't get that at all from E05. Again, I need to go back and see if this is a different garden than I was imagining from the scent. I was imagining something like Une Rose or even Apres l'Ondee. My ideal enchanted gardens are the one from The Secret Garden or from a Midsummer Night's Dream. There is nothing in the description that indicates flower garden, so maybe this is more of a vegetable garden? Again, I need to re-visit the beginning.

    I also did not get any interplay of shadows and light. I really tried to find this. IMO once a note establishes itself, it holds center stage, and there were no other notes creeping in from the shadows. Again, I need to smell this again.
    Last edited by Babsvs; 10th October 2012 at 06:44 AM.

  27. #27

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    Thank you for sharing @Babsvs, sounds like you're disappointed?
    @SomethingSmelly

  28. #28

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    Yes. I am disappointed in the description of the fragrance and not in the fragrance iteself. I was very taken in with the description, and I do no think it reflects the scent. I do want to remain open minded. I'd like to try the fragrance again to see where I might be mistaken. At this point it seems like Jean Claude Ellena minimalism with a long lasting wood bottom to me.
    What do others think?

  29. #29
    Moderator

    Redneck Perfumisto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Spiritually, Kansas
    Posts
    13,379
    Blog Entries
    37

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    Quote Originally Posted by Perfume_Addict View Post
    1. How does S01E05 make you feel? What mood does it create? When would you see yourself wearing it? Do you think others like it on you?
    2. In what way would you describe this fragrance as “less”? Is it minimalist?
    3. In what way is the fragrance “more”? Is it plush, rich, saturated? Is it sexy or sensual, and why? Is it romantic (in the 18th century sense), and why?
    4. Burr says the fragrance is literal, almost photo realism. Do you experience that characteristic, and if so, what do you think it is about the fragrance that causes this impression?
    *sigh*

    I thought I knew what this was when I smelled it, but my first guess only led me to the artist. The second guess, to the fragrance. My sample is a bit concentrated, but I don't think I've ever smelled anything quite like this one, so I'm rather confident in what it is. It *could* actually be what I first thought, which I only own in a body product, but I think of these two fragrances as very similar, so it's six of one, half a dozen of the other.

    For a brief while, however, I wasn't completely sure what it was, and I saw it from a different perspective. The experience renewed my appreciation for the fragrance, and the artist.

    I have avoided reading babsvs's impressions so that these will be as independent as possible.

    1. How does S01E05 make you feel? What mood does it create? When would you see yourself wearing it? Do you think others like it on you?

    Wistful. I'm a country boy at heart, and this one still gives me a very "outdoor" feeling. The smell of fields when I would walk through them on the way to the fishing hole. I want to wear this on a spring or fall day, when the bright sun is either starting to come out, or is making its final, warming, fall appearances.

    I would have to say, I don't really care if others like it on me. I enjoy this one to be alone with it, like I'm in a museum. When I'm in the museum, my wife does nothing but bug me to keep moving. No. I want to enjoy this alone, and spend as much time with it as I want. It makes me reflective. I like that.

    2. In what way would you describe this fragrance as “less”? Is it minimalist?

    This fragrance is not what I would call a perfume. It's less than that. It's not big, or bold or what I was expecting (that Chandler would really "change it up" with E05). Is it minimalist? Yes, I think so. In fact, I was going to tar and feather our buddy Chandler with the neologism "chandlerspace", to describe the specific cross-section of fragrance-space that all of his five wispy, transparent, and minimalist true loves seem to inhabit. It's an interesting place, but numerically speaking, it's rather short on black holes and gothic knuckle-draggers.

    3. In what way is the fragrance “more”? Is it plush, rich, saturated? Is it sexy or sensual, and why? Is it romantic (in the 18th century sense), and why?

    While it's less than a perfume, it's more than an eau de cologne. It's very interesting. It's minimal and transparent, and has no more volume (in the "But my amp goes up to 11!" sense) than most of the others we've looked at in the Untitled series. But despite this, it's opaque in a milky, frosty, photo-through-linen way.

    The words plush, rich, sexy and sensual don't really work for me here because of my rustic associations. HOWEVER, this fragrance could be worn in a sexy or sensual way with the right clothing. To me it wants light-colored, natural fabrics, like a summer dress or a cotton shirt, and to be worn on bare skin with them. It evokes a state of coolness or gentle warmth, and dryness, so it's not a clubbing scent - it's a "let's take a drive in the country" scent.

    I'm not an art expert, though I feel like I "get" romanticism in paintings. I looked at a fair number of paintings labeled as Romantic, and this one is the one that spoke to me about my enjoyment of the scent:



    The image that actually spoke to me about the scent itself is, strangely, a photo (in beginning to answer the next question)...

    4. Burr says the fragrance is literal, almost photo realism. Do you experience that characteristic, and if so, what do you think it is about the fragrance that causes this impression?



    I loved this enough to actually buy a print of it. Just like I have come very close to buying this fragrance before.

    I think in many ways, yes. There is something natural and very real about it. If I could strip the idea of "The Good Earth" of all Asian connotations - even the novel - and just leave it as an idea of a sort of passive glorification of the idyllic, that applies anywhere - it has that feel to me. And yet there is some kind of gauzy, fuzzy texture over the whole thing which makes me think more of impressionism. Or perhaps it's that "less-than-photographic" quality of Romanticism, with central lighting by the spirit of Kinkade® (diluted with a fine mist of coming impressionism), that many Romantic paintings seem to have.

    Ah, what can I say? I like this fragrance.
    * * * *

  30. #30

    Default Re: Chandler Burr Untitled S01E05

    I wrote my answers offline before reading the other responses. I think I know (and considered buying) this scent. I’ve lost my sample, so can’t compare and will also note that my track record is not very good.
    1. How does S01E05 make you feel? What mood does it create? When would you see yourself wearing it? Do you think others like it on you?
    For me, S01E05 creates the feeling of floating in the middle of a great body of water. Serene, alone, but alert to the sun, waves, sounds. This feels like a warm-weather fragrance to me, although it didn’t feel out of place in the office on an autumn day. I’m not sure most people would recognize this as a “perfume” on me. I don’t think it calls attention to itself, and to the extent people notice, I think they would perceive it more as just a nice smell than an intentional fragrance.
    2. In what way would you describe this fragrance as “less”? Is it minimalist?
    This is definitely minimalist. It’s not the single molecule sparseness of Molecule 001, but it has very clean uncluttered lines. I can understand the Mies van der Rohe reference.
    3. In what way is the fragrance “more”? Is it plush, rich, saturated? Is it sexy or sensual, and why? Is it romantic (in the 18th century sense), and why?
    There is a sensual quality to floating in a lake or ocean, and as I mentioned above, I get that from S01E05. If there is a “more” it’s the vastness of the ocean being floated upon. Wearing this doesn’t make me feel sexy, but it has occurred to me that I’d find it kind of sexy if I smelled it on my significant other.
    4. Burr says the fragrance is literal, almost photo realism. Do you experience that characteristic, and if so, what do you think it is about the fragrance that causes this impression?
    I think the object referenced by S01E05 is sea (salt), and I do see it as a literal translation. I don’t get salt in the sense of the saltiness of sweat; it’s a more mineral salt. I recognize vetiver and cedar contributing to the effect. The beginning of the scent, which does evolve on the skin, has citrus notes, but to me they’re not really part of what creates the sea-salt impression. There is also an undefined green note that some seem to be interpreting as cucumber. Well, maybe sea cucumber? Ironically, I think the sea shells in the Romantic-style painting I posted are peeking out of this scent, too!

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Redneck Perfumisto View Post
    *sigh*

    I thought I knew what this was when I smelled it, but my first guess only led me to the artist. The second guess, to the fragrance. My sample is a bit concentrated, but I don't think I've ever smelled anything quite like this one, so I'm rather confident in what it is. It *could* actually be what I first thought, which I only own in a body product, but I think of these two fragrances as very similar, so it's six of one, half a dozen of the other.

    For a brief while, however, I wasn't completely sure what it was, and I saw it from a different perspective. The experience renewed my appreciation for the fragrance, and the artist.

    I have avoided reading babsvs's impressions so that these will be as independent as possible.

    1. How does S01E05 make you feel? What mood does it create? When would you see yourself wearing it? Do you think others like it on you?

    Wistful. I'm a country boy at heart, and this one still gives me a very "outdoor" feeling. The smell of fields when I would walk through them on the way to the fishing hole. I want to wear this on a spring or fall day, when the bright sun is either starting to come out, or is making its final, warming, fall appearances.

    I would have to say, I don't really care if others like it on me. I enjoy this one to be alone with it, like I'm in a museum. When I'm in the museum, my wife does nothing but bug me to keep moving. No. I want to enjoy this alone, and spend as much time with it as I want. It makes me reflective. I like that.

    2. In what way would you describe this fragrance as “less”? Is it minimalist?

    This fragrance is not what I would call a perfume. It's less than that. It's not big, or bold or what I was expecting (that Chandler would really "change it up" with E05). Is it minimalist? Yes, I think so. In fact, I was going to tar and feather our buddy Chandler with the neologism "chandlerspace", to describe the specific cross-section of fragrance-space that all of his five wispy, transparent, and minimalist true loves seem to inhabit. It's an interesting place, but numerically speaking, it's rather short on black holes and gothic knuckle-draggers.

    3. In what way is the fragrance “more”? Is it plush, rich, saturated? Is it sexy or sensual, and why? Is it romantic (in the 18th century sense), and why?

    While it's less than a perfume, it's more than an eau de cologne. It's very interesting. It's minimal and transparent, and has no more volume (in the "But my amp goes up to 11!" sense) than most of the others we've looked at in the Untitled series. But despite this, it's opaque in a milky, frosty, photo-through-linen way.

    The words plush, rich, sexy and sensual don't really work for me here because of my rustic associations. HOWEVER, this fragrance could be worn in a sexy or sensual way with the right clothing. To me it wants light-colored, natural fabrics, like a summer dress or a cotton shirt, and to be worn on bare skin with them. It evokes a state of coolness or gentle warmth, and dryness, so it's not a clubbing scent - it's a "let's take a drive in the country" scent.

    I'm not an art expert, though I feel like I "get" romanticism in paintings. I looked at a fair number of paintings labeled as Romantic, and this one is the one that spoke to me about my enjoyment of the scent:



    The image that actually spoke to me about the scent itself is, strangely, a photo (in beginning to answer the next question)...

    4. Burr says the fragrance is literal, almost photo realism. Do you experience that characteristic, and if so, what do you think it is about the fragrance that causes this impression?



    I loved this enough to actually buy a print of it. Just like I have come very close to buying this fragrance before.

    I think in many ways, yes. There is something natural and very real about it. If I could strip the idea of "The Good Earth" of all Asian connotations - even the novel - and just leave it as an idea of a sort of passive glorification of the idyllic, that applies anywhere - it has that feel to me. And yet there is some kind of gauzy, fuzzy texture over the whole thing which makes me think more of impressionism. Or perhaps it's that "less-than-photographic" quality of Romanticism, with central lighting by the spirit of Kinkade® (diluted with a fine mist of coming impressionism), that many Romantic paintings seem to have.

    Ah, what can I say? I like this fragrance.
    I think its interesting that we both mentioned the idea of being alone when smelling this, and its not being a perfume. What does that mean, do you think?

Similar Threads

  1. Chandler Burr Untitled S01E04
    By Redneck Perfumisto in forum General Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 116
    Last Post: 19th October 2012, 12:44 PM
  2. Chandler Burr Untitled S01E03
    By Redneck Perfumisto in forum General Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 270
    Last Post: 13th September 2012, 03:56 AM
  3. Chandler Burr Untitled S01E02
    By Windblownhair in forum General Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 137
    Last Post: 8th August 2012, 05:19 AM
  4. Chandler Burr's Untitled series
    By Kagey in forum General Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 30th May 2012, 07:55 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  



Loving perfume on the Internet since 2000