Re: Thought provoking article on Cafleurebon

[Guest guest]

Hi Anya, et al. --

I have to admit, I found some parts of this article rather discouraging. I don't

agree at all with the implication that " newbie " perfumers creating

less-than-master quality perfumes are somehow making things worse for the

business of natural perfumery as a whole.

I also don't understand the implication that novice perfumers are somehow

devaluing the art of natural perfumery, and I really don't see how they are

threatening the value or appreciation of perfumes made by masters of the trade.

If anything, the opposite would be true. The perfumes of true beauty and quality

will be valued even more, it seems. Respect and appreciation come with time,

trust (and talent) -- I like to think those who deserve it will get it in the

end, whether they have been making perfume for one year or thirty.

I was also rather embarrassed by the reference to a " newbie " perfumer who

claimed to make perfumes better than Mandy Aftel. Wow! I will never, as long as

I live, think I have mastered this difficult and nuanced craft, and I don't this

this unnamed perfumer reflects the general attitude of most people in this

art/business. I think most natural perfumers, newbie or not, understand that

this is a life-long learning process.

I think there is a place for a wide range of creative people in the world of

natural perfumery, and my attitude is that the lesser-quality products weed

themselves out in the end anyway (optimistically speaking). Everyone should be

given a chance to pursue their dreams and passions, and if a person is willing

to study, work, practice, and put their whole self into learning and creating

natural perfumes, then they deserve a chance, master ot not. I just don't want

to see this turn into an elitist art form that alienates those who are drawn to

it...

Well, that is my two-cents. I would love to hear what others thought of this

interesting article!

Best,

Tara Aveilhe

[Guest guest]

> Hi Anya, et al. --

>

>

> I have to admit, I found some parts of this article rather discouraging. I

> don't agree at all with the implication that " newbie " perfumers creating

> less-than-master quality perfumes are somehow making things worse for the

> business of natural perfumery as a whole.

>

> I also don't understand the implication that novice perfumers are somehow

> devaluing the art of natural perfumery, and I really don't see how they are

> threatening the value or appreciation of perfumes made by masters of the

> trade. If anything, the opposite would be true. The perfumes of true beauty

> and quality will be valued even more, it seems. Respect and appreciation

> come with time, trust (and talent) -- I like to think those who deserve it

> will get it in the end, whether they have been making perfume for one year

> or thirty.

>

>

Hi Tara and all

I've followed this blog post and discussion with interest. I found it a

little discouraging at first, but then I had a flash of understanding.

I've been playing with botanicals for around a year now (not counting a

stint when I was younger) - and I have never made an actual perfume blend

that smells wearable to me.

The day before yesterday I got very excited working on something on and off

for the day ... By the end of the day I had come up with something (simple -

just 6 components) that I actually really liked, and thought I would almost

like to wear! I was thrilled to bits. Finally something promising. I got

carried away imagining what I could do next.

I thought I would spend some time tinkering with it, as I could still

perceive plenty of flaws. And then I imagined that when it was perfected I

would give away some vials as free 'gifts' along with some unrelated craft

items that I sell. (I wasn't imagining actually selling the perfume.)

Then I read the article and felt discouraged. And the next day I tried my

perfume again, and it smelled ... well ... stinky. So - double

discouragement.

But then I got to thinking about how perfumery is a lot like writing.

In my professional life, I've worked as a writer for 20-odd years. The

process you go through, as a beginner, then a more experienced practitioner

must be very similar to perfumery I think. After my discouragement

yesterday, I reassured myself with thoughts of how I had bounced back from

so many failures as a writer over the years, perservered, and finally got to

point where I am fairly confident of my skills and able to market them

without feeling like an impostor.

If I've been through that process in one field, I told myself, hopefully I

can do it in another. (And if not, well, it wasn't meant to be.)

That's not to say writing is no longer a challenge. Writing something you

are very happy with, and want to sell, is always hard work. (Not to be

tossed off quickly like this email! )

Learning to write involves always looking at your work critically, opening

yourself to others' critiques regularly, and doing plenty of reading - i.e.

exploring, appreciating, and trying to understand other people's work. *Above

all, it involves always assuming that your own work can and should be

improved. * Just like pefumery, I think.*

*

The flash of understanding I had after reading that article is that

perfumery is perhaps also like writing in that many people come to it *

thinking* it's easy. I suddenly understood the experienced perfumers'

frustration!

It's like when serious writers get together and roll their eyes about the

surprisingly large number of people they meet who say, 'Oh I'd like to write

a book too, ' in a tone that implies it's the easiest thing in the world, or

about the people who write a terrible book and want to show it to you, as a

more experienced writer, to be admired - not wanting any honest feedback.

(Sometimes getting quite angry if they get it.)

It somehow devalues all the blood, sweat and tears that you put into

writing, day in day out. I know it can sound elitist, the way writers talk

about these people they meet, but it's actually a slightly hurt feeling -

that this art form that you treasure, and your work that you have poured

into it, is being completely dismissed.

In perfumery, writing, and perhaps any art form, there's a world of

difference - I think - between being a beginner who thinks your creations

are instantly going to be a gift to the world, and being a beginner who

knows that you're probably going to start off pretty bad, but with hard

work, learning, honest openness to criticism, and reverence for some of the

great works, you can get better and better.

On top of all that ... with natural perfumery there is the additional issue

that it has had to fight for respect from some quarters within the perfume

world, and there is undoubtedly a fear that if too many bad products are

actually on the market it gives natural perfumery a bad name. (In this sense

natural perfumery is a little like some of the more maligned genres of

writing where even other writers don't actually get what goes into them ...

but that's another lengthy rant!)

Best wishes

Johanna

[Guest guest]

Hi everyone -

It would be great to get these thoughts on Cafleurebon as well to keep the

discussion going! Go on over and post

Elise

[Guest guest]

<. Everyone should be given a chance to pursue their dreams and passions, and if

a person is willing to study, work, practice, and put their whole self into

learning and creating natural perfumes, then they deserve a chance, master ot

not. I just don't want to see this turn into an elitist art form that alienates

those who are drawn to it...>

Amen, Tara!

[Guest guest]

________________________________

I just don't want to see this turn into an elitist art form that alienates

those who are drawn to it...>

Amen, Tara!

~~~~~~~

namaste!

agreed. i can't speak for anyone's work... i can't really speak for my own, they

are these ethereal beings that are no longer my own... they go to partake of

someone else's experience, for better or worse. i think the only threat to

natural perfumery here is one of ego; part the experienced, financially rewarded

perfumer and partly the ego-maniacal novice who compares him/herself to the

former.

we threaten ourselves with infighting and smellier-than-thou attitudes. we learn

from mistakes, we grow from blends too simplistic or too clumbsy. in the very

least, be grateful for the not-so-talented for they are the ones who prove yours

to be a masterpiece after all.

all are needed. all are welcome. all are in a state of euphoric evolution.

much light, einsof

[Guest guest]

well said Sonsa. hugs, joey

[Guest guest]

>>>

> That raises two issues ...

>

> 1. Should experienced practitioners in any field get personally annoyed or

> offended when people see what they do as easy and simple?

>

> 2. What is 'good' art?

>

> I don't know if that clarifies my thoughts any better. I'm interested in

> feedback.

>

> Best wishes

> Johanna

>

> ^*^*^*^*^*^*

> wow; these are the kind of questions whole lectures and debates and fortunes

and

> lives are devoted to? my answer is yes. yes people should think things are

easy

> cause YOU are in the flow. yes they should attempt it if it call to their

> hearts. yes, they too will learn nothing is as easy as it looks (sometimes it

> might be easier), or as enjoyable as one learning their art. yes, some will

> always have more or less money. yes, some will always make more POPULAR art...

> but all is art. yes, people will always be differently motivated to the

reasons

> they create. yes, we are always involved in evolving our art- searching for

> better expression or better product, better botanicals or better accords,

better

> distribution or better understanding. yes, if they come- let them, isn't it

> where we want everyone to be?

>

>

> yes yes yes, einsof

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Joanna,

What Einsof said. I don't think I could put it any better.

In fact he cleared up the cloudy thoughts that I did have about this.

I love how you can express yourself so well and can share these questions about

this whole process that many of us are involved in.

Your first question seems to cross over into an area of ...where exactly do you

want to put your energy? Rather than a question of " should " . If you do become

offended...exactly where does it get you, and if you don't....ect. It is a

personal choice on where we decide to focus our energy. I will (try) to always

chose a creative path that lifts me and if others are lifted and insprired as

well than that is even better.

Your second question...well...you know. I'll pass on that one;-) Maybe I'll

throw in another question...does someone need to be an " artist " to creat art?

Thanks for your thoughtful post.

Ragna

>

[Guest guest]

Ragna,

I think anyone who creates art *is* an artist.

I like how this one person put it:

" Roudnitska actually entered the fragrance industry lacking education in the

vocation that he was later to discover. With no background in perfume, he

learned everything from scratch and was soon promoted to take charge of the

physico-chemical control of a fragrance company.

A year later, Roudnitska was sent to Paris to take over from a top perfumer of

the company where he was essentially self-taught. A fantastic career followed

thanks to all his work and efforts as well as his creative genius. His entire

life was a constant creation. "

Sonsa

>

[Guest guest]

>

>

>

> Your second question...well...you know. I'll pass on that one;-) Maybe I'll

> throw in another question...does someone need to be an " artist " to creat

> art?

>

>

Heh. Well, I'll turn that around and say, 'if they create 'art' does that

then make them an 'artist''?

Forgive me if I rant on about this a bit longer. (I'm fascinated by these

kinds of questions, but do also understand that from another perspective

they can be seen as a total waste of time!)

Once I was part of a team putting together an exhibition for our national

museum on the history of our country's art - and the curators took - as

their overarching concept - the question, ' What is art'? The curators never

set out to answer it definitively but just to give visitors lots of food for

thought - and ways to mull over the question in their own minds. Really,

it's amazing how knotted up you can get over this question if you think

about it in certain ways. (And it's a knot with lots of threads hanging from

it ... pull some and it gets more tangled, pull others and not only the

knot, but the entire thread seems to start disintegrating!)

And then it raises more questions like, 'why do we even have a need for the

word 'art'?

I'm interested in the distinction between art and craft too, and I've been

thinking about how perfumery fits into that. One way of thinking about

definitions of 'art' and 'craft' is to do with functionality ... crafts tend

to be more functional, arts tend to be more about creating effects for their

own sake ... So does that mean perfume is an art, while soap -making is a

craft? (Or could you see perfume as functional? Or soap as being beautiful

for its own sake? ... Well, I'm sure soap can be beautiful for its own sake

actually ... )

In the end, you could dismiss all this as mere semantics, and after thinking

about these kinds of things for too long I often feel like dismissing them -

at least for a while. But then I come back to them because deep down I think

the words we use for things are really important.

Anyway, that's my rant. Thanks for indulging me if you read it!

Best

Johanna

[Guest guest]

> I'm interested in the distinction between art and craft too, and I've been

> thinking about how perfumery fits into that. One way of thinking about

> definitions of 'art' and 'craft' is to do with functionality ... crafts tend

> to be more functional, arts tend to be more about creating effects for their

> own sake ... So does that mean perfume is an art, while soap -making is a

> craft? (Or could you see perfume as functional? Or soap as being beautiful

> for its own sake? ... Well, I'm sure soap can be beautiful for its own sake

> actually ... )

>

> In the end, you could dismiss all this as mere semantics, and after thinking

> about these kinds of things for too long I often feel like dismissing them -

> at least for a while. But then I come back to them because deep down I think

> the words we use for things are really important.

>

> Anyway, that's my rant. Thanks for indulging me if you read it!

>

Hi Johanna....

That's one of the nicest 'rants' I've ever come across...<G>....! I for

one, will indulge your rants anytime...

Yes...the words we use are extremely important...They are basically what

we, as humans, use to communicate with each other, in this case, hoping

what our interpretations of " art " and " craft " are congruent enough for

us to get our ideas and feelings across to each other...

For the first half of my life, I tried to figure out what the heck " art "

was...I will be honest...Never had any formal instruction in " art " ,

though I've read a number of books on the subject...

Then, one day, in epiphany, it came to me....Art is that particular

construct which gets through to *me*....Significant art is that which

gets through/at to *many* people, though it might not include me....I'm

convinced an artist is intending/trying to convey something, a concept,

a mood, or a feeling, to others...

I know this may not make sense to a lot of folks, and the effect of

" getting through " is perhaps an understatement...

When you see a particular painting, listen to a particular poem, smell

a particular scent, see a particular piece of jewelry, or hear a

particular piece of music, and it cuts through to your *soul*, creates a

crescendo of emotion, overriding rationality...

That's art...!

Just one person's opinion, mind you.....<G>...!

And though I'm not mentioning craft, the two are related....Maybe

sometimes overlapped...

--

W. Bourbonais

L'Hermite Aromatique

A.J.P. (GIA)

[Guest guest]

ART

Early 13c., " skill as a result of learning or practice, " from O.Fr. art,

from L. artem (nom. ars ) " art, skill, craft, " from PIE *ar-ti- (cf. Skt.

rtih " manner, mode; " Gk. arti " just, " artios " complete; " Armenian arnam

" make; " Ger. art " manner, mode " ), from base *ar- " fit together, join " (see

arm <http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/arm> (1)). In M.E. usually with

sense of " skill in scholarship and learning " (c.1300), especially in the

seven sciences or liberal arts. This sense remains in Bachelor of Arts, etc.

Meaning " human workmanship " (as opposed to nature) is from late 14c. Meaning

" skill in creative arts " is first recorded 1620; esp. of painting,

sculpture, etc., from 1660s. Broader sense of the word remains in artless

(1580s). As an adj. meaning " produced with conscious artistry (as opposed to

popular or folk) it is attested from 1890, possibly from infl. of Ger.

kunstlied " art song " (cf. art film, 1960; art rock, c.1970). Fine arts,

" those which appeal to the mind and the imagination " first recorded 1767.

Expression art for art's sake (1836) translates Fr. l'art pour l'art. First

record of art critic is from 1865. Arts and crafts " decorative design and

handcraft " first attested in the Arts and Crafts Exhibition Society, founded

in London, 1888.

[Guest guest]

World English Dictionary

art 1 (É‘Ët) <http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/IPA_pron_key.html>

[Click for IPA pronunciation guide]

— n

1.

a. the creation of works of beauty or other special significance

b. ( as modifier ): an art movement

2.

the exercise of human skill (as distinguished from nature )

3.

imaginative skill as applied to representations of the natural world or figments

of the imagination

4.

a. the products of man's creative activities; works of art collectively, esp of

the visual arts, sometimes also music, drama, dance, and literature

b. arts <http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/arts> See also fine art

<http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fine+art> ( as modifier ): an art

gallery

5.

excellence or aesthetic merit of conception or execution as exemplified by such

works

6.

any branch of the visual arts, esp painting

7.

( modifier ) intended to be artistic or decorative: art needlework

8.

a. any field using the techniques of art to display artistic qualities:

advertising art

b. ( as modifier ): an art film

9.

journalism photographs or other illustrations in a newspaper, etc

10.

method, facility, or knack: the art of threading a needle ; the art of writing

letters

11.

the system of rules or principles governing a particular human activity: the art

of government

12.

artfulness; cunning

13.

get something down to a fine art to become highly proficient at something

through practice

[C13: from Old French, from Latin ars craftsmanship]

[Guest guest]

>

> Ragna,

>

> I think anyone who creates art *is* an artist.

>

> I like how this one person put it:

>

> " Roudnitska actually entered the fragrance industry lacking education

> in the vocation that he was later to discover. With no background in

> perfume, he learned everything from scratch and was soon promoted to

> take charge of the physico-chemical control of a fragrance company.

>

> A year later, Roudnitska was sent to Paris to take over from a top

> perfumer of the company where he was essentially self-taught. A

> fantastic career followed thanks to all his work and efforts as well

> as his creative genius. His entire life was a constant creation. "

>

> Sonsa

>

That pretty much says it all doesn't it, grin!

Ambrosia

[Guest guest]

" When you see a particular painting, listen to a particular poem, smell a

particular scent, see a particular piece of jewelry, or hear a particular piece

of music, and it cuts through to your *soul*, creates a crescendo of emotion,

overriding rationality... "

W. Bourbonais

Beautifully expressed . I have been reading this flow of discussion with

interest. Coming from an art back ground, the subject of " When Craft becomes

Art " has always been of interest to me. True Art is about carrying what is

hidden in the soul as a gift for others. An artist uses certain skills to

manifest, or embody a vision. One must first acquire the necessary skills.

Without these even a natural talent will be limited. In any area of competence

it is necessary to learn the requisite skills first, then to learn to relax them

and regain communication with sensitivity and intuition. A Great level of skill

does not necessarily make a perfume a work of art. Many of the perfumes on the

market are produced by professional perfumers with great skill but the perfumes

but only a few touch your soul. In the creative process there is a stage where

after you acquired all the information about what you want to create, you must

let go and let the subconscious mind do the synthesizing.

Many will say that the elevation of a craft to an art depends on a message being

included in the work and communicated. However, many artists do not necessarily

set out to consciously weave a message into their artworks. van Gogh for

example leaps to mind; a soul driven by a desire to create, but rejected in his

time. Today he is one of the best known artists. Perhaps one can say that once a

certain level of skill is achieved the value of the work of art is determined by

its capacity to transcend the limits of its chosen medium by being able to

strike some universal chord by the rarity of the skill of the artist or its

accurate reflection of the zeitgeist. I love the thoughts of A. Windsor

on the subject; " Art is craft that leaps into a metaphor. True art evokes

meanings and emotions far beyond what the viewers observe. Craft remains the

underlying basis of art, but no matter how well done, is merely what it looks

like. "

Not everyone can be a great artist, not every perfumer has that innate ability

to reach out and `touch' their audience; however everyone can benefit by the

practice of the art-form. In the development of craftsmanship there is always a

refinement of the human spirit that takes place; focus, concentration,

persistence, learning to `see,' (in the case of perfumery, the refinement of the

nose). All of which serve to enhance a person's character and give you a broader

view of the world. Whether your perfumes will be regarded as great perfumes is

perhaps not the issue as most artists worry whether their work is good enough to

present to the world. Greatness can only be determined by others and only in

comparison. If you do not let others judge your perfumes, you will never know

how others perceive you creations. You may think you have created a great

perfume, others may not. Even then, if you truly have a passion for the craft,

it should simply serve as encouragement to further refine your skills. As long

as you develop your skill with passion and joy, like love play, you will be

imparting something of your soul in the making of your creations and who knows,

perhaps you will create a great perfume in the process.

[Guest guest]

Thank you for that, it's inspiring, there's hope and room for everyone

Isis

[Guest guest]

It's a fact that " good art " is just a matter of personal taste.  Even in

Perfumery. I'm curious as to who on this thread has been to perfumery school,

who is self taught, and who has studied with a mentor, and who is your mentor? 

Amber

[Guest guest]

Yes and no. There is an educated taste, a taste developed by trial and error,

exposure, life experience, contemplation, environment . . . MEDIA/Marketing!

If ever in Bath, go see:

http://www.museumofcostume.co.uk/

and expand your mind and link the history all aspects of our life.

The current issue which is becoming pervasive, is " I think.... who are you to

tell me I'm wrong. " " It is my opinion... "

OK, so it is my opinion that the earth is flat, the day of rapture is May 21st

(so give me all your worldly possesions), I spin on my bed when sleeping with my

head pointing to the magnetic north due to the iron in my blood.... It is my

opinion, and I'm entitled to it, ... and will vote accordingly, and form

organizations of like minded friends.... too much thinking without foundations.

Crash....

[Guest guest]

> Within my own commercial range, there is one scent that I originally

> made nearly 20 years ago...made when I was a beginner at this lovely art

> form, and it is a simple thing, with few ingredients in comparison to

> some of the complex and carefully crafted perfumes I made in later years...

> But it is still one of my most popular perfumes! At the end of the day,

> people love it's scent. And that, and that alone is what makes it a

> great perfume!

>

> Ambrosia

> http://www.perfumebynature.com.au

> http://perfumebynature.blogspot.com

Which one is it?

Maggie