dior addict (parfymnörd)

journalisten chandler burr som bland annat syns i T magazine, samt profilerats i Kobra tv, är som bekant en av de bästa parfymkritiker/luktnördar som finns. några av hans recensioner finns här: chandler burr - the moment blog
parfymjournalistik är en sån udda men samtidigt självklar nisch om man tar det i beaktning - på samma grund som det finns musik-, konst- och krogjournalister bör det naturligtvis finnas erkända luktjournalister och grävande parfymjournalistik. sinne som sinne non?

här är chandler burrs recension, (som är mycket intressant) av min favoritparfym Dior Addict:

"Dior Addict is either one of the weirdest traditionalist fragrances ever introduced or one of the most normal of the weirdos. It depends on how you smell it. But be forewarned that Addict is one of those perfumes that constitutes an olfactory Rorschach test: opinions on it vary widely, it never really smells the same to any two people, and if you wear it two days in a row it won’t even necessarily smell the same to you.

Addict was creative-directed by the Dior designer John Galliano and built by the perfumer Thierry Wasser, who was recently snatched up by LVMH’s François Demachy and installed as Guerlain’s in-house perfumer. Wasser has now ascended to the ranks of the in-house superelite, which includes Hermès’s Jean-Claude Ellena, Chanel’s Jacques Polge and Christopher Sheldrake, Cartier’s Mathilde Laurent and Jean Patou’s Jean-Michel Duriez. His first official effort at Guerlain, Guerlain Homme, which was unveiled last month, is a nicely serviceable masculine, one that works today but would have worked just as well in the 1960s. Wasser’s Dior Addict, by contrast, was introduced in 2002, would arguably have worked in 1925 as a maximal-minimalist version of Shalimar (take everything out except the ethyl vanillin, pump it full of neon gas and run an electrical current though it) and could conceivably work in 2025. It’s that diaphanous — and that odd.

Yes, Addict is a masterpiece of coumarin (the chewy, taffy-like, vaguely almondy synthetic molecule derived from tonka bean) and vanilla, but what does that get you? To some it reads like a giant, powdery light bulb: warm and formless and slightly alarming. At moments, I have thought of those phenomenally irritating entirely white canvases you see in museums, which force you to conclude that modern art is truly a fraud. At other moments, the thing seems to be generating a wisp of fresh green submerged in sweet vanilla bean, like a scoop of French vanilla ice cream with a tiny green twig snapped in two and accidentally stuck in it. Wasser’s work is technically solid — Addict performs very well on skin, lasting and diffusing like clockwork. Its aesthetics remain the question. But nothing this resolutely indefinable can fail to have value. Stare at this painting and see what you think."

(p.s den är udda och så bra! ibland kanske den luktar kemikalisk peng, ibland lite som före eller efter en regnskur, men i längden kanske mest som en mjuk kryddig nybakad paj som man äter efter ett hångel i en kemisal. men mest luktar den nog som alla tre på samma gång eller alla tre efter varandra med ett lager av smält elektriskt socker ovanpå. testa den idag på åhlens eller något, jag vet att du vill.)