Key fashion houses - namely Chanel, Dior, Givenchy and Armani - have all expanded into a niche market sometimes referred to as “haute parfumerie,” or perhaps more accurately as “collection parfumerie”. The latter is reflecting the fact that these fragrance ranges, separate from the houses’ standard fair [sic] (Dior’s variations on Poison, Chanel’s numbered lines), are grouped into collections, in similar bottles. Like perfume Pokemon, you’re encouraged to buy them all.
— Read more at Designer perfumes: Niche fragrance collections are the heaviest hitters at Independent.
I presume that one would be far more likely to smell different by applying some Grey Flannel instead any of the fragrances mentioned in the article.
Likely so.
I just can’t get past the glaring grammatical error in the second paragraph of the article (and included in the excerpt above). That should be “standard fare”, although I suppose most of the standard fragrance offerings from fashion houses are only fair at best.
Ha — I posted that before my tea and didn’t even notice! That’s atrocious.
That’s what happens when you replace real, live proofreaders with computers.
Interesting piece. The fragrance houses all seem keen to point out how their exclusive lines are intended to be more personalised and different from the mass market, and yet from what I know of them, the Chanel and Diors at least, they are not that different. Beautifully made, yes, but not especially adventurous. So the ‘difference’ is only that they are more expensive and hard to get. And even then, major department stores in major cities mostly carry them.
Also it should be “divining” not “diving” in the section on Chanel No. 5 warming up the nose. What are “bottle scenes”? Doesn’t the author mean “designs’?
Now that I’ve had a chance to sleep on it, I’ve realized that what the author meant was “bottles’ scents”. Also “single-not” [sic]? Sheesh! Get an editor!