Semiotic Spritz Part 1: Unwrapping Viktor & Rolf's Bonbon.

Bonbon is a feminine fragrance launched by the fashion house Viktor & Rolf in 2014. The perfume was created by Cécile Matton and Serge Majoullier (Mane). The publicity features the model Edita Vilkeviciute and was shot by Inez van Lamsweerde and Vinoodh Matadin. 

Ethyl maltol is a popular aroma chemical used in modern perfumery and is strongly redolent of caramel. Thierry Mugler’s Angel (1992) was the first fine fragrance to include an overdose of this molecule in its formula and since then, perfumers have been employing ever higher percentages to satisfy the sweet-toothed cravings of Western markets.

Like Prada’s Candy (2011) which similarly relies heavily on ethyl maltol for its gourmand vibe, Bonbon initially keys consumers into its confectionery-like scent profile through a direct and easy to decode name. Unlike Candy however, Bonbon - at least for French speakers - is polysemic and permits of an especially rich set of associations to be exploited:

In its adverbial usage, bonbon means ‘expensive’. One might exclaim ça côute bonbon! (‘it costs a bomb!’) on seeing the price of a Viktor & Rolf dress and we note the perfume’s flacon is styled after a couture bow that simultaneously recalls the shape of an individually wrapped sweet.

Bonbon in French however, is also a slang term for ‘clitoris’ as knowingly referenced by the placement of an eye-catchingly oversized bottle in front of the model’s pubic region. Yet even for those on whom this linguistic play is lost, the proximal connection of the product with a source of erogenous pleasure is sufficient to establish a meaningful relationship.

The erotic charge this image generates around the fragrance is furthered by the model’s nakedness. Covering the nipple of her exposed left breast is a painted ribbon and bow which design repeats across her torso and arms. Through their use of this visual metaphor, van Lamsweerde and Matadin overcome the tricky problem of how to represent the invisible state of being perfumed.

If we consider the model’s overall disposition, we’re struck by an apparent incongruity: her sitting cross-legged on the floor is typically child-like whilst her well-developed body and mature face are those of a twentysomething. The infantilisation of females in advertising is, of course, nothing new: in his seminal work Gender Advertisements (1979), Irving Goffman noted that women and children were depicted on the floor much more frequently than men -  a process he viewed as  ‘ritualized subordination’. Goffman also had cause to discuss the common ‘fingers-to-the-mouth’ pose, which gesture too is reminiscent of a child’s behaviour and suggests anxiety, uncertainty and an overall lack of agency. Consonant with the advert’s high connotative index though, this hand placement encourages further chaining: firstly, the model’s finger points indexically at her mouth – the organ associated with taste, thereby linking to the perfume’s gourmand theme; secondly, and more generally, the act of self touch objectifies the body, suggesting it is a precious object or even, in the present case, a gift, wrapped up in bows and ribbons.

As a key oppositional feature, the contrast between the immature and the mature is elaborated through the advert’s colour scheme. Here, the grey background and pink foregrounded elements enter into paradigmatic relation, juxtaposing innocence (or at least abstinence) with express sexuality.

Finally, it is interesting to muse on the use of linguistic signs that, prima facie, are limited to communicating only the bare facts about the product. The name ‘Bonbon’ is privileged by its headline position and large size. The white on grey sans-serif typeface is contemporary and grown-up in feel, legible and transmits this key datum with a directness that is served by the model’s gaze. The interplay between text and figure can also be observed in the way that the word ‘Bonbon’, when taken together with the seated model, suggests in outline a bonbon/bow shape. Scanning downwards, we find at the bottom of the advert a description of the perfume as ‘the new feminine fragrance’. Its small font size however, indicates this information to be of only minor significance. Ultimately, all these signs culminate in a single super-sign, ‘Viktor & Rolf’, the brand's name which, as Jean Baudrillard reminded us, is the only real message.

 

City Love Review

Dueto débuted in 2011 with a trio of perfumes, the most interesting of which – Golden Boy, I reviewed a couple of years ago. Even at its release however, the rose / ‘oud’ theme expressed by City Love was seeming quite passé.

Signed by Olivier Pescheux, the fragrance pairs a familiarly synthetic feeling dark woody accord with patchouli that helps adds some vegetal texture. The complementary rose is overall pink, yet possesses a hint of breadyness and a diffusive, Mefrosol like geranium quality. The  citrusy notes meanwhile, are given a lemongrass twist for assured, heady freshness.

Nose: Olivier Pescheux

House: Dueto Parfums

Release date: 2011

Notes (per Fragrantica): violet, lemongrass, cinnamon, geranium, rose, patchouli, agarwood, cypriol oil.

Salome Review

Salome by perfumer Liz Moores is a dense floral chypre whose heavy use of naturals and strong animalic bent place it in the same broad category as Bogue’s Maai, which I recently reviewed. Many of my reservations in respect to the latter apply here too, but ultimately this is simply a matter of taste. 

Jasmine, orange blossom and rose constitute Salome’s deep floral heart that comes off not so much indolic as almost petrol like. The head accord contrasts fresh orange with a good dose of cumin and an already detectable styrax which together introduce the leathery, phenolic, woody, animalic theme that comes to dominate. Particularly apparent here is hyraceum which in recent years has found favour among several indy perfumers. While hyraceum has the advantage over castoreum insofar as it can be harvested without harm to the animal that produces it, its tincture nonetheless seems to lack a certain warmth that comes through with (real) castoreum at dilution. Perhaps for this reason, Moores elaborated the chypre base with additional animalics for a fuller feel. 

While my personal preference is for perfumes that are structured with a greater sense of space and clarity, Salome’s style is sure to find receptive noses.  

Nose: Liz Moores

House: Papillon Artisan Perfumes

Release date: 2015

Notes (per Fragrantica): bitter orange, bergamot, turkish rose, orange blossom, tobacco, carnation, jasmine, hyrax, styrax, vanilla, hay, patchouli, oakmoss, cumin, birch, castoreum.

Anjin Review

Anjin’s head accord is constructed around a light/dark contrast with zingy citrus notes being shaded by clove and allspice. The hesperidic top links to a lightly herbal heart that has a warm, gingery aura and the whole thing lifts off the skin with a C12 (MNA) aldehyde type gaseousness. As Anjin’s woodsy base begins to assert itself, the fragrance comes to somewhat resemble No.5, if you can imagine the latter minus its floral notes: incense-like aldehydes atop a musky, ambery, sandalwood fond. The sandalwood here is lightly creamy with a hint of nuttiness, but it has a more modern, Javanol-y feel.

A thoughtfully made perfume.

Nose: Chris Bartlett

House: Pell Wall Perfumes

Release date: 2011

Notes (per Basenotes): Bergamot, cedrat, green mandarin, lime, neroli, coriander, pink pepper, ginger, violet, ambergris, cedar, sandalwood, vanilla, tonka, white musk.

Maai Review

To judge by the deep amber colour of the juice, Maai contains a good deal of natural extracts and this suspicion is borne out by its complex, if slightly muddy scent. 

An animalic white floral, Maai explores the clean/dirty paradigm beginning with an aldehydic tuberose/ white flower/ rose accord. Among tuberose’s principal odiferous constituents is methyl salicylate (wintergreen), whose phenolic/camphorous smell is here emphasised, though ultimately pulls up short compared to C. Sheldrake’s Tubéreuse Criminelle (Serge Lutens, 1999). As the fragrance develops, the sharp soapiness is overcome by a honied sweetness that serves as a bridge to a base chock full of leathery resins and animalics. This represents Maai’s Unique Selling Point and many have hailed the fragrance as a return to the classical aesthetic. Civet, castoreum and the like however, constituted only one part of the animalic equation in vintage perfumes and most obviously missing here is a complementary nitro-musk style complex to soften the feel. Maai has a wild, barely tamed quality to it that betokens a certain amateurishness. Its fetishisation of the fecal also comes at the expense of balance. 

Nose: Antonio Gardoni

House: Bogue Profumo

Release date: 2014

Notes (per Fragrantica): aldehydes, tuberose, rose, jasmine, resins, musk, civet. 

Flower Review

Key to understanding Alberto Morillas’ Flower is an appreciation of the enormous contribution Sofia Grojsman has made to perfumery with fragrances like Trésor. As previously mentioned, Grojsman effectively introduced a new style of scents built around a monolithic ‘hug me’ accord of Galaxolide, Iso E Super, Methyl Ionone and Hedione. In roughly equal proportion, these materials combine to produce a soft-focus, clean, powdery accord of good substantivity and radiance that can be used to make up a high percentage of the finished product and straightforwardly modified.

Beginning with this template, Flower develops the ionone facet into a pastel violet accord which is then clasically complemented with rose. Hedione provides a jasminic lift, its green and white tonalities dovetailing with some hydroxycitronellal type muguet notes. The musk complex meanwhile, is rendered a little more sophisticated with Helvetolide adding subtle fruity, pear nuances, the whole thing being sweetened up with a moderate dose of vanilla. In terms of development, there’s little to speak of, though as the fragrance reaches the end of its evaporation curve, the pale woodsiness becomes a touch more apparent.

As so often, the cross-over in trends between functional and fine-fragrance works to the latter’s detriment and Flower’s dryer-sheet associations are ultimately hard to shake.

Nose: Alberto Morillas

House: Kenzo

Release date: 2000

Notes (per Fragrantica): cassis, hawthorn, bulgarian rose, orange, opoponax, jasmine, parma violet, vanilla, musk, incense.

Sauvage Review

Last month, I posted my initial impression of Dior’s latest male release on Basenotes, following the very briefest of in-store sniffs. Then, I pegged it as a ‘...very generic modern fougère: a fresh head accord of sundry hesperidic notes linked to cologney, dihydromyrcenol lavender, the whole thing backed up by some powdery dry woodsy-ambers and musks’.

Having had the opportunity to spend a little more time with the fragrance, I can’t say my thoughts have greatly changed, but it’s worth adding a little flesh to the above skeleton.  

The fragrance opens with a standard smelling citrus accord built around bergamot and melonal/calone (/vel.sim.) that’s tartly breezy. The linalool/linalyl facets are freshened up with a good dose of dihydromyrcenol lending the composition a legible masculine cologne character. This metallic coolness carries over to a fruity green heart that has a distinctly oily, violet leaf quality – an oblique reference perhaps to J.-L. Sieuzac’s 1988 Dior classic, Fahrenheit. Sauvage though, has a much more pronounced woodsiness, with plenty of Iso E Super radiance that ties in with a powdery base of desiccated woody ambers and, carrying on the laundry detergent theme introduced by dihydromyrcenol, clean polycyclic type musks.

Dior’s answer to a question nobody asked.

Nose: François Demachy

House: Dior

Release date: 2015

Notes (per Fragrantica): bergamot, sichuan pepper, ambroxan.