Friday, April 18, 2014

The Scent of Moving, or Confessions of a [Perfume Collector] Hoarder, Part I

You have recently worn


18 seconds ago
9x in total
Fracas
5 hours ago
1x in total
Velvet Rose
7 hours ago
1x in total
Vintage Rose
24 hours ago
4x in total
Putain des Palaces
32 hours ago
1x in total
Eloge du Traitre
2 days ago
3x in total
Gorilla Perfume At Lush - Imogen Rose
3 days ago
2x in total
Gorilla Perfume At Lush - Love
3 days ago
1x in total
Champs-Elysées
4 days ago
12x in total
New York Fling
4 days ago
31x in total
Infusion de Fleur d'Oranger
4 days ago
15x in total
Three
4 days ago
7x in total
Eau de Cartier Essence d'Orange
5 days ago
8x in total
Floral Curiosities - Poet's Jasmine
5 days ago
3x in total
Myrrhe & Merveilles
5 days ago
1x in total
Geisha Violet
6 days ago
2x in total
Floral Curiosities - Scarlet Larkspur
6 days ago
13x in total
Jasmin Impératrice Eugénie
6 days ago
2x in total
Eau d'Orange Verte
6 days ago
3x in total
Jasmin et Cigarette
6 days ago
3x in total
Moment de Bonheur
6 days ago
4x in total
Osmanthus
7 days ago
3x in total
Chypré Fruité
7 days ago
3x in total
Fou d'Absinthe
8 days ago
2x in total
24, Faubourg
8 days ago
1x in total
Madame Rochas (1989)
9 days ago
6x in total
Bianca
9 days ago
3x in total
J'Aime
9 days ago
2x in total
Angel
10 days ago
22x in total
Deva des Fleurs
10 days ago
2x in total
Pink Pepper / Poivre Rose
10 days ago
6x in total
Cape Of Good Hope
11 days ago
14x in total
Fleurs de Bulgarie
11 days ago
4x in total
Tubereuse
12 days ago
2x in total
Gourmandises
12 days ago
2x in total
Séville à l'Aube
12 days ago
25x in total
Poudre d'Orient
13 days ago
16x in total
Attar de Roses
14 days ago
3x in total
She Wood Golden Light Wood
14 days ago
4x in total
Iris Nobile (Eau de Parfum)
14 days ago
2x in total
Beleaf
14 days ago
1x in total
Le Vetiver - Itasca
16 days ago
2x in total
Scarlett
16 days ago
10x in total
L'Eau en Blanc
17 days ago
1x in total
Idole de Lubin (Eau de Parfum)
17 days ago
1x in total
Ô de Lancôme
18 days ago
6x in total
Eleganza Luminosa
18 days ago
1x in total
Eau de Fleurs
19 days ago
1x in total
Armani
20 days ago
3x in total
Eau des Missions
20 days ago
8x in total
Natori (2009)
21 days ago
1x in total
Regal
21 days ago
2x in total
Loukhoum
21 days ago
2x in total
Loukhoum Parfum du Soir
22 days ago
1x in total
Vanilla / Vanille
22 days ago
1x in total
Royal Arms Diamond Edition
23 days ago
2x in total
Pavillon des Fleurs
24 days ago
1x in total
China Rose
25 days ago
1x in total
Amaryllis
25 days ago
1x in total
Trueste
25 days ago
1x in total
Cefiro
25 days ago
2x in total
White Rose
26 days ago
1x in total
Edwardian Bouquet
26 days ago
1x in total
Flora by Gucci Eau Fraîche

It's official: I survived the historic move of 2014. Having spent ten years in a three-bedroom apartment, I have now moved into a small two-room loft space with about one-third of my former square footage. How did she do it? you may well be asking, and not without good reason. The answer I'm afraid is that I did it by not doing anything else but move-related work since the beginning of February.

The necessity of carrying out the apparently Sisyphean task of sorting through and assessing the value of every single item in my former abode was occasioned by the sale of the house to a couple who decided that they could command rents of $3K for each of the apartments of their newly acquired three-family house. I had been paying a reduced rate of $1K because I served as the landlord's surrogate. (The other apartments were also being rented for significantly less than $3K, and though I was the first to go, I shall not be the last.)

Unfortunately, the former landlord's next of kin (with whom he had however no relationship) crawled out of the woodwork one gray day--like a slimy earthworm slithering along a sidewalk after a heavy rain--upon learning that he had no will in place. (I am omitting names because this is a true story of the "truths stranger than fiction" variety...) She then moved swiftly and aggressively, with dispatch and purpose, as they say, to have him declared incompetent, rendering it legally impossible for him to pen a will. At the same time, she had herself appointed the "conservator" of his estate.

Said relative then proceeded to liquidate her uncle's estate, including the place which I called "home" for a decade of my life. I'm not sure how much of the story to relay here, but suffice it to say that the circumstances of the "incompetence" finding were suspicious, to put it mildly.

A few juicy quotes were relayed to me by the former landlord, including that when he told his newly appointed "guardian" (ha!) that he would contest her effective usurpation of everything he owned, she replied, "If you get a lawyer, I'll get two. If you get two lawyers, I'll get four." In addition to robbing the man blind, she also painted his mental state to all outsiders as vegetative. I know this because in a phone conversation immediately after she had been named the executor of his estate, she said to me (having apparently forgotten with whom she was speaking--a person whose phone records clearly document many hours of lengthy conversations with said "vegetable")--"Now I'll just have to try to figure out what he would have wanted."

When the house where I was living ended up selling to a couple who paid about $300K more than the true value of the property, though they never had it professionally appraised (which I know because only I had a key to the top-floor apartment), then my hunch that the niece was a full-fledged, bona fide (or should that be mala fide?) con artist was confirmed. I am quite certain that the new owners were in a bidding war with a shill.

Naturally, the "winners" of the bidding war needed to increase rents on the place quickly in order to "make good" ( = break even) on their investment. Whether they sunk their entire life's savings into the place or they "secured" a bad mortgage from a friend of the seller's realtor (who was also a friend of the seller, and who remarkably served also as the buyers' broker! ahem--can you say "Long Con"? I thought you could...), I know not.

What I know, having lived in the house over a decade during which NO MAJOR REPAIRS were made to anything, is that it is a disaster waiting to happen. (NB: My role at the place was only to make sure that the minimal stuff needed was done--hot water heaters and appliances were replaced when they ceased functioning--in order to keep the house fully rented.)

There was water damage on my ceiling--indicating the need for a new roof--and one developer who stopped by some years back to inquire about the property confided in me that the entire structure would be better razed than repaired, given the crack in the foundation, the rotted wood inside the ratty aluminum exoskeleton, etc. (The house, which dates from 1920, has not had any awnings for decades.) The building was never even deleaded, except on the second floor when a complaint was filed by a woman who had a child while living there.

My place in the most recent chapter of this story began when I was told near the end of January that I needed to be out by March 1, 2014. When I pointed out to the new landlord that it would be humanly impossible for anyone to do such a thing, he wrote me a combative note indicating, first, that his demand was "nonnegotiable", and then that he "might consider" letting me take an extra month to vacate the place--if I paid about triple my current rent. No, I am not joking.

I originally had a lease which began on June 15, 2004, and automatically renewed. Unfortunately, I was unable to produce any evidence beyond the lease addendum (archived on one of my hard drives), which specified the details of my special arrangement with the former landlord. I could not for the life of me come up with the original signed lease agreement.

Upon learning that I had been ordered out by the new owner, the gentleman with whom I originally signed the agreement called me up and told me that I should "stay put", because my lease--which he said he had a copy of before him--had never been terminated and so was still valid. No, he is not demented--unless of course he was born that way--but that is another story altogether, which would be far more appropriate for a different venue--such as a major motion picture screenplay.

Needless to say, 2014 has not been my most productive year--at least not in terms of writing. In terms of archaeological discoveries and self-knowledge, I must say that I was surprised and amazed at what I learned through this thoroughly exhausting process. In the end, I was not taken to court, and the new owner and I parted ways amicably after I relayed some pieces of the puzzle of which he had been wholly ignorant. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend"--or something along those lines.

So now, after this somewhat rambling preamble, I offer you sherapop's Scent of Moving: a perfume-by-perfume history of what I wore. Why I wore what I did while slogging my way through ten years of archived layers of STUFF to arrive where I am today will be discussed in a subsequent post--as will other scents of moving not selected by me.

Pictured here are the perfumes which I wore, in reverse chronological order, throughout the grueling process of apartment hunting in the coldest winter in Boston in my history here, and the subsequent herculean task of vacating the place where I spent more years of my life than anywhere else. I am grateful to the Parfumo.net database for enabling my OCD so meticulously.

Unfortunately, Blogger appears unable to accommodate the complete list, so in the next post, I'll provide the missing month of pictures, and the discussion to follow (Part III of this series) will start from the very beginning, a very good place to start.

26 days ago
23.03.2014 16:27 Uhr
28 days ago
22.03.2014 15:00 Uhr
28 days ago
22.03.2014 03:27 Uhr
29 days ago
21.03.2014 14:09 Uhr
29 days ago
21.03.2014 06:09 Uhr
29 days ago
21.03.2014 02:24 Uhr
29 days ago
21.03.2014 01:10 Uhr
29 days ago
20.03.2014 20:31 Uhr
30 days ago
20.03.2014 07:10 Uhr
31 days ago
19.03.2014 15:07 Uhr
31 days ago
19.03.2014 15:05 Uhr
31 days ago
19.03.2014 05:25 Uhr
31 days ago
19.03.2014 05:24 Uhr
31 days ago
18.03.2014 16:00 Uhr
31 days ago
18.03.2014 15:55 Uhr
32 days ago
18.03.2014 01:27 Uhr
32 days ago
17.03.2014 20:18 Uhr
32 days ago
17.03.2014 16:42 Uhr
33 days ago
17.03.2014 05:51 Uhr












33 days ago
16.03.2014 16:57 Uhr
34 days ago
16.03.2014 03:30 Uhr
34 days ago
15.03.2014 19:41 Uhr
35 days ago
15.03.2014 15:23 Uhr
35 days ago
14.03.2014 16:00 Uhr
36 days ago
14.03.2014 04:57 Uhr
36 days ago
13.03.2014 20:20 Uhr
37 days ago
13.03.2014 15:13 Uhr
37 days ago
13.03.2014 05:23 Uhr
37 days ago
12.03.2014 22:01 Uhr
38 days ago
12.03.2014 14:10 Uhr
38 days ago
11.03.2014 20:05 Uhr
39 days ago
11.03.2014 15:26 Uhr
40 days ago
10.03.2014 14:50 Uhr
40 days ago
10.03.2014 14:50 Uhr
40 days ago
10.03.2014 14:50 Uhr
40 days ago
09.03.2014 20:26 Uhr
41 days ago
09.03.2014 06:36 Uhr
41 days ago
09.03.2014 00:26 Uhr
41 days ago
08.03.2014 16:50 Uhr
42 days ago
08.03.2014 01:04 Uhr
42 days ago
07.03.2014 16:18 Uhr
42 days ago
07.03.2014 16:18 Uhr
43 days ago
06.03.2014 23:55 Uhr
43 days ago
06.03.2014 16:36 Uhr
44 days ago
06.03.2014 06:32 Uhr
45 days ago
05.03.2014 04:11 Uhr
46 days ago
04.03.2014 05:15 Uhr
46 days ago
04.03.2014 05:11 Uhr
46 days ago
03.03.2014 16:57 Uhr
47 days ago
02.03.2014 23:36 Uhr
47 days ago
02.03.2014 23:36 Uhr
47 days ago
02.03.2014 16:37 Uhr
48 days ago
01.03.2014 22:46 Uhr
49 days ago
01.03.2014 15:48 Uhr
49 days ago
28.02.2014 20:36 Uhr
50 days ago
28.02.2014 07:01 Uhr
50 days ago
28.02.2014 01:52 Uhr
50 days ago
27.02.2014 23:21 Uhr
51 days ago
27.02.2014 00:42 Uhr
52 days ago
25.02.2014 18:20 Uhr
53 days ago
25.02.2014 06:43 Uhr
53 days ago
25.02.2014 00:03 Uhr
53 days ago
24.02.2014 19:14 Uhr
54 days ago
24.02.2014 07:40 Uhr
54 days ago
23.02.2014 22:17 Uhr
54 days ago
23.02.2014 18:44 Uhr
55 days ago
23.02.2014 15:25 Uhr
55 days ago
23.02.2014 15:21 Uhr
55 days ago
22.02.2014 16:16 Uhr



55 days ago
22.02.2014 16:14 Uhr
55 days ago
22.02.2014 16:13 Uhr

Sunday, March 16, 2014

The Scent of Moving Coming Soon...

Until then, please enjoy a fragrant glass of tea:





Friday, February 28, 2014

Tom Ford Philosophizes in and on Film: Carpe Diem—with Style!





Review of 

A Single Man

a  2009 film directed by Tom Ford



Tom Ford: fashion designer, perfume house creative director, provocateur ... film director? Yes, indeed, his début film effort, A Single Man, starring Colin Firth and also featuring Julianne Moore, has established that the creative director of Tom Ford Beauty is also an accomplished film director—and a screen writer to boot!

I must confess that I came to this film with rather low expectations. I was very pleasantly surprised at how good the work ended up being. Critics have grumbled that A Single Man is "boring". They lament specifically the lack of plot and the hyper-aestheticism, but those are precisely the central themes of this film. The naysayers somehow missed in their visceral disdain that A Single Man, based on a novel by Christopher Isherwood, is on its face and by intention much more about style than substance.





The message of A Single Man is a simple one, and for that reason some may find it banal: Carpe Diem. Live each day to the fullest, as though it might be the last. Tom Ford's embellishment of this cliché—if indeed it is one—is to focus on all of the aesthetic minutiae of which every life is filled, provided only that one has eyes to see. And, of course, a nose to sniff.

Perfume appears in only two short segments of the film. Near the opening, what looks to be a bottle of none other than Tom Ford perfume sits on the protagonist's vanity. The bottle is turned to the side, so we are left to guess which member of the Private Collection George Falconer, the troubled English professor played by Colin Firth, might be wearing. One thing is clear: he does not have the entire collection but a single signature scent, along with two bottles of what look to be classic cologne or after shave. One of the “goofs” of this film listed at the IMDB database is that the bottle of spirits consumed by the protagonist was created in 1999, but the action takes place in 1962. No one seems to have noticed that Tom Ford Perfume did not exist at that time, either. In fact, Tom Ford himself was born in 1961!

The second scene in which perfume is briefly referenced is when the professor is speaking with a departmental secretary, whose beauty he is praising in a rather inappropriate way—and not only because he is gay. George is enraptured by the woman, whose physical beauty is enhanced by her scent, which he recognizes and identifies outloud: Arpège.




This scene effectively conveys an idea sometimes lost sight of: that sex and aesthetics are two completely different things. George, being a gay man, has no physical attraction to the woman whose beauty he admires. He finds her to be an exquisite sight to behold, something to gaze upon in awe, an object of reverence, not desire.




Some would say that women should be regarded as neither sex objects nor art objects or repositories of aesthetic value. But that sort of view supposes that human beings have essences. I favor a more existential approach: that people are what they choose to become. If a woman decides to focus on aesthetics or to render herself physically attractive—whether as a work of art or as an object of desire—that can be a perfectly valid choice, it seems to me, provided only that it is a genuine choice. Different people have different strengths and weaknesses. Work with what you've got.

The problem with beautiful women is not that they are beautiful, but that for most of the history of humanity, women have been excluded at the outset from roles beyond those of sexual partner, mother, and aesthetic object. More recently, as women have been afforded the opportunity to do other things as well, those three roles have become (and remain) choices for some.


My impression is that "beautiful" men have to deal with many of the same prejudices as do beautiful women. Stated starkly: many people have a hard time believing that a person can be both comely and intelligent. It's fine to be one or the other, but handsome, intelligent, and talented all at once? That would be way too many good genes concentrated in a single set of chromosomes!


Charlotte or "Charlie", the woman played by Julianne Moore in the film, has spent her life in the role of the beautiful young woman. She was married for nine years and raised a child. Her husband eventually left her—the implication being that he moved on to someone younger and more beautiful than she. Charlotte aged over the course of the decade of their relationship to become someone other than the woman she appeared earlier to be.

Charlie is the classic example of the woman who dedicated everything to her husband and focused primarily upon her beauty and his needs. She has no career, and now that her husband has abandoned her, she finds herself without moorings, a wealthy middle-aged woman who drinks heavily and wonders what she should do now that she is no longer a nubile young thing, and her child has also left the nest. (It is a bit unclear in the film, but the child may have been from a previous marriage.) Charlie never developed her talents nor pursued a career because she was too busy being the beautiful wife of her husband and the mother of a child.

The film is set in Los Angeles in 1962. At that time, women had many fewer options and opportunities than they do today. It is becoming more and more rare to find women like Charlotte in that sort of predicament, although it certainly does happen and is far more common in other parts of the world. But none of this is really what A Single Man is about. This becomes abundantly clear in a scene where George and Charlotte lie juxtaposed on the floor, wallowing in their respective state of despair. George is a college English professor. Having this credential, a successful career outside of the home, has done nothing to save him from his fate.




Charlotte may never have experienced true love, but George did, and he lost the love of his life after a relationship of sixteen years. The film focuses upon the existential despair of George, not Charlotte, though they are friends in part because they share the very same plight. Both have been left bereft: Charlotte because her husband abandoned her, and George because his long-term partner, Jim, has died in an automobile accident. The very identities of these grieving survivors have become bound up with people who are no longer a physical part of their lives but continue to dominate them psychologically from afar.

One appealing aspect of A Single Man is that it is intentionally and repeatedly ambiguous about a wide range of provocative questions regarding homo- and heterosexuality. Tom Ford leaves enough unanswered questions to allow the viewer to draw his or her own conclusions about the meaning of the bare facts of the story. To some, the fact that George and Jim were truly in love, and Charlotte never was, may be interpreted to mean that the love between two males is somehow higher or more exalted or more authentic than the business-like relationships which so many heterosexual marriages become as couples balance the demands of child-rearing and household maintenance.

In some ways Charlotte exemplifies the stereotypical “fag hag,” who ardently wishes, against all physical reality, that her gay male friend might finally see the heterosexual light. (They did have a physical relationship in the past but it did not work out—because George was really gay.) Yet the message in the film is not unequivocally that women are somehow inferior or incapable of true love. Heterophobes may read the text in that way, but a more catholic interpretation would be that love is very rare, between any two people, whether two men, a man and a woman, or two women.


Tom Ford manages to depict the relationship between George and Jim as one of true love, but also as natural as can be. While that sort of depiction may no longer seem revolutionary, given the recent social advances on this front, there was a time when homosexual love was regarded by a swath of the populace as pathological, something to be hidden and corrected or cured.


Homosexual love is presented as normal in this film, while the so-called normal “all American” family is depicted as somewhat unbalanced. George's next door neighbors, a typical suburban family of the early sixties, are cast in a rather negative light. In one brief segment, the young daughter, a blond child with a Rhoda Penmark-like demeanor (see The Bad Seed), catches a butterfly and destroys it between her hands by rubbing them together, crushing the delicate creature's wings to dust. (Animal rights lovers rest assured: the Humane Society monitored the production of this film and has certified that no cruelty was done!)


The juxtaposition of this somewhat boorish and coldly brutal family with the gentle homosexual couple next door seems to be a way of objecting to the erroneous attribution to homosexuals throughout history of psychological and sexual perversion. Again, a heterophobe might read too much into such examples, but a more liberal reading would perhaps acknowledge that cruelty and pathology transcend all demographic and gender-orientation lines.

The film offers a “sexual-preference-less” conception of love (analogous to “color blind”), though the only two characters who achieve true love happen to be two males. The message is not that every liaison between any two men is automatically better than any relationship between a man and woman. This becomes clear as George is confronted with two prospective “replacements” for his long lost love, but neither can fill the void in his soul. Jim was not just a sex object for George, as becomes obvious when he rejects the repeated advances of two different and very attractive potential suitors.


A Single Man plays out over the course of a single day. George has decided to end his own life, and he moves through the morning, the afternoon, and the evening with this idée fixe in mind. He goes to the bank and removes his insurance policy and other papers from a safe deposit box, returning to his home and laying everything out with the suit in which he wishes to be dressed while lying inert in his coffin. He attaches a note to the necktie to make sure that his last sartorial wishes will be respected: tie in a Windsor knot


He leaves a stack of money in a loaf of bread for his housekeeper, and cleans out his office at the university in preparation for his final departure from this world. Once all of the arrangements have been settled in his mind, George attempts repeatedly to shoot himself with a pistol in various parts of his home. 




He is unable to settle on the appropriate arrangement, where he should be when a bullet from the gun fires through his mouth into his head. 
After multiple failed efforts: sitting on the bed, lying on the bed, standing in the bathtub, and even buried within a sleeping bag, George gives up in exasperation, distracted by the phone ringing, which he knows to be his friend Charlotte, who has been awaiting his visit, bottle of Tanqueray gin in tow.

Eventually, after spending some time with a student who has been pursuing him relentlessly, George finally renounces his plan to take his own life. 



It is not quite clear in the film whether the two men slept together or not—the sequence of floating in water could be a reflection of either a physical experience or a dreambut something about the time spent with this sensitive young man changes George's view. 


He replaces the gun back in the desk drawer and turns the key to lock it in, ending what seemed to have been his inexorable quest to commit suicide. George then makes his way back to his bed, where immediately after experiencing a neo-Leibnizian "best of all possible worlds" epiphany, he proceeds to suffer a fatal heart attack.



This dénouement, like the rest of the film, can be read in a variety of ways. One is that what George and Jim had was sacred and should not be desecrated through George's involvement with another, younger man. Another way of understanding the film is as a profound expression of romanticism: that George and Jim's life together was complete, and once Jim had departed, it was George's turn to follow, not by his own hand, but by a force beyond his control. He died not because he was too weak to face the world without Jim, but because it was time for him to go.


Every single shot of this film is perfectly composed, not because Tom Ford was attempting to be artsy-fartsy, but because he really is. The extreme attention to detail, to making sure that every single thing is in its place and properly arranged with balance and symmetry, is an expression of an aesthetic vision of life. The highly stylized quality of this film reflects a desire not only to control the environment in which one spends one's time, but also to be able to gaze upon all within one's view in awe of the beauty to be found in even the smallest of things.





Sunday, February 2, 2014

Report from the Tea Trenches: There are Thousands of Others Like You!



Of late, I've been spending a lot of my online time at Steepster, which is basically the tea lover's analogue to some intersection of Fragrantica, Parfumo, and/or Dnotes. I suppose that since there is no content beyond tea profiles and tea tasting notes (reviews--or comments relating to the same author's previous reviews), the closest comparison would be to Parfumo. 

People who love tea convene at Steepster to share their tea experiences. It's quite clear that some members spend the whole day drinking tea, and writing about drinking tea. So that's a bit different from the online perfume community experience, because few people write more than one review a day, and many people write nothing at all--aside from interacting in the forum boards.

Tea lovers, like perfume lovers, enjoy talking about their recent purchases, their struggle to "contain" their collection, and their desire to expand it at the same time. All of these dynamics are quite familiar to those who have fallen into the bottomless vortex of perfume acquisition, with many of us resolving each January to refrain from buying any more bottles until _____________ (fill in the blank). My favorite resolution is to not buy any new bottles until I have reviewed everything in my house--bottle, decant, and sample. I usually make it a month or more before breaking the resolution. I believe that my record may have been 2013, when I recall having lasted at least through the month of March! 

One relevant difference in this regard between these two obsessions is that tea costs a lot less than perfume and can be consumed several times a day--or all day long! Perfume, on the other hand, is generally worn for several hours, which means that even very prolific reviewers don't write about several different perfumes in a single day. With all of the aromachemicals swirling about in the air these days, that might not even be safe!

What are the other differences between "fumeheads" and "students of tea"? One may be that people who write about their tea experience do not appear to be advocating for the tea. I suppose that one could consider raves to be a form of exhortation and negative remarks a form of dissuasion. But more than anything, people who write about tea seem to be simply sharing their personal experience with a particular brand, style, and harvest of tea. Some people prefer blends; others prefer single-origin leaves. 

There are five major families of tea: black, oolong, green, white, and pu-erh, and different people tend to greatly prefer some of these over others. (In China, yellow tea is considered a sixth major category, but I have never tried it!) Some people prefer herbal infusions, which are not really "tea" at all, for they contain nothing derived from the tea plant, camellia sinensis. In navigating one's way through the vast and kaleidoscopic world of tea and tea-like brews, subjectivity is key: something not to be overcome but to be celebrated. 





No one seems to have any problem with a person who finds jasmine or oolong teas headache-inducing, for example. We are different people, and different people like different things, including different types of tea, in large part as a result of not only physiological factors, but also cultural habits acquired over time. Sencha is the number one tea in Japan. In Argentina, the "national infusion" (defined by law!) is maté. Is one of these beverages better than the other? In a referendum, the Japanese might insist that sencha is superior, but Argentinians would certainly demur!

There are groups of tea lovers who all seem to be patronizing certain very popular tea emporia, many of which would be absolutely unknown to the average person. There are also "controversial" tea providers--above all, Teavana--whose business practices elicit anger and denunciations reminiscent of some of the vitriol slung by perfumistas at houses such as Bond no 9, Creed, and Montale, among others which are beloved by many but scorned by others. In these and many other ways, the social world of tea and the social world of perfume seem to have many parallels.

There are many different levels, qualities, and kinds of tea within each family--indeed, more than there are of all perfumes taken together! People tend to like or dislike certain "genres", just as with perfume. In Japan, there are undoubtedly imbibers of maté (an herbal infusion packing a major punch of caffeine), and in Argentina, there are undoubtedly people who prefer sencha (a green tea with a clean, vegetal taste). 

Some tea drinkers add sugar or honey and cream or lemon to their brew; others regard such "adulteration" as akin to an act of desecration! In all of these matters of taste, the cultural milieu in which we are raised affects us without fully determining our preferences. How else could I, sherapop, who grew up in a perfume-free home, have become so obsessed with perfume? Why am I, sherapop, the only person in my family who even knows what bancha and pu-erh are?

In the school of hot cups, I have found less snobbery and less tendency to indulge in hype as a way of justifying one's tea preferences than I have sometimes witnessed in the spaces frequented by perfumistas. I believe that this may have something to do with the difference in price between fine tea and most niche perfume. If an ordinary (working) person drops $300 on a 50ml bottle of perfume, it had better be good. Very good

For the last couple of months, I have purchased little perfume and a ton of tea. Yet each order of tea, often containing up to a dozen--or more!--different varieties ends up costing less than a single bottle of perfume. It occurred to me that since tea is an intrinsically rich olfactory experience, in addition to being a healthy habit, given that the body and mind function best when well-hydrated, more perfumistas should perhaps look to the opportunity for olfactory enrichment readily available to them in what looks from afar to be a modest and mundane cup of tea. 

In truth, once one cuts through the packaging and perfume marketing hype, looking for the olfactory experience within the genie bottle--not the seduction of associating with the sorts of people who use, advocate, and advertise perfume--it becomes obvious that the sniffing in one case (the fumes emanating off the surface of a cup of tea or from a packet of dried leaves) is not really any different than it is in the other (the fumes wafting off one's neck or wrist--or ankles!). 

In fact, my fragrant friends, I have discovered that many of the most annoying aspects of the perfume industry in the twenty-first century--including the removal of natural substances from perfumes and the increasingly abstract and synthetic compositions being fobbed off in kitschy bottles as fine fragrances in their stead--are altogether absent from the world of tea. 

I exhort you, therefore, to consider expanding your olfactory horizons by opening the door to the multifaceted universe of tea, not only for the potable pleasure which it affords, not only for the health benefits which it brings, but also because of the olfactory adventures which await you in the exquisite range of teas carefully cultivated, harvested, roasted, steamed, dried, and blended in endless ways to produce a near infinity of flavors and scents all beckoning you to enjoy!