Different professions foster different attitudes and lifestyles. In the world of scent, developing a systematic standard for perfumery criticism requires deep smelling, weighing, and thinking.

There’s always a good amount of pure, cute naivety in a beginner. The search for truth begins the moment you decide to run. Whether you choose a marathon or a sprint depends entirely on your vision and personality.

If you choose the marathon, you must still practice sprints and breathing in between. Breathe in and breathe out. Train, reflect, create, and summarize.

One of those sprints took place for me in Milan at Esxence, a tradeshow dedicated to the art of perfumery. The discussions heard and products experienced triggered something in me. They moved both the culture enthusiast and the frank person who enjoys arguments that evoke a positive, developing sense of criticism.

WHY DO WE FOCUS ON SCENT?

Before we proceed, one has to answer a basic question. Why do we focus on the sense of smell and perfumes? The reasons are mostly multi-disciplinary and cross-cultural.

To begin with, perfumes are about intelligence and beauty. However, beauty differs from one cultural room to another, and from person to person. It remains ungraspable because it is based on unique experiences and knowledge. Ultimately, a perfume is a beautiful work of art.

We must also consider the well-known fact that smell connects deeply with our memory. It constantly plays upon the feeling of nostalgia. This is a truth we all know well from our personal experiences.

Furthermore, a sense of mystery surrounds the entire medium, and humans are simply curious by nature. Smell cannot be easily transmitted like images or melodies. Because it is less reliable than vision or sound, it raises fascinating questions about communication and interpretation.

Finally, from a storyteller’s point of view, scents are chemical narratives. They act as novellas and poems that carry deep meanings. These sensory messages are meant to be perceived and kept close.

PERFUMERY CULTURE IS…

…’farouche’ as they say in French, meaning both ‘shy’ and ‘fierce’ at the same time. I started on the shy side. I learned the basics by reading and measuring scented poems line by line in a Paris laboratory.

Soon, I discovered that the industry holds numerous opinions and opinion holders. Many of these individuals barely touch a pipette or stand near a scale. Yet, they still voice annoying opinions about oriental scents. They clearly do not know how frustrating it really is to work resinoids into a perfume formula.

(background sound: ‘Drop It Like It’s Hot’ by Snoop Dogg)

Prophet Muhammad was said to be a perfume lover. One of his quotes states that perfume is the intangible quality of God—the unmeasurable and otherworldly.

We can also view a perfume as a cultural product full of meanings. But how do we perceive it correctly? How do we evaluate its quality or interpret its message? Where exactly do we position this mysterious piece of art?

To hear more perspectives, I attended the Esxence lectures in Milan. I wanted to hear new approaches to perfumery criticism, and of course, smell them all!

THE STABLE MARKETING POINT OF VIEW

It is easy to grasp and understand fragrance from a marketing point of view. This approach simply views the fragrance as a commercial product.

We can easily evaluate the packaging or calculate the cost of raw materials. We look at the effort spent to produce “the story” behind the creation—the ones “connected with the soul” or “inspired by travels to exotic places.”

We are all familiar with these narratives. They are often inspiring, great, and educational. Here, we sense perfume from a consumer point of view. We look at where it is distributed, how the media communicates it, and who fills the target group. This approach offers a clear, logical system where numbers and statistics matter most.

ILLUMINATING BEYOND THE NUMBERS

Coming from the world of semiotics and qualitative research, I must stay true to my roots. I agree with Vin Scully, who said that statistics are used much like a drunk uses a lamppost: for support, not illumination. Let’s provide some illumination.

THE ART POINT OF VIEW IN PERFUMERY CRITICISM

Many of us, including myself, state that perfumery is art. If so, how do we evaluate it? How do we criticize a fragrance from an artistic perspective?

During the Esxence panel on perfumery criticism, the right approach remained unclear. Speakers offered comparisons to the movie industry, award systems, literature, and authorship.

The discussion mostly focused on exchanging information, sharing impressions, and creating a shared language. We can certainly “culturize” scents this way to make them more domestic. However, this is still not enough to develop a true system for evaluation. In my frank opinion, the actual logic of criticism went missing during this panel.

BORROWING TOOLS FROM CINEMA AND LOGIC

Analyzing perfumes through their creators is a beautiful, poetic idea. It provides fruitful ground for a breakdown, but it relies too heavily on a subject-focused approach. It does not give us a proper playground.

Instead, we could borrow frameworks from the movie industry. Cinema provides plenty of schools and tools to analyze moving images and their hidden meanings. We can study the language of film and its cultural codes. Great contributions by Italian, French, and Russian theorists offer an incredibly wide variety of analytical tools.

If we want a serious standard for fragrance criticism, we should develop a similarly systematic approach. We can base it on structuralist views or language logic.

Fortunately, we already have a great foundation. Masters like Edmond Roudnitska applied Kantian aesthetic judgment to his writings and creations. To establish a true language of perfumery, we need a system of scented logic. For instance, we could borrow frameworks from logicians and semioticians like Ludwig Wittgenstein or Roland Barthes.

ON THE CONTRIBUTION OF ONLINE OPINION LEADERS

Freedom is great, and digital platforms give everyone the freedom to express themselves. It is wonderful to have spaces where like-minded people connect, share knowledge, and learn from one another.

However, we must ask: is this online crowd always right? Should we mistake public noise for true expertise?

According to creators, parts of this digital consensus are not exactly true or accurate. Often, they are just a heavy mass of personal opinions and reflections.

The panel discussion heavily glorified the rise of the online community. Unfortunately, they missed the other side of the coin. Beyond the positive awareness these digital leaders create, a harmful side exists. The actual expertise behind these online opinions is sometimes highly questionable.

REAL EXPERTISE VS. ONLINE LIKES

Start-ups are great, but they excel when the people behind them possess real education and experience. You cannot become an expert out of the blue just by buying a camera and blogging about a curious topic.

Pardon my French, but I do not mean to imply that analyzing scent is easy. It is not. However, it is far too easy to generate empty opinions and social media likes. These subjective metrics cannot form the foundation of real critique.

Sometimes I speak too much, and sometimes I do not speak at all. Yet, I remain deeply curious to explore, learn, and understand. I highly value dialogue, and I believe having a strong stance is essential.

When we speak of perfumery criticism, it must be fair, professional, and conscious. It needs to acknowledge cultural backgrounds, varied interpretations, and how environment alters meaning.

THE FUTURE OF SCENT EVALUATION

Criticism is cold and calculated. It must be systematic, objective, and balanced.

If we want to build a vocabulary and grammar for perfumery, we cannot look only at the final product. We cannot rely solely on the impressions of the market.

A true critic considers all elements, codes, and lines. We must evaluate the raw materials used, their quality, and the complexity or simplicity of the formula. We have to analyze the outcome, the sensory effect, and the resulting meanings. This requires personal reflection built on a deep knowledge of the classics to detect unoriginal copies.

A perfume is far more than a simple story or a nose behind a brand. Perfumery is a highly complex entity to analyze.

American drama critic George Jean Nathan once said that criticism represents the windows and chandeliers of art. It illuminates the darkness where art might otherwise rest unseen. Critique is essential for an art piece to survive and come alive.

After visiting Esxence and talking with creators, one thing is clear. The industry possesses immense passion, years of dedicated learning, and beautifully curated art pieces. Scent-making is definitely an art, but we still need to build the framework for its criticism.

Perhaps this write-up leans too far into the fierce side of ‘farouche’, reflecting the ambitious view of a newcomer. I might eat my words in a couple of years. Maybe yes, maybe no. But one thing is certain: there is always a way to evolve, improve, and become better.

The post When Criticising Scents appeared first on THE FRANKLY SPEAKING.

Published in LE MILE MAG and Scentury Mag: https://scentury.com/julia-ahtijainen/ 

A friend of mine, who hopes that one day I will change my field and stop wasting my talent and time, recently wrote to me: “I was thinking the other day that I really don’t like any perfume per se. All of them are just too damn strong. If they are supposed to enhance the person, they should never overpower them, but they always do. It’s like putting lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig.”

My friend accurately articulated the underlying anxiety I sometimes feel about my job. Communicating scents and perfumes is, after all, a strange and complicated field.

The Weird World of Scent Communications

Public relations and brand messaging sit in a bizarre purgatory. It exists somewhere between politics (where one must always remain polite and politically correct), babysitting (managing journalists while repeatedly explaining the importance of social media and press gifts to brand creators), and pure style. To succeed, you must look, sound, and act as a literal extension of the brand so you don’t lose loyalty points on either side of the business.

But how do we measure the results of these three competing roles? How do we quantify the blood, sweat, and tears invested in a few forced meetings and carefully polished words? Is it time wasted, or time beautifully invested?

Returning to my friend’s blunt expression: I am not a pig, and I generally dislike lipstick. Unfortunately for the PR industry, I am fiercely honest and direct. I also don’t particularly care for pigs or eating pork—unless it’s the mandatory slice of prosciutto crudo during a celebratory night out with my Italian friends.

The Semiotics of the “Dirty” and the Volatile

“Pig” is a word that carries an inherent smell. It is a heavy linguistic signifier packed with multiple cultural meanings, and certain religions ban it entirely. In his book L’Onesto Porco (“The Honest Pig”), Italian historian Roberto Finzi explores the animal from cultural, religious, and linguistic perspectives. Amusingly, the worst curse words in Italian always begin with the word porco, which also translates to “dirty.” Yet, despite the less-than-delightful smell of the slaughterhouse and the global rise of vegetarianism, most of the world still consumes pork.

Most animals only become “dirty” in our minds when we domesticate them; we accept them as they are when left in nature. In a domestic framework, everything transforms into a sign or a symbol. This realization opens a Pandora’s box of daily struggles for a semiotician trapped in product communications.

People have often accused me of being too opinionated in this line of work. Yet, if the word “perfume” originates from the Latin per fumus—meaning “through smoke”—our words naturally become volatile when communicating scents and perfumes.

To truly understand a phenomenon, a person, or a linguistic sign, we must categorize types and map out similarities and differences. We have to anchor the subject inside a structured framework so it cannot escape or fade away. When we discuss fragrance, there is no room for empty abstractions, plain delusions, or hollow expressions.

Aiming High in Fragrance Storytelling

Michelangelo allegedly wrote: “The greatest danger for all of us is not that our aim is too high and we miss it, but that it is too low and we reach it.”

We should always aim high. Communicating scents and perfumes effectively is a lot like leading the blind from a high peak. It requires leading them with genuine passion and absolute honesty. I am speaking about an artistic, truthful, and deeply humble way of translating outstanding liquid masterpieces into human language.

Applied semiotics functions as a creative act that elevates our communication. It sharpens our analytical frameworks to fit a specific purpose and maps them onto a real-world phenomenon. While a perfumer evaluates a scent based on quality, intensity, and duration of perceptibility, the storyteller treats the scent as a living entity. Capturing a fragrance in words requires the exact same imaginative effort that went into creating the juice itself.

A frustrated novelist probably lives inside every semiotician. To survive in this field, you must know how to write—but more importantly, you must know how to read. Reading is the ultimate technique for acquiring knowledge, sharpening insight, and honing critical skills. It allows us to compare subtle reworks, generic copies, and original masterpieces.

In this way, semiotic analysis feels less like marketing and more like detective work. It requires a willingness to be provocative. Semiotic theories serve as excellent hooks to hang our thinking on, and a deep knowledge of pop culture is not just a competitive advantage—it is vital for basic survival.

Navigating Our Chaotic Semiotic Environment

To decode the modern landscape, we have to understand the main characters driving our current semiotic environment:

• SPEED – Driven by rapid messages, instant feedback, information flow, rigorous execution, and real-time chronicles.
• CLUTTER – An explosion of competing ideas, content, books, music, events, and choices that demand pattern detection.
• UNPREDICTABILITY – Shifting definitions of accountability, structural flexibility, and constant cultural changes.
• DISTRACTION – Severe information overload that forces a constant battle for concentration and mindfulness.
• FRAGMENTATION – The rise of micro-niches, distinct subcultures, and the challenge of balancing the big picture with cultural sensitivity.
• IDEOLOGY – Navigating critical thinking alongside rapidly changing and competing worldviews.

The Primal Power of Olfactive Intuition

Once you wipe away the corporate lipstick and embrace this “dirty” way of analyzing fragrance, you realize the undeniable role of intuition.

Our sense of smell remains indisputably primal. Inextricably linked to memory, a scent sparks immediate neurological recall and emotional recognition. The archipallium (or archicortex) represents the most ancient part of our neuroanatomy—our primitive reptilian brain. Because of this raw connection, a perfume detective cannot complete a project without relying heavily on intuition.

One of the finest definitions of intuition belongs to legendary perfumer Edmond Roudnitska, who noted:

“Intuition is not a miracle; it is a flame which is sparked only if the necessary amounts of knowledge, experience, reflection, and meditation are available. Perfumery schooling calls for patience, attention, and perseverance.”

The post Communicating scents: Putting lipstick on a pig? appeared first on THE FRANKLY SPEAKING.