I thought Cuir de Nacre would be my favorite in this new line of three exceptionally well made perfumes, but it turns out – as it so frequently does – that I was wrong.
It has been a while that I was so completely enamored with a perfume from the very first sniff, but it would not be an overstatement when I said, I adore this and I want it to be mine (the latter said with a drawn-out iiiiii and a scary laugh).
Ann Gerard is a Parisian jeweller, whose elegant creations are sought after among those in the know. She asked perfumer Bertrand Duchaufour to create her line of perfumes and he really is on a good streak lately. His work has matured and he produces outstanding perfumes, Seville a l’aube impressed me hugely and actually reminds me of Perle de Mousse, not in smell but in terms of a shimmering radiance and brightness and above-average tenacity, then he created the impressive India trio for Neela Vermeire and now these perfumes for Ann Gerard are following suit – Bertrand, you are amazing.
UPDATE: In the light of recent events, I feel I have to put a qualifier on to that last statement. While I am, obviously, no less impressed with Bertrand Duchaufour’s artistical and technical prowess, I am disappointed and saddened by the fact that he chose to work for Uzbekistan’s dictator Karimov. (He created a bespoke perfume for his daughter, details see in an article by the Independent and on The Non-Blonde). This is a spectacularly bad decision for obvious ethical reasons, and also a very selfish one, as M. Duchaufour not only hurts his own reputation, but also brings bad press and possible financial repercussions upon his former patrons, among them Neela Vermeire, Penhaligon’s, L’Artisan Parfumeur and the line I’m writing about today, Ann Gerard. The motivation behind such a move remains a mystery to me, but apparently money makes the world go around, and this is just another instance of money winning out over everything else. There is no other explanation I can fathom, but I would love to be educated.
It makes me sad and angry having to type this, because my heart goes out to all the innocent bystanders of this unsavory affair. I really hope people are able to distinguish between the person of Bertrand Duchaufour and his personal decisions and the former patrons he worked for. Boycotting Ann Gerard, Neela Vermeire or L’Artisan will only hurt them, not the perfumer.
In any case, my review of Perle de Mousse and next week’s Cuir de Nacre had been written before the scandal came to my attention, and in the spirit of what I said above – let’s not take it out on the perfume and on Ann Gerard, who is not involved. I could not help but put a question mark after my title though, since my pure joy about this perfume has been tainted, at least for now, and that is very sad and frankly, it makes me furious with M. Duchaufour.
Perle de Mousse was created by Bertrand Duchaufour and includes notes of aldehydes, pink pepper, bergamot, green mandarin, galbanum resin, ivy, lily of the valley, hawthorn, Bulgarian rose, clove, jasmine, gardenia, lentiscus absolute, ambergris, musk and hint of vanilla.
Perle de Mousse opens very fresh, green and bracing, with a citrus-galbanum-pink pepper accord further lifted into the air by aldehydes. The green darkens soon, a lovely, cool ivy note emerges and softly eases the perfume over into a very floral heart of rose, gardenia and jasmine. The chypre undertone, present from the start, has been achieved without oakmoss, but is still very convincing. Lentiscus, ambergris and musk make up the base and evoke a mossy forest floor so realistically, it is a pure joy.
Pure joy, that is what this perfume means to me. It it eye-rollingly gorgeous, extremely elegant and refined and it just smells
damn fantastically good.
I don’t want to overfill this review with love-struck ramblings. just know that I want this, I want this badly and I highly urge you to give it a try.
Who doesn’t need a little shot of pure joy in their lives?
First of all – few aesthetic matters are surpassed by the joy of a new perfume delight 🙂
And then the sad part – I agree with you on the lack of wisdom displayed in agreeing to participate in the absurd vanity of close family of a dictator. As ordinary consumers we can’t avoid inadvertently supporting people or causes we woukd have preferred not to. But we have to assume that this was a deliberate choice. A naive on at the very least.
I am glad that you are adressing the issue because I have been contemplating purchasing a fragrance from one of the above mentioned houses, and they are not to blame.
This is an issue that we are often confronted with – to what degree must we separate the artist from his work? There is no easy answer. And time is also a factor. Unsavory decisions fade over time – many do at least – and we move on to more curremt issues, as perhaps we should.
There is very little innocence left as we mature and understand more and more of what goes on in the world – and in ourselves.
Thank you for adding your thoughts, Marie!
I agree with you – his decision was a very naive one at best, but a man like him can’t really afford to be naive, I believe.
Your last sentence is incredibly sad, because it is true and it is a shame that it has to be true.
Yes, the loss of innocence is sad. I’ve been thinking about this quite a lot recently due to specific circumstances. It takes effort not to let the heart harden as a result of certain experiences, but we must try to resist that.
Well said. It is important to try, for our own sake and for that of our children.
As much as I acknowledge that everyone has their flaws, I have to say I’m extremely put off by BD’s decision. Perhaps I’m not as outraged as I should be by Sting being paid seven figures to sit next to Karimov’s daughter at a fashion show, but I think that’s because I don’t connect with “Roxanne” as much as I connect with Amaranthine. Duchaufour was foolishly cavalier about this questionable commission, and although some may forget this transgression (which, given its seedy-yet-unviolent nature, might happen sooner rather than later), I don’t think I can look at his new work without feeling uneasy. I just hope others don’t ignore it, like when Vogue published a fawning feature article on Bashar al-Assad’s “glamorous” wife.
I was thinking of Amaranthine myself – it was – perhaps still is – on my wish list. Now I feel a bit uneasy.
I find the celebration of dictators’ wives objectionable as well – however “glamorous” they might be. The world needs to outgrow its feudal fascination and celebration of royal figures and others like them.
I live in a constitutional monarchy myself – and not liking that part one bit – and it’s sickening to watch the idolization of younger the members of the royal family – who are chic dressers, I admit that – by the media. “Grow up!” is what I want to shout.
Uneasiness is what we are all left with, when looking at his body of work now. And that is such a shame. He has tainted his own reputation and that of his work with this kind of unethical (greedy? thoughtless? immoral?) behaviour.
There are certainly questionable and objectionable aesthetics also in the perfume, fashion and makeup world. Aesthtetics when removed from considerations of the “real world” (I’m making an assumption here, I know) run the risk of becoming soul-less. Perhaps Bertrand Duchaoufor was seduced by the thought of ancient empires, the mystery of the East etc. etc. I don’t know. But considering the many tasks one could have chosen connecting Uzbekistan and France through perfume doesn’t seem wisely chosen.
Without further comparison I personally had a problem with the aesthetics of Parfum d’Empire when I first read the copy on their website. I just revisited the site and it seems that the rhetoric has been toned down some. I couldn’t quite stomach the oppulent and celebratory references to war lords or much less than necessarily benign rulers of ancient empires.I do realize that perfumery is not an exercise in modern democracy, but there are bullets that can be dodged. There’s still a reference to the “Slavic soul” (which is supposedly passionate in nature) in relation to Ambre Russe that I can’t wrap my head around. Examples of such rhetoric in the world of art are plenty and I personally find that they often take away from my joy in the work of art in question.
I wish he would come forward with an explanation. And if there is none (can there be? I don’t know.), an apology. Why? Because he is not simply a private person, but a figure of public interest, something he cultivated himself. He is his own brand and not just an anonymous face behind the laboratory door.
As for Parfum d’Empire: I find myself to often ignore the entire back story as to not put myself off the perfume itself.
I was glad to read your disclaimer – it’s really unfathomable why would Mr. Duchafour do something like that – was the money behind it worth it?
I believe every perfumista will distinguish between the brands and the perfumer, I wonder if he will have reprecussions of any kind regarding his future employers or are they going to turn a blind eye to this?
I don’t think he was aware of the kind of negative publicity this would bring (in itself a quite naive thought).
But it’ll blow over eventually, as all things do…
Thank you for this lemming-worthy review, but most of all thank you for discussing the uneasiness that Monsieur Duchaufur has cast among many of us perfume lovers.
What I found particularly disturbing is the fact that he also attended the party thrown by his morally questionable client, for which he even expressed admiration…
I would love to hear his point of view, and be proved wrong despite all the appearences.
By the way, I agree with you: I would not like to see small independent lines who had hired BD prior to his unfortunate connection with a dictator to be held responsible for his “blunder”.
My position might be different for those clients who hire Monsieur Duchaufur now, fully aware of his choices.
In any case, I go back to the perfume, and ask you what you think about the third of the Ann gerard fragrances (Ciel d’opale – I think). It was the one intriguing me the most, based on the list of notes! 😉
Thank you for mentioning the perfume! 🙂
I’m in two minds about putting the discussion on top of the perfume, since it is lovely, and Ann Gerard deserves her scents to be taken for what they are, not to serve as vehicles for political or ethical discussions, but it would have been impossible for me not to address this current issue. It is out there and to review one of his perfumes and praising his talent without taking a standpoint would be a standpoint in itself, namely condoning it, and that I cannot do.
As for Ciel d’Opale: I’m currently testing it, and while it is very well made and a beauty, I still feel it is the least innovative of the three. A full review will follow in the near future.
First let me comment on the perfume: I have never been a fan of ‘green’ perfumes, but I have worn Ormonde Woman so much already this autumn that anything with the words ‘dark green’ makes my ears prick up! My interest is definitely piqued, plus I am developing a dangerous soft spot for small beautifully curated collections, especially if they are created by my favourite perfumer. Which unfortunately does bring me to M. Duchaufour… he has acted through ugly levels of greed and unadulterated stupidity and I am sadly disappointed. You can’t help but wonder about both his moral fibre and his business acumen, and I do echo your wish, Birgit, that this doesn’t affect his patrons. Is it too much to hope that he will follow in Nelly Furtado’s footsteps: apologise and give the fee to charity??
The perfume is awesome! And he entire collection is a gem, lovingly made, beautiful flacons and boxes and suffering from the misfortune of being used as a Duchaufour discussion point. But what can you do? 🙂
“Unadulterated stupidity”- I couldn’t have put it more succinctly.
I am beyond gutted about this. I know he’s a freelancer but he’s also arguably the most sought after perfumer on the planet right now. Surely he could have afforded to turn this down? I hope (in vain) that he didn’t know the full story about the family and makes some kind of public statement, like Alexandra says. I somehow doubt he will, though L’Artisan might encourage him to.
I agree that it would be unfair to punish the brands he has worked for in the past. The best thing I can think of right now is for us to voice our disapproval and I’m grateful that you and others have given us a platform to do that. It’s also a shame that his behaviour may have tainted this perfume for you B. It does sound joyous.
I should think he could have afforded turning it down (But what do I know?) In any case, I think he acted in a way, that all ethical concerns aside, was totally without thought as to what would come of it. Even if he doesn’t care at all about Uzbekistan and the personalities of Karimov and his daughter, he should at least care and think about the fallout that such a decision inevitably incurs. Did he not think that people might see this as questionable???? Is he not even concerned with his own reputation, if everything else that is problematic here does not stop him?
Maybe you are right and a big patron like L’Artisan will encourage him to make a statement. I hope so.
I’m willing to bet that attorneys don’t like all their clients but they are hired to do a job and they do it. I did the hair of 2 women whose husbands had less than savory business practices shall we say. Does that make me a bad person? I was hired to do a job and I did it. It’s easy for us to take the moral high road and say he should have refused. It’s not our wallet being affected. Plus, whose to say when he was approached with this offer he even knew the background. I doubt most people go and research the moral fiber of potential clients. He’s a perfumer. Who is he to judge what kind of life that guy leads? He was hired to do a job and he did it. Maybe he doesn’t feel it’s his place to make a moral statement on events of the world. Maybe he just wants to make perfume.
Anyway, this perfume sounds lovely. I’ve seen it mentioned elsewhere with similar glowing remakrks and I definitely want to try it some day.
Poodle, apparently this was a 2 year collaboration, and he went to the launch, praising this woman, who’s country is about to be heavily sanctioned for human trafficking (child slavery) to the skies, extolling her “femininity and sensuality”. He made special celebuscents just for her, and was working with her for quite some time. You cut and styled someone’s hair. I’d say there’s a big difference there. Wouldn’t you?
Is she the dictator or is her dad the dictator? I don’t know the whole story. Maybe it was a very bad decision on his part. I doin’t know. Maybe he isn’t as fabulous a person as everyone has made him out to be. Yes, I cut someones hair. He made a perfume. I wasn’t trying to start an argument.
Poodle, please don’t feel bad, you have not started an argument. I welcome and value every opinion here!!! I’m glad you voiced your point of view.
Perfume is a passionate subject, and as fans we tend to adore those who make it, and are disturbed when they don’t live up to our (imagined) ideals.
Hi, Poodle, I know you weren’t arguing, and I was glad to read your opinion! No worries there. To answer your question, Islam Karimov is the ruler at the moment-his favorite daughter, Gulnara, the woman in question here, is his official heir apparent and wields considerable power in Uzbekistan. She has been called by Western diplomats, “the most hated woman in Uzbekistan.” Hope that clarifies it a bit.
Okay, thanks. That does clarify a lot. I was giving him the benefit of the doubt but you have a point. Not a good choice for him to make. I didn’t know all the details.
Maybe he just wants to make perfume. That is certainly a possibility. A naive stance for a grown person, but possible nonetheless. He would have had to live under a soundproof glass jar to not find out what was going on with his client and his country over a period of collaboration. He certainly has the right to ignore that or not attribute any value to it. And live with the consequences of that stance. And something tells me that he wouldn’t have had to starve if he had chosen not to take on the job and that makes a huge difference to me, personally. There are problems that can’t be avoided, and there are problems that can. This one belongs to the latter category in my book. And no changes in any society across the world came about without people who cared about what went on.
I discussed this with my husband, who is a surgeon, and he said he would operate on Karimov if he were asked to do so, because it was not his place to make a judgement and everybody deserved medical treatment equally.
Do I think he is a bad person for that? No.
Do I agree with him? No, although in his particular field the parameters are decidedly different, so it is not really a comparable situation.
Duchaufour is a perfumer, yes, but through his own choice he is also a person of public interest, a perfumer-superstar if you will, and as such, the freedom to do as you please, is reduced. Decisions must be made with concern as to how they affect others. At least that is how I see it…
Anyway, the perfume is lovely indeed (and so is Cuir de Nacre) and really deserves to be smelled!!! 🙂
I’d operate Karimov only in the case of emergency. If he needs a nip & tuck only, I’d happily throw him from my surgery. I hate that they can live happily ever after and nobody shows them the limit !
Your husband took the Hippocratic Oath, and that means he must treat anyone in need of his medical skills. It’s one of the oldest and most humane and ethical statements in the human world. I very much doubt he would do what BD did! Art meant to glorify individuals, and medical care meant to treat them when they are sick or injured, are different things.
I agree. That’s an important distinction.
Thank you, B., for the statement. The joy is somewhat dulled by B.D.’s activities now… I already had the Ann Gerard parfumes in my shopping basket few days ago, but then I read the article and couldn’t finish the purchase. And I know that in fact I punished Ann Gerard with that and not the very person who’d fully deserve it. I despise him ! I’m so naive (and now disappointed) : I thought artists and especially parfum artists are the better people, with conscious and responsibility….
And I don’t agree with Poodle’s “if they hire me then I do the job” – I still remember, there was something there called ETHICS (I don’t believe B.D. desperately needed Karimov’s money, soaked in blood…).
It is all about ethics. And BD showed his by taking on this commision.
Please don’t deprive yourself of Ann Gerard perfumes!
I wasn’t aware of all the details and yes it’s nice when people have ethics. Unfortunately, not everyone does and it’s a shame when someone you once respected shows an ugly side you didn’t know they had. Oftentimes people make these decisions and think no one will be the wiser. Oftentimes that’s exactly the case. It’s sad that people are not going to buy Ann Gerard’s perfume because of this or Neela Vermeire’s and others. They had nothing to do with it. I missed the post the other day and when I commented earlier I didnt know as much as I do now. Sadly, most of the people buying fragrances he created will never know the story. We know because we are that into perfume. We like to know who created it. The average consumer has no idea that someone other than Ann Gerard or Neela Vermeire made that fragrance. I don’t think people who have worked with him in the past should have to suffer for what he did either. Maybe he’ll get fewer jobs in the future because of this. It is about ethics, you’re right, and hopefully there will be some fallout from this but I hope that it’s not the innocent bystanders who feel it.
Most people don’t have ethics, when we are truthful. And I’m not saying I’m such a good person… At the very best it was a very stupid idea of BD, and he had to expect some repercussions.
I hope you don’t feel that anybody attacked you, I’m sure that is not the case! You know how it is, emotions flare up so easily. I hope you’ll stay a reader here. 🙂
I’m sticking around. I understand how people get worked up. I don’t feel like I was attacked. No worries, B. Now if they said something negative about poodles, well then, that would be a serious offense. 😉
This is so upsetting … and I agree, Ann Gerard, Neela Vermeire and others (I am thinking of Parfums MDCI too) should not be punished for his tragic decision, but considering how deeply he is involved with the much larger brand, L’Artisan, I hope L’Artisan will force him to address the issue publicly (and I wonder whether they will continue to have him creating perfumes if he doesn’t. I would hope not!).
We’ll see what L’Artisan will do…
I forgot about MDCI, his Chypre Palatin is amazing. So upsetting indeed!
I am staying well and truly out of the political minefield here. I love BD perfumes and I will continue to love the perfumes he has created that are in my collection.
As for the Anne Gerard perfumes, I thought that the cuir de nacre would be my favourite, I have tested it a couple of times and the opening hit is to die for but sadly on me it is short lived and drops to an ok dry down. I was sent the full set of samples but after the disappointment in what I thought would be a winner for me I have not got around to trying the others, of course after your favourable review I shall remedy that pretty sharpish.
Just one thing though, there are always 2 sides to every story.
I would love to hear the other side of the story! Let’s hope we’ll get to hear it.
I hope you like Perle de Mousse better than Cuir de Nacre.
I am torn-artists and visionaries, by nature, often are not what we (or their publicists) would want. Think of Chanel and her vile history during the Nazi occupation. A certain haute couture house just last year released its designer for some pretty foul behavior. The classical composers of the past only produced works because they were sponsored by princes and upper nobility (and much artwork in general was sponsored by vain portrait hunters). However, there is such a thing today as personal integrity, and I believe BD crossed the line here. I will not punish past work collaborations, for as you said, they cannot be held responsible for actions taken after the fact. Any future work by him, however, is tainted beyond measure. That said, I have been lusting after that Perle de Mousse for some time now, and may just buy some out of protest against this horrible lapse in judgment BD took after its completion. Kind of like how now, I may actually buy a ruby, now that Burma has pulled back some of its tragic policies.
I know what you mean, artists are wont to compromise on many things to be able to practise their art. I daresay BD is not starving for his art though.
But, as you say, personal integrity and ethics is what it comes down to here.
I hope you enjoy Perle de Mousse!
This may be my present for landing a new job..and yes, I’d wear it on the first day! 🙂
Congratulations on the new job! You’ll smell terrific! 🙂
Gretchen, I find that my thought about this matter are a bit clearer after reading your post. People BD worked with in the past are not to blame for the present situation. Personally, I will have to put future BD creations on ice for a while and follow any developments in the matter. And it is certainly true that great works of art from the past were created under the patronage of some deplorable rulers and/or created by someone we might not approve of with our modern sensibilities. It can be hard to grasp that beauty can come from its opposite.
There are questions we might never know the answers to – e.g. whether a person’s highly unfortunate action is the result of a singular instance of flawed judgment (the we-all-make-mistakes-principle) or whether it’s the result of a general flaw in that person’s character. I’m speaking generally here. And if a person comes out after the fact and acknowledges the problem one should always seek not to pursue the matter any further, in my opinion.
Your description of this reminds me of another favorite of mine: Roja Dove’s Unspoken!! Is this similar to your nose? 🙂
Absolutely, it is. It is like a lighter, more airy version of Unspoken.
Truthfully, I wanted to mentioned that, but I didn’t find a good place in this already overwrought post.
Thank you for bringing it up!
Hm, I think I have to re-try Unspoken…
After calming my emotions a bit, I just wanted to add that your review is spot on, these are Ann Gerard’s perfumes, they match her lovely jewelry to a T, and are well worthy of sampling and buying. I hadn’t thought of the Unspoken/Perles de Mousse parallel, but you are correct, they are kissing cousins.
I’m glad you like those perfumes as well.
Lovely review. The set may be my next purchase.
I just finished reading Denyse Bealieu’s (SP?) The Perfume Lover and I have to say that my impression of BD was that he was kinda mean and appeared to be distracted during the many encounters described. I wonder if he was concurrently working on Duende at the same time he was doing work for this despicable family?
The set is surely a good idea, I love it when brands immediately come out with a discovery set. 🙂
I don’t know anything of the timing of this. I hope for some kind of statement from BD, so people are not left with this bad impression.
I can understand the sadness on this count. Who I feel particularly bad for ( aside from those in the nation in question, obviously ) are those who were involved with BD prior to the scandal, but who will be releasing these scents during and after, Given that it can take some time from brief and commission to fragrance launch and BD is prolific, I sense some unfortunately-timed releases are due these next six months or so. 😦
Same here. Those involved with Bertrand will feel the repercussions of something that has nothing to do with them, and that bothers me. Which is why I wanted to point out the fact that boycotting those other patrons is not a good idea.
There are so many brands that will take the low road to make money. Just look at how they bend over backwards to get their stuff on the Chinese market, even though China is known for their large scale violation of human rights. Moreover, for cosmetic companies this means, their products will have to be tested on animals, as is mandatory in China. Latest example, Urban Decay. My point is, if you really want to boycot all of these things, there is, unfortunately, not much out there you can enjoy anymore (sorry if this sounds a bit cynical). But in the end, you can boycot a brand, should you not agree with the way they do business. Mr. Duchafour, however, makes things rather complicated. He chose to work for Gulnara Karimova. That’s his choice and you can agree with it or not. I’m not saying he did the right thing, it’s all kinds of wrong as far as I am concerned. But if you choose to boycot his work, you are indeed hurting others that are not involved. Others that put lots of money, energy and care in the perfumes he created. He has a responsibility to his other employers, past and present, but he chose to ignore that fact. The sad part is, that he was probably only hired for his name and not his talent and creativity. Dictatorial regimes are there all about their own glorification and therefore only want to be involved and seen with the most popular people, brands etc. of the day. This time, they wanted the rockstar perfumer of the day, which just happened to be Mr. Duchafour. One day, he will realize this and hopefully kick himself for having been so stupid.
Thank you, Claudia! That is exactly my point. You summed it up perfectly!
Most of my thoughts have already been expressed by you Birgit and in the other comments, I just want to thank you for posting this!
And yes I would give Karimov medical treatment (in the past I’ve had patients who’s been convicted murderers among other things) but I refuse to ever wear his daughter’s perfume!
Ann Gerards perfumes sounds lovely and I’ll try them if I get an opportunity.
Thank you, Eva!
The perfumes are lovely indeed, a very well thought through launch.
I think that Ann Gerard’s perfumes will be my last BD’s work I test/buy for a while. I thought about it for a while and, as I’ve written in other comments on the topic, I agree that we shouldn’t punish brands that employed Mr. Duchaufour in the past but going forward… In my book it’s worse than Guerlan’s “worked like a negro” gaffe.
Anyway, as always, it was a very nice review (have you seen that horde of lemmings running in my direction?) 😉
I’ve seen the lemmings running west at a good clip… 😉
I’m glad we agree that punishing his other patrons would be unfair.
BD can do whatever he wants to do, but we all live with the choices we make. He has the freedom to screw up what ever he wants. We also have the freedom to choose what we want and approve of in our world of consumerism. I will not be purchasing any future fragrances of Mr. BD no matter whose name is on the label if I know he had anything to do with them. This saddens me deeply.
It is saddening indeed, Anne. There are surely two sides to every story, but whatever is behind this, it surely has damaged M. Duchaufour and tainted his work.
Pingback: Elegance Is Timeless – Review: Ann Gerard Cuir de Nacre | Olfactoria's Travels
Dear Birgit, did you read Betrand Duchaufour’s reply on Cafleurebon? http://www.cafleurebon.com/duchaufour-on-his-trip-to-uzbekistan-bertrand-speaks-out-uncut-and-unedited/
I personally think, M. Duchaufour explains quite well how this unfortunate co-operation came about.
As to future projects of some of the brands mentioned here, I would like to mention that the majority of perfumes are planned a long time ahead. Neela Vermeire, for example, told me that she has already more fragrances in the process of being finished. It would be financially and otherwise impossible for her to cancel them. Should she be punished for bringing out these fragrances? I do not think so…
I do not think so either, which was exactly my point to even address the subject. I read many comments on other sites anout boycotting, and I find (as I stated above) that to punish other patrons was unfair, unnecessary and pointless.
So we are in absolute agreement on this point.
I saw Cafleurebon’s article today, and I’m very glad that Bertrand got the opportunity to recount his side of things. There are always two sides to every story. Unfortunately I am not as well connected as Michelyn Camen is, so I’m glad she received a response from him.
Pingback: Laughs, Lemmings, Loves – Episode 24 « Undina's Looking Glass
I have just read Mr Duchaufour’s explanation on cafleurebon, and I must say this is one of the lamest excuses ever. I was just missing the “oh, but this was such a long time ago” one.
If he’d at least shown some backbone.
Actually, this makes me detest his creations even more, and though I own some of them, putting them on would evoke physical reactions.
I greatly admire those people who threw away their scents.
As for his latest stuff for MDCI and Neela Vermeire as well as l’Artisan: I would not have bought them anyway as they did not appeal to me due to olfactive reasons.
It’s not the explanation and apology I was hoping for… 😦
Pingback: My Favorite Things – End Of 2012 Edition | Olfactoria's Travels
Pingback: Tale Of A London Perfume Crawl – And A Giveaway! | Olfactoria's Travels
Pingback: Flying the Flag – Union Perfumes Mini-Reviews | Olfactoria's Travels