Dear Grazia magazine,
Your recent perfume article (6th December) is incredibly confusing for perfume wearers and lovers alike. You've divided perfumes into two varieties 'more' and 'less'. In the 'more' group:
Tom Ford Private Blend
Chanel Exclusifs
Dior J'Adore L'Or
Chanel No 5
Guerlain Shalimar
Mary Greenwell Plum
Chloe Love
Michael Kors Very Hollywood
Diptyque Eau Duelle
In the 'less' group:
Illuminum
Chloe floral trio
Marc Jacobs Splash range
Dior Diorama
Lalique Fleur de Cristal
Philosphy Eternal Grace
Nasomatto Nuda
In the complicated world of perfume choice, your article has, I feel, made the picture more confusing rather than less. Perfumes, as we all know, don't fall into neat groups. They need to be tried and tested and worn and experimented with.
What's more, the article glosses over the interesting stories behind many of the perfumes mentioned. It feels like a missed opportunity to properly educate your perfume-wearing readers. For instance, Plum by Mary Greenwell. I want to know why a make-up artist has decided to develop a fragrance, rather than developing a make-up range. You mention Tom Ford Private Blend and Chanel Les Exclusifs - but what are they? Surely some of your readers would like to know more.
Your readers are much more informed than you realize. We don't want an article listing all the latest releases to keep your advertisers happy. We want to hear from perfumers about the latest trends and be given credible advice from a beauty editor whose opinion we can actually trust.
Best wishes,
Jess at MyPerfumeLife.com
10 Lovely comments:
Bravo!
But to educate readers, the journalist must be educated first. Maybe that is where the problem lies?
Good points!
I have to say I totally agree with you.
Fee x
love it - thanks Jess!
I read that article!! What a load of cobblers! lol Needless to say I haven't acted on any of their 'advise'!!
xxx
One of my thoughts was, Diptyque Eau Duelle on the "more" list? I don't think so. I love it, but it's soft and cozy, and not to be put in the same category as no. 5.
Excellent point and one which I hadn't thought of really in so much detail. It bears repeating: Being specific about individual de facto differences while experiencing and writing about perfume.
Thanks for all being so supportive. I was a bit nervous about writing this - but Grazia have ignored it - even though I tweeted them directly too. Ho hum.
Not just the whole 'confusing' side of the article, but then they go and say "Chloé Love, Chloé - luxe neroli"
what? There's barely a HINT of neroli. Orange blossom (different to neroli, even if though it is the same flower) is listed as a note in some sources, but it's barely prominent. If anything, Iris or Heliotrope is what would be 'luxe' in that scent. It's all about powder.
I know scent is subjective (we all smell the same stuff, just interpret differently) but it just smacks of lazy journalism or someone wanting to sound like they know what they are talking about. I always get annoyed seeing perfume bundled in with 'beauty' or 'grooming' in magazines, though.
Go Jess!!
I couldn't agree more! Grazia and other magazines should sit up and listen. What's the point of an article that doesn't actually say anything!
Post a Comment