Juliet Nicolson says new super-smells make the perfect gift
I once knew an exotic and terrifying old lady who had been reared on the back of Indian elephants and who on opening her mouth to speak breathed out a heavenly cloud of something unforgettably alluring. How did she do it? Had she declined a stiff martini and instead swallowed an entire bottle of Patou’s Joy? I never discovered her secret but her legacy to me has been an insatiable fascination with smell.
Smells are big these days and burning candles have recently become such trendy house gifts that they have even acquired their own verb. I know people who ‘fragrance’ their houses with enough flickering table and wall illuminations to resemble the cathedral at Chartres en pleine messe.
Nowadays, with everyone on a low-carb diet, house gift ideas present a real challenge for the guest. A bottle of the finest olive oil or the full yard of pricey peppermints is considered an affront to healthy eating, while ubiquitous membership of AA categorically precludes the fine wine option. My father once confided to Dear Mary that his favourite present was a full gross sheet of first-class stamps. But unless your host is a pen and paper person, the candle alternative is often a wise choice.
Happily, home smell options have suddenly become delectably, headily classy, and the merest whiff of Diptyque’s Figue or Jo Malone’s Pomegranate Noir can lift the seductiveness of a room as effectively as the sight of a glorious bunch of flowers or the taste of a chilled magnum of vintage champagne. The Krug/Bendicks of the candle world is undoubtedly the Rigaud, the oldest smelly candle on the market. Even the striped black and white box and the silver-topped glass jar, once so beloved by Jackie Onassis, drip elegance and style. The popularity of its classic Cypres is now threatened by Rigaud’s own delectable yellow Tournesol (sunflower) which evokes a Grace Kelly-type, south-of-France exhilaration, belching high summer and containing almost double the usual intensity of most perfumed candles.
More articles from: Juliet Nicolson | this section
Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit
Advertisement
Your questions answered
Your problems solved
Your problems solved
Christopher Silvester says you don’t have to be rich to invest in fine wine, and the rewards can be handsome
A visit to the London International Wine Fair is, paradoxically, a sobering experience.
Build your own Sky package online. Sky TV, Broadband & Talk only £16.
Sky TV & free broadband packages available from £16 a month. Choose from a standard free sky box, sky plus or sky hd.
Build your own Sky package online. Sky TV, Broadband & Talk only £16.
Sky TV & free broadband packages available from £16 a month. Choose from a standard free sky box, sky plus...
PORTA METRONIA, ROME Standing high on the top of one of the seven hills of Rome- the Coelian- this unique
ROME and PARIS: over 350 holiday rentals apartments listed: visit www.romanreference.com and www.parisreference.com or call +39 0648 903612.
Goldsmiths by Design Welcome to Ruffs! You have found a company of Goldsmiths that specialises in the manufacture, amongst other
Spectator Business | Apollo Magazine
Corporate | Advertising | Privacy | Terms
Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP
All Articles and Content Copyright ©2008 by The Spectator | All Rights Reserved
tom
June 27th, 2008 4:36pmOh dear , not another free plug on behalf of the British Fragrance Association members, there are getting to be so many of them. Juliet it seems is entirely unaware that there are many people around for whom this synthetic petrochemical based stuff is literally poison, as well as many others whose lives and bodies are damaged by them. All too often I can smell the tear gas propellants in the mix, never mind the formaldehyde and who knows what else. They are protected by secrecy law, and no way will the makers tell you what is in them, even if there is is a chemical that could be a killer and is not an aromatic but just part of the package.
joyce alderson
June 27th, 2008 7:59pmWhat an appallingly feckless article. As numbers of people with allergies and ill-health continue to rise, at an alarming rate, and more and more people are seeking to clear their homes of synthetic chemicals, the Spectator's 'Scents and Sensibily' article is completely out of touch.
For years now my friends and relatives have known that fragranced products are anathema to me, simply because they make me very ill. People who care want to give good, not frivolous and harmful presents. Who knows, perhaps the writer's chosen items are different from the majority of fragranced products and do not contain toxic, petro-chemicals. Nevertheless, I look forward to reading a better-researched and a more responsible aricle, perhaps entitled NO SCENTS MAKES GOOD SENSE.
Sue
June 27th, 2008 8:30pmI would like to ask Juliet Nicolson if she can imagine a life devoid of social contact? The scents that she is encouraging others to use in their homes and on their person are the reason why the ever increasing number of sufferers from Multiple Chemical Sensitivity are unable to socialise. No visitors, no visiting, no work, no shopping.
The components in these scents cause a wide range of effects on the central nervous system, from headache and joint pain through to dizziness and collapse.I would suggest that some research into MCS could lead to a far more enlightening article, but one that would not be welcomed by manufacturers of such consumer products.
Since only a minute amount of perfume can make me ill, I wonder whether the workers who are producing these toxic consumer goods are being unwittingly affected, as were asbestos workers decades ago.A time bomb the industries do not want to admit to.
Caroline
June 27th, 2008 10:56pmTry Googling "harmful chemicals in perfume". When you have read some of those articles, replace the word "harmful" with "carcinogenic" then with "hazardous", then gather all your bottles of perfume together, (along with your scented candles) and throw them out!!!