Listen here for an AI podcast about this edition’s feature essay:

Emotional Fragrance Design: Fact or Fiction (Part Two)

Emotional Fragrance Design (EFD) is fiction.

That is a strange sentence for me to write.

For more than three years, I have been exploring how fragrance connects with emotion.

I have written dozens of essays about it. Including the original part one of this essay: Edition No.25: "Fragrance Feelings: Fact or Fiction?

And I have tested these ideas in my daily work as a perfumer.

Plus I have spent the last few years turning much of what I learned into my upcoming book, More Than A Nice Scent.

So, have I changed my mind?

Yes.

But probably not in the way you think.

Let me explain.

I still believe fragrance can affect how we feel.

I still believe a perfumer can design with an emotional intention.

And I still believe that understanding the person behind the fragrance leads to better creative decisions.

What I no longer believe is the simple version of EFD. Use this material. Create this emotion. Follow this recipe. Get this feeling.

The truth is that there isn't one single truth about what a fragrance will make us feel.

And that has changed the way I think about perfumery.

An Emotional Description Is Not an Emotional Guarantee

If you have been reading this newsletter for a while, you have seen me write things like this many times:

Orange Flower Absolute (Opulence): A narcotic heart of heavy white petals. Floral-animalic amplifier that signals bold femininity. High levels of indole. Green-solar facets.

Prunol (Addiction): Spicy and dark fruitiness. Forbidden fruits. Dried plums. Raisins. Prunes. Cinnamon. Slightly leathery. Opulent. One of the few historic bases I still reach for today.

Isobutyl Quinoline (Danger): Raw. Earthy. Dirty. Leather. Rebellion.

I still stand behind descriptions like these.

When I wrote Prunol (Addiction), I was describing how I understood that material inside a specific fragrance idea/concept. The material, the accord around it, the structure and the story were all part of the same thought.

But now I want to make something clear because I didn't make clear enough before:

An emotional description is not an emotional guarantee.

The words in brackets still matter to me.

I just understand them differently today.

They are intentional interpretations, not permanent definitions.

Isobutyl Quinoline is not a dangerous substance.

Prunol will not turn you into a junky.

And Orange Flower Absolute does not always evoke feelings of Opulence.

That sounds obvious when I put it like that.

But it took me a while to really understand what that meant.

The Chart I Could Never Make

Earlier in this project, I wanted to create a chart. A chart that would guide all of my creations.

It seemed logical.

If I knew the kind of person I was creating for, and I understood what they wanted emotionally, maybe I could connect those feelings directly to fragrance materials.

• Adventure? Use these.
• Tenderness? Try these.
• Romance? Start here.
• Peacefulness? Add these.

I kept trying to make the pieces fit.

They would not.

At first I thought I needed more research.

More categories.

More materials.

Maybe a better chart.

Eventually I realized the problem was not the chart.

The problem was believing fragrance worked predictably, but:

Materials are multidimensional. Accords are multidimensional. Finished perfumes are even more multidimensional. And then a human being smells them.

One person might experience the finished fragrance as comforting.

Another might find it old fashion.

Another might dislike it completely.

The fragrance is the same.

But the experience is not.

A Formula Is Not a Person

This is where my science brain and my work as a perfumer started colliding.

In pharmacology, we talk about dose and response.

In training, we talk about stimulus and adaptation.

We like the idea that if we change the input, we can predict something about the output.

Perfumery gives us the same temptation because formulas look so precise.

I can tell you exactly how much Geraniol is in a formula.

I can double it.

Halve it.

Adjust it by a tenth of a percent.

But:

Double the material. You don't double the feeling.

More Geraniol does not simply mean more Calm.

At some point, it becomes a different fragrance.

The same question shows up at the level of the finished product.

An Eau de Cologne, an Eau de Toilette and an Eau de Parfum do not give us measurable emotional doses:

• A little confidence.
• More confidence.
• Maximum confidence.

Changing the concentration can change the impact and performance and the experience.

But it doesn't give us a reliable emotional dose-response curve.

That helped me see three kinds of precision that are easy to confuse.

Chemical precision: I know exactly how much material is in the formula.

Perceptual tendency: I have a reasonable expectation of what changing that material may do to the smell.

Emotional uncertainty: I cannot convert that dosage into a guaranteed amount or type of human feeling.

A formula can be precise.

But a person is not a formula.

What the Research Can Tell Us

None of this means research into fragrance and emotion is useless.

Far from it.

There is serious work looking at fragrance, mood and physiology.

Researchers have used consumer testing, EEG measurements and statistical analysis to identify materials and compositions associated with states such as relaxation.

One older industry patent even describes increasing certain ingredients as increasing the likelihood of a relaxing benefit. But the same work admits that fragrance associations can vary with culture and context.

More recent industry research goes further.

It measures raw materials across several emotional dimensions:

• awakening
• relaxation
• sensuality
• pleasure
• tenderness
• fun
• self-esteem

That is very different from treating every material as a one-emotion switch.

I find that useful.

The important word for me today is likelihood.

Research can reveal tendencies.

It can reveal patterns across groups.

It can help a perfumer make better decisions.

But likelihood is not a guarantee about the person standing in front of me.

That is where the strict, prescriptive version of EFD becomes fiction.

Use X. Get Y.

No matter how attractive that idea is, people are more complicated than that.

Something Unexpected Happened

Here is the part I did not expect.

The less certain I became about what a fragrance will make someone feel, the more intentional my perfumery became.

I started thinking beyond materials, accords, structures and fragrance classifications.

I started thinking harder about the person:

• Why are we creating this fragrance?
• What are we actually trying to create for them?
• What is the emotional intention?
• What choices could increase the chances that the intention and the experience meet?

This new way of thinking has changed my work.

I would like to think it has contributed to many of the professional wins I have had over the last couple of years.

I cannot prove that one caused the other.

There are always many reasons why a fragrance wins or loses.

But I know I am thinking differently.

And I know I am creating differently.

More importantly, I have learned a lot.

My knowledge of materials has grown.

My appreciation of perfumery has grown.

I notice things today that I would probably have missed a few years ago.

And I enjoy my work more.

Giving up some certainty did not make perfumery less interesting.

It made it more interesting.

Try This With One of Your Own Fragrances

Pick a fragrance from your collection that somebody has described with an emotional word.

Sexy. Comforting. Confident. Relaxing. Energizing. Powerful.

Smell it again.

This time, do not ask whether that description is right or wrong.

Ask:

• What do I think this fragrance is trying to do?
• What do I actually experience?
• Where do those two things meet?
• Where do they not?

There is no need to force your answer to match mine, a brand's, a perfumer's or your favorite fragrance reviewer's.

That is the point.

An emotional description can give us direction. It does not guarantee the destination.

And that's okay!

So, Is Emotional Fragrance Design Fiction?

Yes.

And no.

The fiction is the idea that I can select the correct materials, follow the correct recipe and tell you exactly what you are going to feel.

I cannot.

What I can do is design with intention.

I can think.

Imagine.

Explore.

Test.

Learn.

Pay attention to patterns.

Try to understand the person more deeply.

Make better choices.

All because of emotional fragrance design.

After more than three years of trying to make all of this fit together, I think I have found a better way.

It seems to be working for me.

And soon, in More Than A Nice Scent, I will share much more of what I discovered along the way.

But that is not the only reason I have spent all these years writing these essays.

I hope you begin noticing more too.

I hope your knowledge and appreciation of perfumery grows alongside mine.

And I hope exploring, discovering and thinking about fragrance in a more intentional way brings you some of the same joy and satisfaction it has brought me.

Maybe understanding fragrance better is not about finding one final truth.

Maybe it begins by accepting that there isn't one.