After I published the list of perfumes we were expected to learn at the IFF Perfume School, many readers asked what does a list like this actually teach?
At first glance, it looks like a collection of classics, some famous, some less so. But taken together, the list reveals how perfumers are trained to think, and that’s the main reason I wanted to share it.
The first thing it makes clear is that perfume is not divided into masculine and feminine. That distinction belongs to marketing. In training, what matters is structure. You might notice that in my perfume lessons, I focus on structure from the start.
By studying the list of 74 benchmarks, you learn to recognize a fougère in Azzaro Pour Homme or Drakkar Noir, a chypre in Mitsouko, an amber structure in Shalimar or Opium, a citrus cologne in Eau Sauvage or 4711. Once you understand these forms, the labels become secondary and a perfume stops being “for men” or “for women.” It becomes a composition built on a recognizable architecture.
The more you study the list, the more you begin to notice common traits. This makes it easier to classify and judge fragrances. I think that it helps you understand your personal tastes better once you observe what forms you gravitate to?
The second lesson is that perfumes do not exist in isolation. They respond to each other across time.