“Perfume must smell nice” she says; nothing else, no elaborate descriptions or considerations, no frills or buffooneries. It is either nice, or not nice (to your nose), and that’s it. Simple, clear, affective and not over-intellectualised.
I like this about her, and sometimes I crave being alike… Unfortunately, I am not: always too brainy, always digging and trying to ‘undo’ things into their constitutive parts, always curious to see what’s behind the hood, and how it all came about… But do I find in all that analytical critical approach, in all that phenomenology of hidden truths, do I find there, what I look for? Is an incitement present in critical thinking, a pleasure I am after in the perfume and all other olfactory impulses, sensations, and impressions?
Maybe, after all, it all boils down to that simple, almost vulgar, yet somehow so crudely truthful and accurate, statement of aesthetic pleasure judgement: “Perfume must smell nice”, without overthinking it, simply enjoying how it resonates in your body. Indeed, not on the body, but in one, in the flesh, for that is what the perfume does: it stimulates our bodies; the olfactory stimuli make us cringe, shiver, swoon, swoosh, sit, murmur, groan, speak, write, smile… The body work: in the body, of the body, by the body.