My DNA Fragrance, a company "which manufacturers [sic] one of a kind fragrance based on human DNA profiles", has launched Antiquity, a series of fragrances based on the DNA of dead celebrities. Shown above is M:
M is an exclusive one-of-a-kind fragrance that explodes into an indescribable fragrance, which seemly draws the attention of every person in the room. It is composed of the lightest, but most volatile essences. Much like the performer himself, this cologne is unique and like no other cologne in the world. We guarantee it.
M is engineered from the DNA genetic code of the King of Pop, Michael Jackson.
M is $59.99 for 90 ml. There are also fragrances for Albert Einstein, Elvis Presley, Joan Crawford, Katherine Hepburn and Marilyn Monroe. (via mydnafragrance, with thanks to everyone who sent me links to one of the many articles about this line)
I can’t figure it out… they claim that DNA is odorless but they use the DNA to compose the fragrance, so are they attempting some sort of note-dna equation (e.g., music-fragrance)? Their Antiquity line doesn’t mention any fragrance notes at all.
Monarch supposedly smells like butterflies (poor Katherine Hepburn!).
I made no attempt to figure out what they’re actually doing with the DNA, so can’t help, sorry!
And I wonder if Joe Jackson was the one who gave them MJ’s DNA.
Heh heh. I’m sure.
Yeah. I can’t help it, but my first thought was about a book I have been reading: “perfume” from Patrick Süsskind. There was also a movie of it with Dustin Hoffman staring.
Great book!
Doesn’t this just seem kind of sick? I am seriously grossed out.
Yes and it’s pathetically sad for the dead celebrities.
And you have to wonder if their estates authorized this…
Ditto. Ick.
Yes. Eeeewww…
Probably, but it just made me laugh.
Oh, this is a joke!
Isn’t it? Please say yes….
Truth is usually stranger than fiction, LOL…
The face on that bottle looks just like Michaels!!
smooth and white?
AHHHRR!! Stop!!!
hahahahaha
It probably smells like pedophilia
…or monkeys….
I smell dead people! LOL
LOL³
I think that most of you sound like haters. None of you have read the website. i have and the creator of this very creative way of making perfume has a great story of his life
“Carlton’s passion for giving back to the community is rooted in his own hard luck story as a challenged inner city youth moving through a scenario of events from being molested at 10 years old, to becoming a thief and spending several years incarcerated as a teenager. He knows how important young people’s lives are and why we must all give of our time, our money and our mentor-ship. He humbly states, “I don’t consider myself a mentor, but I’m a person who will give back through donating a portion of our gross profits between 1-5% to child-oriented charities, which I will announce during our red carpet launch after the first of the year. We all give easily to our family and friends but how many of us give to strangers? If every person in the world would just give $1.00 to end homelessness, it would be stomped out the day after tomorrow. I just feel I need to do something, and I hope others will help too.”
Every time someone tries to do something there are those who try and break it down not caring about those whom they affect.
The perfume and colognes they make are designed by the DNA code there is no DNA in it.
good intentions to hell’s full
Thanks for chiming in.
I’m sure you’re aware that some of us are just being a little silly this morning and not intending to disrespect anyone’s efforts to make the world a better place. And while we may joke around a little bit, I would bet that most of us also, have already or intend to, follow the link and do a little reading.
Perhaps, but I think many people (here and elsewhere — this has been all over the internet) find the fragrance concept absurd. That the owner had a difficult life and/or gives money to charity isn’t likely to change many minds on that issue.
No, as far as I’m concerned, the two have nothing to do with each other. Fantastic that he donates to charity, and he sounds like a great guy. But I’m just not interested in the perfume. Just as I think it’s great that MAC donates from the selling price of the Viva Glam lipsticks, but I don’t buy them because they’re not my color. (And lest I sound callous, know that I have worked for non-profits for almost twenty years and currently work in a homeless shelter. We all give back in our own ways. Mine is just a cut in salary.)
Exactly. I do not like ad campaigns that play on your sympathy to sell products. I find it crass and predatory and it gives you a false sense of benevolence. One to five percent of the profits of a perfume or lipstick is a very small amount and it does not impress me. They are using that pitch to SELL something – it is just marketing. They are still keeping upwards of 95% of the profits, often charge more for the “special” items, and where the money goes is usually something vague like “breast cancer awareness” or “AIDS research.” I’ve spent the better part of my adult life and career in an HIV/AIDS hospice, and very little of that money actually ends up where the rubber hits the road. If you like something, buy it, but don’t think that you are changing the world or saving a life by purchasing something with a ribbon on it or whatever. It is wonderful that companies give to charities, but if you really want your money to make a difference write a check to a reputable 501c3 of your choice or volunteer your time and skills to an organization in your community. Angry rant over. And those perfumes sound gross.
Yes, I agree with Miss Kitty V, and while I can’t claim her long track record I’ve worked with lots of survivors as well. I still find the idea of using dead celebrity DNA abhorrent, and the quick-on-the-heels use of Michael Jackson’s particularly so. People with difficult personal histories who give to charity still do abhorrent things–sometimes even without realizing it…it’s an unfortunate truth of the complicated world.
Plus, I’m laughing at the idea that we are “haters,” since I’m guessing the median age of the commenters would put us out of that particular slang-bracket, LOL…
Yes, I get “crabby old lady” a lot, but so far not “hater.” 🙂 (Although I’m sure it’s all true.)
I agree with Robin, the concept is an absurd, even Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King or Madre Teresa of Calcutah release a thing like that, even that I wouldn’t buy it.
making some (lot) more money by using poor late Michael Jackson is just simply disgusting
Perhaps I’m just very slow this morning, but I don’t understand what you mean by: “The perfume and colognes they make are designed by the DNA code …”
“trust but verify” as far as his charitable actions go. As far as dressing it down as exploitation goes…well, lipstick on a pig, you know.
yup, still says ‘oink’
I can’t say that he doesn’t revere these famous individuals and seeks to honor their memory in some way….and I know there’s not Abraham Lincoln bits in the perfume, but the IDEA just seems creepy, that’s all I’m saying.
Gives to charities yet to be named. And it may be 5% of the profit… or just 1%. I don’t know, I guess I think if someone is so committed to charitable work, they would…COMMIT…to organizations they believe in and percentages in advance. This way just sounds like a marketing gimmick. Coincidentally, I read the Boudicca Wode review this morning, and there was a similar comment on that one after so many people said they found the Paint concept weird, or the videos disturbing. I think there is room for people to have differing reactions without resorting to attacking other people’s opinions. If you think this DNA thing sounds great, say so! But don’t call the other commenters “haters” just because they think it’s silly. Any opinion that has merit will stand on its own, without resorting to name calling.
Justin I wish you would come back and explain the perfume notes to us. Instead of labeling us as Haters, educate us!
Get off your moral high horse, justincantaylor. I agree that this is a ridiculous concept and in bad taste but don’t call me a hater for having an opinion. So what if they claim a portion of the profits will be donated to charity? Doesn’t make the product any better than anything else out there.
I am no scientist or geneticist, but I really don’t comprehend how a fragrance can be created from or based on something that doesn’t emit any smell. Perhaps a better concept would be a fragrance inspired by Michael’s favourite things. Or better yet, don’t even go there, it doesn’t do justice to the King of Pop.
?????
Wha??
Beats me.
Anything that has to do with profiting off dead celebrities whether it be for good or bad just leaves me cold, period. Let them rest in peace, please. With that said, I find the DNA concept interesting only because I saw a lilttle blip on the travel channel once about a local perfumer in Italy somewhere who would make a custom perfume for anyone on the spot. He interviews you, asks you about your life and has you smell some vials he keeps of base notes, he watches your reaction and then goes off to work. You pick up your scent the next day or so…seems kind of similar to me in a way….
Leaves me cold too.
I’m a bit blown away by this one. In the first place, how did he get access to the DNA of dead celebrities? It’s not remotely likely. Furthermore, is the creator a molecular biologist? Has he worked in olfactory research? Has he discovered something in human DNA that indicates olfactory preferences? If so, the guy needs a Nobel Prize – stat! I’m sure Dr. Axel and Dr. Buck, who won the Nobel in 2004 for their olfactory work, would be laughing themselves silly over this one.
And I thought my inner perfume geek was huge – let’s not even mess with my inner science geek 😉
I have no answers, sorry! But it might all be explained on the website.
So this guy is making money off the exploitation of a dead person’s name *and* DNA (talk about invasion of privacy) and then justifies it by giving us a sob story about his life and mentioning (humbly, of course!) how he donates to charity? Please. Many people from difficult backgrounds have turned their lives around and now work to benefit society, without exploiting others and without tooting their own horns about how wonderful they are. There are strict laws against unauthorized use of a name or likeness for commercial gain. Did this guy get permission from the estate of each dead celebrity to use their name, likeness, and genetic code?
No idea, but guessing not…
Oh, but apparently they’re also donating a portion of the profits to the estates of the celebrities and the charities they support.
Sure, he can say anything he thinks people want to hear, but it doesn’t answer the legal question.
Ack, my eyeroll vanished! There was one when I typed it, I swear…that was a sarcastic remark. 😀
I am mildly repulsed, which is sort of silly. If we wear vintage, we’re wearing dead people’s clothing. Do all the skin cells come off when the clothes are cleaned? I don’t know. Wear them, smell like them, whatever.
I’m not really repulsed, just think it’s silly.
This doesn’t exactly answer all the questions, but the Web site claims that the company used hairs of famous people from the collection of some dude who’s “the world’s pre-eminent historical hair collector.” It goes on to say that “using the Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) process DNA can be extracted from hair shafts with or without the follicle intact.”
This guy might be a saint, but I find the fragrance line icky, exploitative, and definitely based on hooey rather than hard science.
“the world’s pre-eminent historical hair collector” was TMI, LOL…I did not want to know that person existed.
Odd concept. I’ve read the comments and it seems we’re all in the same boat, here. Is the company attempting to re-create skin scents mixed with favorite notes of the celebs? Re-create how their bodies would’ve worn certain fragrances, depending upon acidity? Don’t get me wrong, I admire what was Katherine Hepburn’s sense of style, but there’s something very disturbing about the idea of applying something that might smell like her actual skin. Creepy. Art has its limits.
I really don’t know what they’re trying to do, nor did I try to find out. The whole thing strikes me as silly.
Jeeze! Anything to make a buck. I wonder what Michael thinks of his DNA code being sold for $59.99? Pure schlock!
Who knows.
While I am in full support of any line donating to charity and being so gracious, the obvious junk science involved in this is annoying.
Here’s a brief rundown on the scientific claim, for anyone who is interested:
http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/11/17/2129509.aspx
Still doesn’t explain how they get from the DNA to actual fragrance notes, aside from the mysterious “secret formula,” i.e. hocus pocus.
LOL! What’s funny here is that we were posting at the same time and both came up with hocus pocus. 😀
Our eye-rolling was probably synchronized too!
Hocus pocus! Mumbo jumbo! Nope, it’s still garbage. 😀
I read a lot of the site, and I feel no more informed than I was before.
It’s rare that a product makes me _angry_, but I’m there. I’m no longer into the silly, I’m very seriously annoyed.
See the link I posted just above…I think that clarifies what they’re doing, although it isn’t likely to make you less angry.
I have now officially moved into Stage Five Perfumistaship. 😉
Snort! It has to be really bad to pull you over to the dark side.
HA — temporary status, I’m guessing.
Visiting the website I learned that you can submit a swab kit and have your own “skin healing” fragrance created. Yuck. And isn’t it difficult and expensive to do DNA analysis? Isn’t that why police departments around the country have loads of rape kits sitting around that haven’t been analyzed yet? There was a story on my local news today about it. And am I the only one who finds the “POTUS 1600” fragrance more than a little offensive with the reference to a “chocolate note” inspired by President Obama?
I didn’t even look at the Obama scent…ack. As I understand it, they are not doing the same sort of DNA analysis that a police department would:
http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/11/17/2129509.aspx