There’re companies that are saying, “Well, couldn’t there be a little area at the end where you can show the packaging?”
— Chandler Burr talks about upcoming Art of Scent exhibit at the the Museum of Arts and Design's new Center of Olfactory Art, in Scent of a Museum at the New York Times.
It’s an excellent question, and the answer ought to be yes. Would we have interpreted Opium as we did if it hadn’t been sold in that Chinese-red box and bottle? Would Poison have had the same impact if it had been marketed in a clear-glass cylinder instead of that toxic violet, symbolically loaded apple of temptation?
The packaging is part of the experience of a scent, in precisely the same way as the presentation of a meal is part of the dining experience: we wouldn’t enjoy sushi as much if it were simply slopped onto a plate. I like a scent better if it’s packaged in a meaningful or well-designed bottle which in turn is encased in a gorgeous box, and I don’t think I’m alone.
Unfortunately, I won’t get to find out what they decide, because I’m going to New York in September, and the show doesn’t open until November.
I second your opinion.
Pretty sure there won’t be packaging unless CB is forced. I agree though, it’s part of the experience. Then again, I don’t see scent at all the way CB does anyway.
A case of synaesthesia for both of you?
Not for me, not at all!
By “packaging” do they mean the box or the bottle or both? All three are art forms. It is important to concentrate on just the juice in this exhibit; perfumistas get that. The box and bottle are important as brand recognition (as is the scent) but I suppose the former two are really for a different exhibit with an art historical focus. It’d be nice to have a museum that features all three aspects of perfumery.
They mean both.
It’s going to be just scent and a label on the wall with the perfume name and house, from what I understand. I don’t need the packaging. I can’t wait to attend.
That’s my understanding too.
I totally get the idea. If they are going to have a display of the perfumer’s art, then it should be all about the perfume, and nothing else. I’d love an exhibit of amazing packaging, but that’s a different aspect altogether.
Wish I could go.
I have some Odeur 53 at home – I’ll have to see if it’s as unwearable as he says. I get that one and 71 mixed up and I know I really liked one of them.
I don’t find it unwearable at all.
Mr. Burr did indicate that the packaging might be the subject of a future exhibition.
“Mr. Burr: Yes, the smell. That’s the work of art. I’m opposed to the photon. If you have to see it, I’m not interested.”