“The nature of the machine is to give you, today, another version of yesterday, and never a different tomorrow.”
I wrote that sentence down weeks ago and kept returning to it without entirely understanding why. Then one night I was lying in bed scrolling through fragrance videos and realized I had seen the same perfume at least seven times in twenty minutes. Different apartments. Different voices. Different shelves. The same bottle appearing over and over again as though everyone had independently arrived at the same conclusion.
After a while, the repetition stops feeling accidental.
Perfume culture online gives the impression of abundance. Endless launches, endless creators, endless collections lined up against beige walls and soft lighting. Yet the conversation itself feels strangely narrow. The same names circulate continuously. Delina. Baccarat Rouge 540. Erba Pura. Angels’ Share. Another “top ten sexy perfumes.” Another “hidden gem” that has already accumulated twelve million views.
I kept thinking about a conversation I had with Claude Marchal during Paris Perfume Week. We were standing outside talking for a while, and eventually the conversation drifted toward social media and how strangely narrow perfume culture has become online. Parfums MDCI has a substantial catalog and collaborations spanning perfumers including Pierre Bourdon, Bertrand Duchaufour, Francis Kurkdjian, Patricia de Nicolaï, Stéphanie Bakouche, Nathalie Feisthauer, and Cécile Zarokian. Yet online, the house often seems to collapse into the same few bottles.
Chypre Palatin. Invasion Barbare. Peche Cardinal.
Good perfumes, certainly. That was never really the issue. What stayed with me afterward was the narrowing itself. An entire house gradually compressed into a few recognizable references.
Sometimes I wonder how much of online fragrance culture is actual discovery and how much is algorithm disguised as discovery. People encounter the same names repeatedly until familiarity begins to feel like personal taste.
There is very little time now for a perfume to become interesting. A few seconds, really. Long enough for the bottle to catch light. Long enough for someone to say “beast mode” or “compliment getter” before the screen moves on. Perfume has adapted accordingly: louder openings, bigger projection, simpler emotional messaging, faster gratification.
I do not entirely blame brands for this. Attention has become its own economy. Visibility creates legitimacy. A perfume appearing constantly online begins to feel culturally important whether or not most people have actually smelled it.
The strange thing is that social media has made perfume more democratic and less adventurous at the same time. More people care about fragrance now. Younger audiences know perfumer names. Independent houses can reach consumers without department store counters or traditional beauty editors deciding what deserves visibility. Parts of this shift are genuinely exciting.
That kind of relationship feels harder to sustain online now. Everything arrives pre-interpreted. Pre-ranked. Pre-approved.
I think perfume loses something when people become too afraid of having unfashionable taste. Or private taste. Or taste that cannot immediately be validated by numbers, views, compliments, rankings, or consensus.
Sometimes I think the only way to hear certain perfumes clearly is to encounter them before the machine tells us what we are supposed to feel about them.
Leave a Reply