Rate
Collection
Souk
Classify
Notes08/29/2020
Pinkdawn
Translated Show original
Pinkdawn
Very helpful Review
9
Sensuality with the mallet
Today, I can't remember which perfumery came up with the idea of delighting me with a generous sample of Scandal by Night. It probably never would have occurred to me to purchase a fragrance called Scandal by Night. Not because I'm such a prude, but because I can imagine what to expect. Thanks to the sample in the spray bottle, I now have the opportunity to test my prejudices for their validity.
Based on the comments, I assumed that a surge of honey sweetness would occupy me. Whether sticky sweet or surprisingly light and more bearable. But the honey is very discreetly retained by me after spraying on. Instead, I am inundated with a wave of floral scent, which I very soon identify as tuberose. An old acquaintance. I know her from Poison, Hypnotic Poison and Loulou - all creations of the 80s and 90s, when people liked heavy scents. I owned all three. Loulou is still in my collection
When I was given Hypnotic Poison by Dior years ago on a date from a Swiss mail friend, I unfortunately already knew that I could not do with so-called "hypnotic" scents. (I "used it up" anyway, because I already had it once ...)
I recognize and understand their message: they seem exotic. One feels transported to a magical nocturnal jungle in Tahiti - although I have no idea whether there are jungles in the South Seas. Not without reason is the white flowering tuberose a nocturnal hyacinth. Its scent is beguiling, heavy, sweet, sensual, seductive. And that is exactly what Scandal by Night wants to be. Fragrances of this kind have "always existed" and they were popular with many women.
Gaultier deliberately plays with the sensual note of tuberose. The flacon, which seems to contain a lady who seems to be wearing nothing but wriggly, shapely legs and high heels, is as much a part of the image as the name, which is supposed to be disreputable. That the nightly scandal has something to do with sex is more than clearly conveyed. As we know, Jean Paul Gaultier likes to provoke. Okay, I got that. It's fine by me too. What bothers me is that the message of the perfume is being made too obvious. I prefer something more subtle. But that's not what Gaultier has in mind. He wants his scent to be loud and to attract attention.
And that's probably what most women who wear this perfume want. And they don't just wear it, they wear it - even on purpose: Look at how sexy I am ... I'm irresistible ... I'll dull your senses, seduce you, seduce you ... That's what Gaultier tries to convince his target group about the effect of this fragrance
It's too clumsy for me. I don't want to walk around as a female seduction machine, nor would I - as a man - respond to this all too boldly sensual fragrance. But I'm sure that many women - especially younger ones - will feel more desirable with this perfume, which is of course a chimera. I can imagine that many a man would rather hide from this surge of scent than be conquered ...
But maybe I'm being unfair. I'm sure that many ladies use the perfume because they simply like the scent and not because they want to be erotic and make a conquest.
The scent is too heavy and too sweet for me. Tuberose is said to have a relaxing effect. That hasn't happened to me any more than the alleged scandal the perfume is trying to express. For that, what is offered here is too little. According to the fragrance, a scandal is not even a little scandal - at most for those who let themselves be talked into it. In fact, it is a quite conventional tuberose scent, as there are many. The sensuality comes with a mallet, so to speak, and can be quite annoying if you don't appreciate such sweet, beguiling heaviness. A fragrance can also create an erotic aura in a different way - finer, more refined, more exciting.
As I said, the very one-dimensional message also includes the fact that the fragrance is not subject to any major changes in my case. It remains as it is, so to speak. Except it gets weaker over time. The scent may annoy some people, because it is so haunting. I can't quite believe that it has an above-average durability and that those who want to get rid of it shouldn't even remove it with oil. With me the durability is average. The sillage seems impressive at first, but soon it diminishes.
It seems clear that this fragrance is not made for everyday use. It would be completely out of place in professional life. It is clearly a perfume for going out in the evening, which I can well imagine in discos.
I can't identify with it. Not because I don't go to discos anymore, but because, as I said, my preference is for more subtle scents that have an exciting scent and are more interesting or profound and perhaps more innovative. Fragrances with a touch of avant-garde like some molecule perfumes or something more "sophisticated" simply suit me better. Others may of course see it differently.
Since the fragrance does not seem to radiate much elegance to my perception, I see it most likely at ambitious discoqueens in their 20s.
As a flower, tuberose may smell intense and striking. As a fragrance on my skin I find it too intrusive. This applies to all fragrances with this note. I love hyacinths and their strong scent, but in perfume it soon becomes too much of a good thing for me. But that's a matter of taste. I don't mean to say that tuberose isn't something I can do with on principle. I could imagine that this note can be very stimulating in fragrances if it is not overdosed. Unfortunately, I haven't come across a perfume where she hasn't been - apparently there are many fans of tuberose overdoses.
I was afraid that the honey in this perfume might be too much for me. In fact, I find the tuberose so dominant that it doesn't give the honey any room to develop. Tonka bean may give the tuberose a certain vanilla warmth and that typical sensual almond aroma, but it actually only serves as a supporting base and never stands out.
Conclusion: too sweet, too heavy, too intense, too intrusive ... Not for me
Based on the comments, I assumed that a surge of honey sweetness would occupy me. Whether sticky sweet or surprisingly light and more bearable. But the honey is very discreetly retained by me after spraying on. Instead, I am inundated with a wave of floral scent, which I very soon identify as tuberose. An old acquaintance. I know her from Poison, Hypnotic Poison and Loulou - all creations of the 80s and 90s, when people liked heavy scents. I owned all three. Loulou is still in my collection
When I was given Hypnotic Poison by Dior years ago on a date from a Swiss mail friend, I unfortunately already knew that I could not do with so-called "hypnotic" scents. (I "used it up" anyway, because I already had it once ...)
I recognize and understand their message: they seem exotic. One feels transported to a magical nocturnal jungle in Tahiti - although I have no idea whether there are jungles in the South Seas. Not without reason is the white flowering tuberose a nocturnal hyacinth. Its scent is beguiling, heavy, sweet, sensual, seductive. And that is exactly what Scandal by Night wants to be. Fragrances of this kind have "always existed" and they were popular with many women.
Gaultier deliberately plays with the sensual note of tuberose. The flacon, which seems to contain a lady who seems to be wearing nothing but wriggly, shapely legs and high heels, is as much a part of the image as the name, which is supposed to be disreputable. That the nightly scandal has something to do with sex is more than clearly conveyed. As we know, Jean Paul Gaultier likes to provoke. Okay, I got that. It's fine by me too. What bothers me is that the message of the perfume is being made too obvious. I prefer something more subtle. But that's not what Gaultier has in mind. He wants his scent to be loud and to attract attention.
And that's probably what most women who wear this perfume want. And they don't just wear it, they wear it - even on purpose: Look at how sexy I am ... I'm irresistible ... I'll dull your senses, seduce you, seduce you ... That's what Gaultier tries to convince his target group about the effect of this fragrance
It's too clumsy for me. I don't want to walk around as a female seduction machine, nor would I - as a man - respond to this all too boldly sensual fragrance. But I'm sure that many women - especially younger ones - will feel more desirable with this perfume, which is of course a chimera. I can imagine that many a man would rather hide from this surge of scent than be conquered ...
But maybe I'm being unfair. I'm sure that many ladies use the perfume because they simply like the scent and not because they want to be erotic and make a conquest.
The scent is too heavy and too sweet for me. Tuberose is said to have a relaxing effect. That hasn't happened to me any more than the alleged scandal the perfume is trying to express. For that, what is offered here is too little. According to the fragrance, a scandal is not even a little scandal - at most for those who let themselves be talked into it. In fact, it is a quite conventional tuberose scent, as there are many. The sensuality comes with a mallet, so to speak, and can be quite annoying if you don't appreciate such sweet, beguiling heaviness. A fragrance can also create an erotic aura in a different way - finer, more refined, more exciting.
As I said, the very one-dimensional message also includes the fact that the fragrance is not subject to any major changes in my case. It remains as it is, so to speak. Except it gets weaker over time. The scent may annoy some people, because it is so haunting. I can't quite believe that it has an above-average durability and that those who want to get rid of it shouldn't even remove it with oil. With me the durability is average. The sillage seems impressive at first, but soon it diminishes.
It seems clear that this fragrance is not made for everyday use. It would be completely out of place in professional life. It is clearly a perfume for going out in the evening, which I can well imagine in discos.
I can't identify with it. Not because I don't go to discos anymore, but because, as I said, my preference is for more subtle scents that have an exciting scent and are more interesting or profound and perhaps more innovative. Fragrances with a touch of avant-garde like some molecule perfumes or something more "sophisticated" simply suit me better. Others may of course see it differently.
Since the fragrance does not seem to radiate much elegance to my perception, I see it most likely at ambitious discoqueens in their 20s.
As a flower, tuberose may smell intense and striking. As a fragrance on my skin I find it too intrusive. This applies to all fragrances with this note. I love hyacinths and their strong scent, but in perfume it soon becomes too much of a good thing for me. But that's a matter of taste. I don't mean to say that tuberose isn't something I can do with on principle. I could imagine that this note can be very stimulating in fragrances if it is not overdosed. Unfortunately, I haven't come across a perfume where she hasn't been - apparently there are many fans of tuberose overdoses.
I was afraid that the honey in this perfume might be too much for me. In fact, I find the tuberose so dominant that it doesn't give the honey any room to develop. Tonka bean may give the tuberose a certain vanilla warmth and that typical sensual almond aroma, but it actually only serves as a supporting base and never stands out.
Conclusion: too sweet, too heavy, too intense, too intrusive ... Not for me
6 Replies
