#fumehead

Invisible Stories started as a project to bring scent back into the everyday vernacular. It was also, personally speaking, a deliberate pursuit of happiness. Scent was restorative for me, a mental tonic—a whiff of lilacs in the spring could lift a depressive episode instantly, while a spritz of a new perfume sample kept me giddy all day. For something so simple, its rewards are incommensurate. After all, smell is as close as we get to time travel—a familiar scent can transport us back to places long lost in the dusty crevices of our brains, while a new fragrance conjures up glittering futures and new realities we'd never dreamed of.

I've thinking about this upcoming game a lot recently. I tried going through the tag on tumblr but couldn't find anything!! so I'm making my own post

it's a turn based rpg, with only 2 playable characters. the setting is an underground post-apocalyptic kind of deal. the goal is to eliminate a strange new disease

What could be more fun for a perfume critic but to write a brutal review of a really bad fragrance? Not many people can do it as naturally as Chandler Burr. You can think whatever you want about Mr Burr (as fumeheads often do), but this review of his from 2008 is simply – so much fun:

“Danielle by Danielle Steel was like the pile of trash that Danielle Steel stepped over on her way to the creative meeting. For the first four seconds it smelled sort of vaguely like a kind of flower that you get in a gallon of floral-scented laundry detergent, and then for five seconds it reminded you of Edvard Munch’s “The Scream.” Then it evaporated, like the prose in a novel by Danielle Steel evaporated from your memory the moment you read it. It was a perfume that, instead of being made by human beings, was made by a faceless, soulless committee like Elizabeth Arden Internal Creative Team. And at that point there was nothing more to say about it.”

No need to list the notes, I guess. Simply go and read the rest of the review.