Evidently Danielle Steel Stinks

In his Scent Notes blog, New York Times perfume critic Chandler Burr (yeah, me neither) lowers the boom on Danielle Steel, queen of the bodice-busting romance novel. He gives her fragrance, “Danielle,” a zero-star, Do Not Inhale rating, describing the juice thusly:

“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.”

I know, I know: Danielle Steel is easy to mock. So let’s continue. Here’s how the Arden copywriters describe the fragrance on Steel's official website:

“This lush, fresh floriental opens with a fresh burst of watery green notes, moves into an ultra-feminine floral heart, and has a rech base that slowly reveals darker facets.”

First of all: floriental? Secondly, it seems to me that anything that “opens with a fresh burst of watery green” should be avoided at all costs, particularly in public. And finally, what’s a “rech base,” and should a perfume have one? I Googled the term and came up with bupkis, so until someone tells me differently, I’ll assume a rech base (retch base?) is a kind of Gag Reflex Inducer Scale, which in this case is apparently off the charts.

Pee-yew.

- Brandon