Menu

more fetish thoughts

Here I am again, talking about fetish and perfume, following up on the post of last Wednesday (click here for the post), where I was talking trend and fetish.  In the mean time, searching  for "tauer fetish" brings my post of 48 hours ago right on top of google's list of results. Which is sort of cool, as it tells me that Google indexes my blog sort of fast. Thank you Google, highly appreciated!

The comments that I got were great and keep me thinking "fetish" perfume. I did a quick query on thesaurus.com for synonyms and guess what pops up as first synonymous noun: OBSESSION. This tells me that fetish IS a cool name. Actually, it is such a cool name that it was used before. There existed a Fetish Perfume by Dana. It was (is) sort of a floral thing with a funny flacon.

A quick search on TESS tells me that these days "fetish" is not a protected mark for the goods and services perfume anymore.

Actually, you see: we did the first steps towards building a brand together right now. We came up with an idea for a perfume or even an entire range (dark, animalic, woody, spicy,..) and we checked whether it can be protected.

I love, love, love these brain games of inventing new fragrant worlds. And the name of the game has changed in the last few years. Actually, coming up with a new perfume has become very easy. Maybe this is one of the reasons why we see all these new perfumes appearing. Michael Edwards published a few numbers on his Twitter feeds (worth following by the way):

I copy his numbers from his twitter feed that you can find on http://twitter.com/theperfumenose

All new fragrances: 76 (1990) > 389 (2000) > 1125 (2010)

WOW!

I continue thinking "fetish". I feel it would need to be a perfume concentration fragrance, really heavily concentrated. In a simple flacon, without spray. Avintage flacon. Like you find it at Waltersperger's.(click here for the picture)...

Today's picture to the left shows you rotten wood, sort of fitting. I love its smell, damp after a summer rain.

Leave a Reply