I recently wrote something of a magnum opus on the work of Sophia Grojsman, albeit on pieces of random scrap paper during lessons and in a couple of notebooks. I haven’t yet found the energy nor space to transcribe this to the computer. But I will.
The finishing act was to procure, and then wear, Calvin Klein Eternity. I wore For Men for a while, even if it was never really me; the original composition – so heavy with associating it is RIDICULOUS – I have never properly worn until now.
I am adoring it. It is a revelation (and I hope the students feel the same, as this has immediately become my work scent). Less bracing and exhilarating perhaps than the original —- an utter iconoclasm on its debut in 1988, this current version, bought from a big pharmacy in Fujisawa, the city I work in and am rather sick of, is still very fresh; clean: replete with eugenol, and nothing but Eternity :
cloves
carnations
star gazer lily
rose
heliotrope
violet
chemical freesias
the numbness of dead chrysanthemum
I should love Eternity looking at the notes. Yet I disliked it. I should probably do a sniff & run to see if either it or I have changed.
No it was and is noisome and grating – extremely artificial – but still j’adore
I, too, should love Eternity from looking at the notes (I’m obsessed with carnation fragrances and also love lily), and I was going to say that now I really want to try it. But then I saw your comment above “noisome and grating” and that cooled me down, because I really have a problem with overly synthetic modern perfumes. Is the vintage Eternity different?
Also, a magnum opus on the work of Sophia Grojsman sounds fascinating, so I hope you’ll write it.
It is written : must type it up !
As for Eternity, it is synthetic and a headache inducer for many, but there is still something I really love about it. The compressed cloved white flowers and peppery sandalwood musk