Question:
Originally Posted by Ruggles I agree with everyone, and perhaps it's easy to name a few possible men's classics from Guerlain, Creed, Caron. But what about the hundreds of niche house creations? How will anyone ever know all or even most of these? The traditional fragrance families, Oriental, Chypre, Fougere, Citrus, seem to be less and less adhered to and so many fragrances seem unclassifiable.
--------------------------------------
I believe that Guerlain's Heritage is the most recent classic scent.
--------------------------------------
OK, I'll stick my neck out, my vote for the classic male fragrance: Caron Pour un Homme. I think you raise some interesting points. The question is not only what kind of perfume makes a classic, but for whom. In previous eras the group of perfume consumers was smaller and more homogenous, wile the sheer amount of perfumes was infinitely smaller than today. Those are much better preconditions to arrive at a consensus about what constitutes the classics. Now, in a global mass market of previously unknown proportions with an annual deluge of new products, while niche-counter or subcultures sprout left and right, this becomes much more difficult. It's the same with popular music, or wine, or literature, in fact.
Still, it's possible to arrive at provisional truths, at least among a community of fragrance lovers, and I agree with previous posts that it is in particular the high quality of ingredients, technical mastery according to the norms of the nose guild, and perhaps most of all having set a paradigmatic precedent that constitutes a classic. The H&R genealogy lays some of these out nicely, though it stresses commerical success - 4711 is one there, not Farina Gegenüber. Yet, canons are flexible, and from the vantage points of an ever-changing perfume landscape, older perfumes might come into view as classics that hadn't been considered such previously, though I'm at a loss for an example.

Answer:
I'm going to approach this from another direction. A classic *is* a classic when it:
a) sells well over time
b) is recognized by both the sophisticated and unsophisticated as quality
c) is unique/distinct
Of the three characteristics, I'd say b is the most important. Mainstream fragrances are often simply of their own season (celebrity fragrances, anyone?) and/or are held in contempt by the sophisticated (I'm only going to recognize legitimate contempt, based on shortcomings in the fragrance, not just snobbery (the *wrong*people* are wearing it))

Answer:
Originally Posted by radix023 I'm going to approach this from another direction. A classic *is* a classic when it:
a) sells well over time
b) is recognized by both the sophisticated and unsophisticated as quality
c) is unique/distinct
Of the three characteristics, I'd say b is the most important. Mainstream fragrances are often simply of their own season (celebrity fragrances, anyone?) and/or are held in contempt by the sophisticated (I'm only going to recognize legitimate contempt, based on shortcomings in the fragrance, not just snobbery (the *wrong*people* are wearing it)) Hi Radix. So, are you saying that a classic is measured by a fragrance's popularity over time? I'm not sure if I agree. I think the "unsophisticated" person's opinion defines a fragrance's popularity, while the "sophisticated" person's opinion defines its artistry.
I do not believe something's popularity is a factor in deciding if it will stand the test of time. In my opinion, CK One will never be a classic, it will be forgotten over time. I think something has to survive its era and continue to be relevant to future generations. I question if Gourmands will last or will they become a footnote in the history of fragrance.
An Oxford History of Perfumery is what we need.