There are two ways of viewing “naturals” in perfume.
The first is that it smells like something natural. So a synthetically created eugenol that happens to smell like vanilla might be classed by some perfumers as “natural” in that it mimics something more molecularly complex.
The second is that it is or came from the natural. The assumption here is that at the beginning of processing a given chemical, there was a real live plant (or in some cases animal) involved. This is also the area where questions are raised because of what happens in order to distill that chemical or scent. For example, some argue absolutes are not natural because of the hexane used in processing - while it still starts with a plant, it is rendered “unnatural” because of any solvent residue. I disagree with this, personally, although I understand and can follow the reasoning: to me an absolute is still natural, although it may not be quite so environmentally friendly or safe to use as a result of the use of hexane. I expect to see some of these arguments subside as C02 extraction becomes continuously more applicable to delicate botanic sources.
These differing approaches to the meaning of “natural” is in part where the marketing melee originates. Industry marketers may well know the meaning of “natural” coming from a modern traditional perfumer, but will also know that a typical western consumer operates on the belief that the definition of natural falls into the second category; all too few are aware of the difference and that the only guarantee is the USDA certified organic label or the EU equivalent.1
- I am unversed in any organic certification available beyond EU and US. [↩]
