Just when you think you’ve seen everything, stuff like this reminds you of what Bruce Cockburn says: You’ve Never Seen Everything. For which, I guess, we can only be thankful. But here’s a new one, at least to me: Virtue Perfume, a new beauty product that the creators say was inspired by biblical ingredients and which is geared toward assisting the wearer, or the lover, as the case may be, towards spiritual attainment. $80 bucks gets you a chance to be biblical, spiritual, and sexy all at the same time.
Obviously this kind of materialist marketing, capitalizing on obscure content from the text of the Bible, is nothing new. Pop-culture pragmatic evangelical products have been around for at least 30 or so years and include everything from rock music to visual art of biblical scenes and characters, Christian Tee-shirts that parody popular consumerist products and ideology, to Christian horror flicks. The Christian retail industry hit something like $4 billion dollars in sales three years ago, and this figure doesn’t even include sales of Catholic bookshops and gift stores that marked incense, images, and other such sensory aids to worship. So I suppose that the surprising thing is that it took so long for a Christian perfume to appear at all.
Now, while I find the consumer-capitalist junk products of Tee-shirts and other Christiany knick-knacks highly problematic, especially for the purpose of evangelism, I can definitely appreciate sensory, physical, and material elements in the practice of faith. The natural, physical world exists to be experienced through the senses, which can deepen faith for those who have it and can inspire mystical ecstasy even among those who profess no faith or who cannot intellectually assent to the Divine. There is nothing that inspires my experience of God so much as things that allow me to participate in the physical, sensory world of the Creation. So much that I find sensorily beautiful move me to tears and to stronger faith. And smells are one of these; food, for example, is a spiritual experience for me from time to time, as it engages sight, smell, and taste. The human body is also an inspiration to beauty that engages the senses. I love good perfumes on my woman. So the concept of something like Virtue Perfume as an aid to experiencing the sacred isn’t particularly foreign or offensive to me.
What I find ridiculous is the need to justify the spiritual value of sensory and bodily beauty to certain Christian groups by marketing the stuff as a religious product and, especially, by making it “biblical.” As if to say that smelling good and feeling sensual or sexy is sinf, unchristian, and unbiblical unless it can be shown that smelling good, feeling sensual, or being sexy is OK’ed by Scripture. The way Virtue tries to pull this off is by listing its ingredients as “biblical.” And so they are. But so what? In fact, the website even notes that one of these biblical ingredients, Apricot, was probably the original forbidden fruit. This would have been news to medieval theologians like Bernard, no stranger to sensual spirituality himself, who thought of the fruit as the apple, and of modern scholars who find it much more likely that the forbidden fruit was the pomegranate. But in any case, it is highly ironic that an ap-peal to the forbidden fruit in this very biblical list would be used as an aid to experiencing God.
The thinking is that “Christians won’t buy perfumes if they psychologically associate them with negative stereotypes of sexuality that most perfumes perpetuate.” And that’s probably the case. Why feed into the sex industry even more by buying products that perpetuate sexual imagery that is damaging and destructive? It is tough, I suppose, to avoid thinking of having wild sex on the beach if your schnozz picks up a whiff Nautica or whatever. Having a marketing image that provides an alternative to ads like Nautica’s or Calvin Klein’s is commendable, but to actually say it’s “biblical” goes a bit over the top. Some things can be good, and sensual, without having to justify it as being biblical.
Plus, its $80.00 bucks.
17 May 2007 at 3:20 pm
“$80.00 bucks.”
Biblical or not, no thanks.
17 May 2007 at 4:10 pm
This has a postmodern aspect to it. The surface is everything.
It also has a holistic aspect to it. Change the Bible to another ancient source (eastern or Native American, or tribal from Europe, for example) and it might sell quite well at the organic shops here that we visit frequently.
It also seems like a parody. I wonder if it is real or a hoax.
I am also amazed at the speculation that the tree of knowledge was apricot or pomegranate or apple or any fruit we know. I know that in various religious traditions it has been associated with particular trees for various religious reasons, but for scholars to weigh in on this (speculating about what kind of fruit tree it was) amazes me as much as the perfume. It reminds me of speculation that Lilith was an owl, Behemoth a hippo, and Leviathan a crocodile. The scholars I studied with regarded all of these creatures, as well as the tree of knowledge, as simply mythological and as having no meaningful correspond to creatures or plants of the modern world. I guess if a scholar is arguing that pomegranate or apricot was somehow associated with knowledge of good and evil in the ancient world, I can understand a scholar saying that ancient readers might have imagined the tree of knowledge as a pomegranate.
Do you know anything about such scholars and their work?
17 May 2007 at 4:24 pm
I just remembered that at least one of the health food chains here sells Ezekiel bread based on a recipe in Ezekiel. I don’t remember the chapter and verse. Ironically, I think the recipe was associated with a curse, not a blessing.
17 May 2007 at 4:30 pm
Wow! Deep stuff huh? ha
17 May 2007 at 5:19 pm
It’s Ezekiel 4.9. And, it’s great stuff, presumably because the recipe conveniently leaves out the method of baking in 4.12 (look it up. 😉 ).
17 May 2007 at 6:02 pm
Oh that’s right. They did not have bread machines in those days:-)
17 May 2007 at 6:40 pm
ANYWAY. 🙂 Regarding your comment about speculation on tree types, Behmoleviathilith, and such things. As usual, I take a bit of a middle road with this kind of thing. As I intimated in the actual post, I am largely persuaded by a “materiality of religion” approach that recognizes that, especially in cases where a commonplace from the natural world (tree, fruit, mountain, river, or whatever) takes on spiritual significance, an understanding and appreciation of the thing itself as it was understood and appreciated in those days is helpful. The pomegranate is one of the great examples here; a symbol of power, fertility, and sexuality throughout the ancient near east, and in fact it still is in some cultures today; and, in fact, “POM” juice is marketed as having a bit of the symbolic element of life-giving even now. So, when exegetes and so forth in antiquity are speculating on “what kind of tree was the tree of knowledge of good and evil,” because of the way they associated pomegranates with power, sex, and what not, the answer would have been “well, obviously it was a pomegranate tree.” To me this is a bit different than taking an apologetics approach that needs the tree to be a “real tree” in order for the Bible to be true, and it’s also different from the more “it’s mythological and there isn’t an actual material reality behind the symbol” approach of liberal theologians.
Not to get off topic or anything …
17 May 2007 at 10:16 pm
Thanks for that insight.
We planted a pomegranate tree this year. It is fine tree. No wonder Eve ate the fruit. I think we will too.
18 May 2007 at 9:36 am
LOL!
18 May 2007 at 4:21 pm
I finally just read this whole post. And I think that if it’s not in the bible, then not only does it have no value, it doesn’t even exist. I therefore don’t believe in popcorn poppers, automatic transmissions, KY Jelly and all variants thereof, Timex watches, pineapple upside-down cake, Twizzlers, asphalt driveways, fair trade coffee, toejam, hangnails, General Motors, rhubarb pie, impacted cerumen, and leather panties.
Things must have a biblical source if they are to be considered real, valuable, good, healthy, NORMAL, or useful.
Just my $0.02.
21 May 2007 at 11:30 pm
http://pressposts.com/Education/Heaven-Scent/
Submited post on PressPosts.com – “Heaven Scent”
22 May 2007 at 5:42 pm
Hopefully the scent is not culled from the book of Revelation.
22 May 2007 at 6:11 pm
Yeah, lovely; sulfur, smoke, fire, John’s bitter scroll, and four frothing mad horses.
24 July 2007 at 7:24 am
This brings to mind the old platitude” a fool and his money are soon parted” BUT I still wonder where that fool got the money