Perfume | Book Review

Perfume

Patrick Süskind

263 pages

Paperback

Penguin Books

1987

ISBN: 9780241973615

Review

‘In eighteenth-century France there lived a man who was one of the most gifted and abominable personages in an era that knew no lack of gifted and abominable personages…’

I wanted to love this book. On spec I should have; it is driven by an ambitious, fresh idea – a man with the most refined sense of smell, sniffing his way around Paris, the French countryside, and murder scenes. Grenouille is our protagonist – an orphan disfigured with smallpox scars and dirt-poor into the bargain. So far, so compelling.

To an extent ‘Perfume’ did deliver – the translation from German is seamless and the world of eighteenth century France is compelling, extensive, and yes – perfumed. There are fascinating insights into the trade and into a world where everyone, to a larger or lesser extent, stank. We travel through cramped, shit-ridden streets and reeking tanneries. It is a world well imagined and flawlessly executed.

But my enjoyment suffered for the lack of someone to root for. Süskind makes no bones about the fact that Grenouille is unlikeable (see the quotation above – the first lines in the novel). Given this design on Süskind’s part and its prominence, this seems a somewhat trite grievance to hold against an obviously well-written book. Am I an underdeveloped reader, the kind who still needs a goodie and a baddie to moor his fragile literary moral compass to? Do I need to be led, docile and plodding, by the nose to an author’s authoritative vision of good and evil? On reflection I don’t think this is the case. It is the lack of arc in Grenouille’s character which makes him disappointing as opposed to his dark intentions. Dostoevsky’s Raskolnikov is a despicable character, callously murdering two women for his own personal development. But whereas Grenouille does not deviate from either his objective or his perversions, Raskolnikov is eventually cornered by his own guilt and as such is a more compelling study.

‘Perfume’ is a good read, but I didn’t love it as I was expecting to.

*Thanks for reading. Image courtesy of Wikipedia. Find my other reviews below*

Hernan Diaz – Trust

Wilkie Collins – The Woman in White

Hilary Mantel – Mantel Pieces

Kevin Barry – The Heart in Winter

Lauren Oyler – No Judgement

George Mackay Brown – A Time to Keep

Sarah Moss – Summerwater

Stephen King – 11.22.63

Damon Galgut – The Promise

Francine Toon – Pine

Robert Winder – Bloody Foreigners

P. G. Wodehouse – Very Good, Jeeves

Michael Palin – Erebus: The History of a Ship

Hilary Mantel – The Mirror and the Light

Maggie O’Farrell – Hamnet

Raynor Winn – The Salt Path

Samantha Harvey – The Western Wind

Diarmaid MacCulloch – Thomas Cromwell: A Life

Peter Carey – A Long Way from Home

W.C. Ryan – A House of Ghosts

Val McDermid – A Place of Execution

Richard Cohen – How to Write Like Tolstoy

George Orwell – 1984

John Sampson – The Wind on the Heath

Michelle Paver – Wakenhyrst

Jess Smith – Way of the Wanderers

Zadie Smith – Feel Free

Max Hastings – Vietnam: An Epic Tragedy 1945-1975

Bernard MacLaverty – Grace Notes

Ernest Hemingway – In Our Time

Andrew Roberts – Napoleon the Great

Emily Bronte – Wuthering Heights

Margaret Atwood – The Handmaid’s Tale

Kamila Shamsi – Home Fire

Annie Proulx – Brokeback Mountain

Anthony Doerr – All the Light We Cannot See

Ellipsis: Three magazine

Harper Lee – To Kill a Mockingbird

Jon McGregor – Reservoir 13

Colson Whitehead – The Underground Railroad

Amor Towles – A Gentleman in Moscow

---

Matthew Richardson is a writer of short stories. His work has featured in Gold Dust magazine, Literally Stories, Close to the Bone, McStorytellers, Penny Shorts, Soft Cartel, Whatever Keeps the Lights On, Flashback Fiction, Cafelit, Best MicroFiction 2021, Writer’s Egg, Idle Ink, The Wild Word, Down in the Dirt, and Shooter magazine. He has a Professional Doctorate in Education. Matthew blogs at www.matthewjrichardson.com.