{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02096177558569667, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004932182490752158, 'mean_word_length': 4.75886524822695, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Perfume between Art and Design

Chapter 12 explores two main ways out of the impasse reached in Chapter 11. The first way would adopt one of the current composite or disjunctive definitions of (fine) art; the second way would abandon the quest for defining (fine) art and consider instead what it would take to promote some perfumery practices to the status of art perfumes, parallel to the way some kinds of photography or quilt making have become art photography or art quilts. Since this solution to the impasse would mean that only certain types of perfumes could be considered art perfumes, leaving most standard perfumes part of design, a postlude to Part III, “Free Art versus Design Art,” answers the concern of perfume admirers that this would demote the finest perfumes for wear to “minor art” status.