Dead Letter Office: Tiffany and Tiffany for Men- License Expired

1

If there was ever a column that was destined to be written by popular demand it is this one. Every blog has their most commented on post. Far and away the one which has the most comments is my review of 2017’s Tiffany & Co. perfume. The bulk of the 84 and counting comments is a lament for the loss of the originals done for the luxury jewelry store. I realized the reason Tiffany and Tiffany for Men are both in the Dead Letter Office is also a story of how the licensing business in fragrance worked then and now.

Back in the mid-1980’s Tiffany wanted to add an exclusive perfume for purchase at their stores. Most designer brands look for a fragrance company to license their brand to. This has been an ongoing eco-system in perfume for decades. Almost every designer fragrance you own is overseen by one of the huge beauty conglomerates. Which makes the choice made by Tiffany more remarkable. Instead of going with those proven successful entities they chose to collaborate with another exclusive luxury brand who also made fragrance, Chanel.

Francois Demachy

They chose to ask the in-house perfumer team at Chanel of Francois Demachy and Jacques Polge to design exclusive Tiffany branded perfumes. In 1987 they released Tiffany followed two years later by Tiffany for Men. I never knew they existed until I was in Tiffany with a friend and saw the bottles. Both were sophisticated styles which felt perfectly at home in the jewelry store.

Jacques Polge

Tiffany is a gorgeous, layered perfume made up of the best floral ingredients. Rose, jasmine, ylang-ylang, orris and muguet form a heady central accord. Grace notes of citrus and berry flirt around the edges. It ends on that characteristically warm Chanel sandalwood and vanilla base.

Tiffany for Men is one of the greatest men’s perfume ever produced on a similar level to Patou pour Homme. The perfumers create a spicy citrus opening which turns greener through galbanum and oakmoss. It also comes to an end on a familiar Chanel accord this time it is an ambery sandalwood given some texture through black pepper.

About the time I learned that Chanel was the perfume house behind them I would learn soon after that Tiffany was not renewing the license, ending it in 2006. The remaining inventory would be depleted over the years following. Eventually the only place they lived on was in the Dead Letter Office.

The story picks up again ten years later. Tiffany wanted to get back into the fragrance game again. This time they would collaborate with one of the large beauty companies; licensing the brand to Coty. This seems to be an attempt to capture a new Tiffany audience. No more exclusivity. Sold everywhere. Looking to appeal to the current trends favored by the younger fragrance buying demographic. If you read my review of this newer version, I think they achieved what they were trying for.

This story is a tale of two different times and places for how Tiffany wanted to be interpreted as a perfume. 35 years ago it was exclusivity. Currently it is in search of a younger demographic by casting a wider net.

For all the commenters I hope this gives you some insight into why it is unlikely to ever see Tiffany or Tiffany for Men find their way out of the Dead Letter Office.

Disclosure: This review is based on bottles I purchased.

Mark Behnke

Dead Letter Office: Mystere de Rochas- The Art of More

1

As I look around the Dead Letter Office considering what to write about there is a shelf which seems overpopulated. The label there reads “Rochas”. It has some of my favorite perfumes on it. I always look as I wonder how it can be the perfume is grand while they missed the consumer. Ever since the post-war release of Femme the brand has flailed about trying to find something which would share the popularity of that. It has led to a few eras over the past eighty years. One of them occurred in the late 1970’s early 80’s. It started with Mystere de Rochas.

Rochas has been a brand which has regularly relied upon in-house perfumers. Especially back then it was a crucial piece to developing a brand identity. Even though nobody but the professionals knew who was behind any fragrance. During this time, the nose in charge was Nicolas Mamounas. As he was working to give Rochas a new identity he was also looking around at what was popular. He made the decision to work on popular styles but to metaphorically pump up the volume. I am unsure what the reception was back in the day. I guess since all four perfumes made during this period are in the Dead Letter Office, I have my answer.

Nicolas Mamounas

What I find kind of sad is how well M. Mamounas did at the art of giving us more. These are super intense versions of well-known styles. Mystere went for the popular style of the time, chypre. The ingredient that made chypre at that time was oakmoss. Mystere is awash in it. M. Mamounas forms a green perfume so deep it almost becomes black.

The lore of the perfume is along the lines of others which touted the “hundreds” of materials to be found. It might be so, but it spins on an axis of three primary ingredients of narcissus, patchouli and oakmoss.

It opens with a familiar hiss of aldehydes and galbanum. This sets the stage for the greening of things to come. Narcissus forms the core of the floral accord. M. Mamounas unfurls an assertive version of this which would be too sharp if left on its own. He expertly weaves in a bouquet of other florals to form an ameliorating wreath of mostly white flowers. We then come to the base where the classic chypre accord is present in patchouli, oakmoss, and a woody accord of cypress and cascarilla wood. Usually the wood is sandalwood, but this choice is much lighter in effect. I think it is so the oakmoss can just coat everything in a velvety soft green blanket. The patchouli modulates the earthiness present in the oakmoss. Whenever I need a reminder of why I miss oakmoss Mystere is a good reminder. It flows in a gorgeously textural way as it sweeps up the narcissus in its embrace.

Mystere has 24-hour plus longevity and above average sillage.

Mystere arrived in 1978 and after Rochas was acquired was reformulated. That 1989 reformulation dumbed everything down. It is the only confirmation I have that even though M. Mamoulas perfected the art of more the only place it lives on is in the Dead Letter Office.

Disclosure: This review is based on a bottle I purchased.

Mark Behnke

Dead Letter Office: Sikkim de Lancome- Late to the Trend

As we have covered multiple times through this series some perfumes have a shelf life. Not due to their materials going bad. But because trends shift away from them. One of the more frustrating parts of looking back is when a really great version of a style which is in its final days puts out one of its best examples. That is the story of Sikkim de Lancome.

Lancome has been producing perfume since 1935. They have consistently been in front of trends instead of following them. 1969’s O de Lancome, 1971’s Magie Noire or 1990’s Tresor. Especially the latter made a name for the brand. One of the earliest releases was Cuir de Lancome. This was a traditional birch tar cuir de Russie style of leather. In the 1930’s this was the trend. By the late 1950’s early 60’s leather chypres had become the rage. Somewhere inside the creative team at Lancome the decision was made to join in.

Fresh off composing O de Lancome perfumer Robert Gonnon was asked to make one for the brand. He would design one of the driest leather chypres ever. He would also hit the market too late as it released in 1971. The sun was setting on that style, rapidly.

It is that arid intense green quality which sets Sikkim apart from its contemporaries. The general style was for florals and/or stone fruits to add some softness to the animalic chypre foundation. It was thought to make them easier to wear. M. Gonnon was going to go the other direction with very dry top and base with only a bit of floral relief in the middle.

2005 Reformulation of Sikkim de Lancome

The opening is a severely green galbanum. Sikkim is one of the perfumes which made me adore this ingredient in high amounts. M. Gonnon adds aldehydes which orbit the crystalline galbanum like fizzy comets. There is an herbal component which is listed as artemisia but if it is it is one of the driest versions of that ingredient. Whatever is present adds a dusting of green herbal dust to the shiny galbanum. It moves to an abstract gardenia heart accord. M. Gonnon does not want the inherent green of actual gardenia to interfere with his galbanum. To anyone smelling this it is gardenia just a sweeter deconstructed one. We then come to the leather chypre base. M. Gonnon moves everything to the dry side of the spectrum. The leather feels skanky, old, and crackly. The chypre accord vibrates off the herbal galbanum. Together it forms an excessively sharp experience.

Sikkim in its original formulation has 14-16 hour longevity and above average sillage.

Sikkim in its 2005 re-released version has 10-12 hour longevity and average silllage.

Sikkim was originally discontinued within ten years. It would rise again as part of Lancome’s 70th anniversary as part of “La Collection”. That version was hampered by being unable to use some of the ingredients of the original. I’m not sure who oversaw it, but they did a creditable job at retaining the desiccated greenness in a slightly different way. If you can only find the reformulated version, it still hews to many of the themes M. Gonnon expressed in the original.

I think Sikkim de Lancome is right up there with the greatest of the leather chypres. It is just too bad it came too late for others to decide that for themselves putting it in the Dead letter Office.

Disclosure: This review is based on bottles of the vintage and reformulated versions I purchased.

Mark Behnke

Dead Letter Office: Dinner By Bobo- Sensual Gingerbread

The early years of the naughts were a fascinating time for independent perfumery. It was the beginning of what would become a special piece of modern perfumery. Like all new things it drew an eclectic group of entrepreneurs. In that kind of environment it was inevitable that some great perfumes would fail because of inexperience. Dinner By Bobo is one of those stories.

Anne and Alexis Hardouin-Finez

In a lot of ways spouses Anne and Alexis Hardouin-Finez made a lot of the right choices when they started their line, By Bobo. They began by working with perfumer Sylvie Jourdet for their first release in 2002. On the perfume side of the equation they made a great decision to work in the gourmand style. It was a type of perfume which had only just become popular. They correctly believed there was a lot of space for creativity. Dinner By Bobo finds that by adding in a sexy skanky underpinning to all the sweet foodie accords surrounding it. This was the very raison de etre for niche perfumery. To take risks by not smelling like anything else.

Sylvie Jourdet

That desire to stand apart is where Mme Jourdet begins by using cumin. This is all the things which makes cumin divisive among perfume lovers. It has that clean human sweat profile. Right next to it is a Holiday fruitcake of intense facets of dried fruits. The balance achieved is remarkable as both accords have equivalent presence, and they go together delightfully. The heart is another interesting exercise in balance. One of my favorite gingerbread accords in all of perfumery is given a sensual twist through ylang-ylang and indolic jasmine. As if a buttery rich gingerbread man is being propositioned by the sexy florals. In the same way that the cumin finds purchase among the fruitcake the skanky florals do the same to the gingerbread. It develops in a slow burn to a base of incense, musk, and patchouli. Continuing the dichotomy of sweet and skanky.

Dinner By Bobo has 12-14 hour longevity and above average sillage.

I treasure my tiny bottle because I own nothing else like it. Almost twenty years on nobody has managed to replicate this balancing act. As to why it ended up in the Dead Letter Office I have been told the name was one reason. A perfume called Dinner By Bobo did not inspire elegant thoughts in consumers. I also think that the early successes of niche perfumery were different but not too different. Dinner By Bobo might have been just different enough to be unable to find an audience. It could even be simpler than that. New entrepreneurs just couldn’t get their perfume in front of enough buyers. I don’t have a definitive answer and parts of all three conjectures might be the truth.

Dinner By Bobo is one of the reasons I see such potential in gourmand perfumes. It shows what a perfumer who is willing to seek balance between the foodie and the sensual can make something gorgeous.

Disclosure: This review is based on a bottle I purchased.

Mark Behnke

Dead Letter Office Rochas Audace- A Quiet Chypre

In the history of modern perfumery perhaps the most influential outside event was World War II. Just as the great European perfume producers were hitting their stride everything changed. When peace was declared modern perfumery would be just another, albeit minor, thing which would need to be rebuilt. Of the brands which would make a mark post-war one would be Rochas with the release of Femme. It was one of the ways perfumery was able to say “I’m still standing”.

Femme would be the return to perfume for Rochas which prior to the war had sold three perfumes, Air Jeune, Avenue Matignon, and Audace. All three perfumes were never produced again after the war. Rochas would largely rely on Femme as the flagship fragrance for twenty-five years. By the late 1960’s Rochas wanted to get back into the fragrance game with attention getting perfumes. Monsieur Rochas and Eau de Rochas would signal that return. The perfume which was meant to cement it was the 1972 version of Audace.

Guy Robert

This version of Audace was not a reformulation as much as a reinterpretation by perfumer Guy Robert. The original Audace was said to be a full-bodied floral chypre. M. Robert, perhaps in a nod to changing trends, composed a version of Audace which I think of as a quiet chypre. This was the 1970’s so quiet is a relative term. If you were to compare Audace to the classic green chypres of twenty years earlier, it is much easier to see what I mean. Compare it to the modern chypres of today and quiet would probably not be the adjective which springs to mind. Even so I find the less extroverted style to be almost more engaging.

Audace opens on an acerbically green duet of juniper berry and pine needles. M. Robert finds a stained-glass effect of refracted light through these two ingredients. As the oakmoss rises so does a combination of florals headed by carnation. M. Robert uses a judicious amount of galbanum to extend the green effect from the top accord downward to join the oakmoss and the florals. The choice of the lightly spicy carnation gives the florals some ability to push back against the green without becoming overwhelming. Sandalwood, patchouli, vetiver and musk are all waiting for the oakmoss to complete the chypre base accord. M. Robert’s ability to keep this at a middle level of intensityis impressive.

Audace has 10-12 hour longevity and average sillage in its extrait version. 6-8 hour longevity and average sillage in its Parfum de Toilette version.

Audace was released with great fanfare by Rochas in 1972. It spawned a dress and a hairstyle at the same time. It was removed from the market six short years later. It seemingly did not find an audience for its subtle beauty.

As I look back at Audace it makes me think about walking in to an imaginary party where all the mid-century chypres were there. As much as the more flamboyant extroverts draw the eye the quite elegant one on the edge of the circle is the one which makes the biggest impact by being the quiet chypre.

Disclosure: This review is based on a sample of the extrait I received from a generous reader and a bottle of the Parfum de Toilette I purchased.

Mark Behnke

Dead Letter Office: Tom Ford Private Blend Lavender Palm- Too Contemporary?

Ever since its debut in 2007 the Tom Ford Private Blend collection has been one of the most successful expansions of luxury niche perfumery into the marketplace. They represent one of the defining brands of that style. They were the first perfumes I would review where I would be asked, “Are they worth it?” The answer to that is always an individual choice. What was undeniable was the collection was representing some of the best-known ingredients in high quality forms where the difference was noticeable.

Tom Ford

Tom Ford and Karyn Khoury creatively directed each perfume to provide a singular luxurious experience. That so many of them are on “best of” lists show their success. They have been so successful that there is debate to whether they should even be referred to as niche anymore. I think they still retain a niche aesthetic while having a wider distribution than most other fragrances referred to with that adjective. Over the first three years of existence they cemented their style over 21 releases. Then 2011 happened.

Karyn Khoury

This is conjecture on my part, but it seems like they had tired of hearing how “safe” they were. If you were to try the three releases from 2011 it feels like they wanted to have the word contemporary be part of the lexicon when describing Tom Ford Private Blends. Jasmin Rouge, Santal Blush, and this month’s Dead Letter Office entry Lavender Palm succeeded. What separated them from the rest of the collection was they took the keynote in their name off in very different new directions. All three have been among my favorites within the entire line. For some reason Lavender Palm was discontinued after only two years. I’ll provide my hypothesis for that later.

Yann Vasnier

Lavender Palm was released early in 2011 as an exclusive to the new Beverly Hills Tom Ford boutique followed by wider release a year later. Perfumer Yann Vasnier was asked to capture a Southern California luxury vibe. He chose to use two sources of lavender wrapped in a host of green ingredients.

The top accord uses the more common lavandin where M. Vasnier adds citrus to it. The whole opening gets twisted using lime blossom which teases out the floral nature of the lavender while complementing the citrus. This is an opening with snap. The heart coalesces around lavender absolute. Here is where things take that contemporary turn. M. Vasnier uses clary sage, aldehydes, moss, and palm leaves to form a lavender accord that is at turns salty and creamy. It seemingly transforms minute-by-minute. It remains one of the most unique lavender accords I have experienced. A soft resinous base is where this ends.

Lavender Palm has 6-8 hour longevity and average sillage.

Lavender Palm became widely available in the beginning of 2012 and was discontinued by the end of 2014. I think the reason might be this was the only one of the three 2011 releases which unabashedly altered the previous style of the collection. There aren’t many Tom Ford Private Blend releases to be found in the Dead Letter Office; Lavender Palm might have got there by being too contemporary.

Disclosure: This review is based on a bottle I purchased.

Mark Behnke

Dead Letter Office: Weil Kipling- Actions and Reactions

There are shelves in the Dead Letter Office which contain too many from the same brand which are amazing. The Weil shelf is one of those. The brand itself was one of the earliest brands of modern perfumery. Created by three brothers, in 1927, they came to fragrance as an accessory to their main business of selling fur coats. Their first perfumes were meant to be worn on their fur coats to camouflage the smell of the skins. When I’ve smelled Zibeline from this period it is hard to see it as masking much of anything. It seemed like it would amplify the furry quality. They would graduate to making perfume to be worn as perfume. That ended abruptly as World War 2 broke out and they fled their factory for the US. The family would return post-war and pick up the pieces. The best of that time period was Antilope.

That was the extent of my personal knowledge of Weil until my reader who gifted me with the box of discontinued samples appeared. As part of what was sent there was almost an entire set of Weil releases. I finally got to experience Weil de Weil and Eau de Fraicheur. As I mentioned every one of these perfumes are on a shelf in the Dead Letter Office. As part of my treasure trove I ran across a Weil I hadn’t heard of previously; Kipling. I was always going to write about Weil and this group of perfumes which have been discontinued. The four I mentioned to start are the acknowledged gems. I will probably return to them another time for future columns. As I learned of the current history of the brand Kipling felt like a good representative.

Where I left off in the brand history was as the family returned to Paris post-war. They would continue to make perfume until the early 1960’s. Then would begin a merry-go-round of different owners. Each owner wanted to capture the glorious past, but their vision was less assured when it came to new perfumes. When it hit; as in 1971’s Weil de Weil it was great. When the next owners took over, they wanted to put their stamp on the brand. Through the last part of the 20th century the brand always seemed to be a tiny step behind sometimes seeming like a reactive brand instead of a trendsetter. Weil de Weil was released soon after Chanel No. 19 as an example.

When the chairs stopped in 1986 Fashion Fragrances oversaw Weil. These were the latter days of the masculine leather fougere powerhouses. There seemed to be a desire to do a fuller version of that style. Kipling was going to be a reaction that upped the elegance of the style. Perfumer Jean-Pierre Mary oversaw realizing that brief.

When I smell Kipling now it seems part of that period in masculine perfumery. By itself I didn’t rate it as something different. It wasn’t until I pulled some of its contemporaries off the shelf that what M. Mary did was more evident. The trend in the late 1980’s for this kind of perfumes was to be drier. For Kipling, M. Mary added back something more rounded.

That shows right away with a mixture of lavender, juniper, and artemisia. The latter two ingredients accentuate the herbal-ness of the lavender. The licorice quality of the artemisia meshes beautifully. A green intermezzo of basil and pine leads to a heart dominated by geranium. M. Mary adds in a tiny amount of clove to accentuate that part of geranium’s scent profile. It lands on a classic base of leather supported by oakmoss, and patchouli. Both of those elevate M. Mary’s leather accord.

Kipling has 14-16 hour longevity and average sillage.

Why did Kipling end up on the Weil shelf in the Dead Letter Office? The ownership wheel spun again. As had been done during other changes last in was first to go. There was a market for this kind of stepped-up spicy leather fougere. Weil just didn’t have the stable ownership invested enough in making Kipling one of those. As before the reaction instead of the action ends up in the Dead Letter Office.

Disclosure: This review is based on a sample sent to me by a reader.

Mark Behnke

Dead Letter Office: Donna Karan Chaos- Twice Canceled

30

One of the familiar refrains of this column is the perfume being profiled was ahead of its time. That is inevitably followed by the conjecture on whether it would have succeeded at a different time; after trends caught up to it. There aren’t many that are given that second chance only to end up back in the Dead Letter Office. Donna Karan Chaos owns this distinction.

Donna Karan is one of the most successful designer perfume brands on the market. Her namesake fragrances plus the DKNY branded ones are classic mass-market perfumes. It didn’t start out that way. Ms. Karan released her first branded perfume in 1992. Over the next ten years she would release another five perfumes. Taken as a collection they were an impressive group of fragrances staking out their own territory. Using those perfumes it seems like Ms. Karan was attempting to create her own niche-like character. That five of the six, Cashmere Mist the exception, are all in the Dead Letter Office tells you how successful they were in the marketplace.

In the realm of the senses where being different is lauded; that group of six were delightful for that. I own all of them because of their unabashed desire to do their own thing. They are examples of what mass-market can aspire to. Each of them was contemporaneous to emerging trends from niche brands.

Jean-Claude Delville

In 1996 the style of spiced dried fruit Oriental perfume was just beginning. Working with perfumer Jean-Claude Delville; Ms. Karan and her co creative director Jane Turker made one of the earliest versions of this.

What is fascinating about Chaos is it accomplishes this fruitiness without a single fruit ingredient in the note list. This would become common; in 1996 it was still infrequently seen. M. Delville would form an axis of coriander, saffron, and sandalwood. On to that he would adhere precious woods, resins, and spices. This is a gorgeously realized opulent Oriental ahead of its time.

Chaos has 8-10 hour longevity and moderate sillage.

Chaos was discontinued in 2002 after failing to capture consumers’ attention. This is where I say Chaos was ahead of its time and that’s why it is in the Dead Letter Office. Except the powers that be at Donna Karan must have thought that time had arrived in 2008 when they re-issued Chaos onto the market. Along with two of the other original six Donna Karans which also seemed to be too early for perfume lovers.

By 2008 Chaos was not an oddity there were many other perfumes going for two to three times the price in the same style. This was the time for Chaos to thrive. Except it didn’t. It would be discontinued for a second time in 2013.

As much as I want to believe every perfume has the right time to find its audience Donna Karan Chaos stubbornly refutes that hypothesis by finding its way to the Dead Letter Office; twice.

Disclosure: This review is based on a bottle I purchased.

Mark Behnke

Dead Letter Office: Lagerfeld for H&M Liquid Karl- Gourmand by Karl

Upon the death of Karl Lagerfeld earlier this week I began considering what was a fitting tribute to him and his impact on perfume. I spent a few days reminding myself of the perfumes he released under his own name. If there was something which surprised me was, outside of a few, there was a lack of a recognizable aesthetic. All the perfume releases under the Karl Lagerfeld brand tended to veer from one trend to the other without necessarily being the one at the leading edge but the fast follower. Which is why many of them are in the Dead Letter Office. In looking back I found one which best sums up the iconoclastic designer; Lagerfeld for H&M Liquid Karl.

 

Karl Lagerfeld

In 2004 clothing store H&M wanted to start collaborating with the biggest fashion designers in the world on affordable couture. They thought, if successful, this could become a regular event. For their first collaboration they went right to the top convincing Karl Lagerfeld to kick this concept off. Mr. Lagerfeld wanted a full-service collection, including a fragrance. He had founded his own perfume brand in 1978 making it an easy extension for the H&M collaboration.

Pascal Gaurin

The perfume was called Lagerfeld for H&M Liquid Karl. He worked with a team of three perfumers; Pascal Gaurin, Bruno Jovanovic, and Sandrine Malin. What they produced is one of the best of the early gourmand perfumes because it went in such a different direction.

Bruno Jovanovic

Liquid Karl starts with the smell of baking bread. The perfumers build that doughy sweet scent of every bakery. In the early moments there are hints of some of the other bakery spices. This opening shows where gourmand perfumes will go. Then as cocoa and frangipani add to the bread the entire effect goes from savory to sweet. From bread to bread pudding; sort of. Maybe bread to chocolate pudding is closer to accurate. The base is a set of clean woods given depth from oakmoss.

Liquid Karl has 10-12 hour longevity and average sillage.

When the collection was released in November of 2004 it sold out immediately. This is an occurrence which happens yearly as H&M has partnered with another high-end fashion brand every year since on an anticipated capsule collection. Many of them contain a perfume because of Mr. Lagerfeld’s inclusion of one at the beginning.

Liquid Karl is not well-known because it was produced in limited quantities as part of the H&M collaboration. This is in the Dead Letter Office because it was a limited edition not through business reasons. You can find bottles frequently on the online auction sites.

I chose Liquid Karl as a way of honoring the vision of Mr. Lagerfeld because of any perfume he made it displayed his sense of the coming trend. His fashion set the trends. His perfumes not as much. Looking back on that fragrance portfolio Liquid Karl was another case of Mr. Lagerfeld charting the course which others would eventually follow.

Disclosure: This review is based on a bottle I purchased.

Mark Behnke

Dead Letter Office: Spazio Krizia Donna- Left Behind

As we entered the new millennium the trend of niche perfumery was taking hold. Throughout the mid-1990’s there was this segment of perfume producers re-writing the rules. Pushing back against the commercial with a vision that perfume could be something more. I write over and over about those founding brands of the style of fragrance which changed the way things were done. What gets lost is there were some brands who were also looking to find their audience while never surviving. These were the putative failures. Except they really weren’t. There were equally great ideas at the brands which got left behind. This month I look at one of those with Spazio Krizia Donna.

Mariuccia Mandelli

Mariuccia Mandelli and her husband Aldo Pinto founded Krizia as a ready-to-wear Italian brand in 1954. Sig. ra Mandelli was a trendsetter as one of the mothers of the short shorts known as “hotpants” her most well-known innovation. As the 1990’s began Sig. ra had begun the diversification that every successful fashion brand had undergone. They had started making perfume in 1980 with their debut release K de Krizia by perfumer Maurice Roucel. They would follow that with four other perfumes. All five of those perfumes were nicely done. In 1991 is seems like Sig. ra Mandelli had decided she wanted the perfumes which carried the Krizia name to have something to say. By collaborating with perfumer Dominique Ropion she wanted to lead the way with her fragrance collection as she had with her fashion. With the release of Krazy Krizia she succeeded. For the next fifteen years she would keep making interesting niche-style perfumes. My favorite is Spazio Krizia Donna.

Christine Nagel

Spazio Krizia Donna was released in 1998 it was the “donna” version of the “uomo” version released five years earlier. Beyond the name there is no comparison Spazio Krizia Uomo is a crazy herbal vetiver in a moss-covered ocean cave. Spazio Krizia Donna was composed by Christine Nagel which confirms Sig. ra Mandelli’s eye for talent. It is best described as a floral gourmand a term which had not ben coined in 1998.

Spazio Krizia Donna opens with a spicy rose floating on a cup of slightly bitter brewed coffee. There have been quite a few floral coffee releases the last year or so. This is more floral than coffee, but the roasted contrast is a nice companion. Mme Nagel uses an ingredient which is not used very much these days, cascarilla bark. The essential oil from the distillation of this wood is a kind of allspice effect. If you smell it by itself you will think you are smelling a blended perfume of pepper, nutmeg, and green herbal-ness. In the case of this perfume it elicits a response from the spicy core of the rose. Paradise seed is also present providing a nutty cardamom piece. This is such an interesting accord as Mme Nagel uses alternative sources for specific spice effects. It gives it a lighter feel than it probably would have if the regular ingredients were used. The base accord covers the florals in a sticky coating of honey which is warmed by amber and musk.

Spazio Krizia Donna has 14-16 hour longevity and average sillage.

The collection of Krizia releases from 1991-2006 contain some great examples of the early days of niche perfumery. They continued to be available until three or four years ago. The brand was sold in 2014 and it was soon after the fragrance collection was contracted to just four perfumes; none from the time period I mentioned above. The scions of niche perfumery are well-known. If you want to find the creative brands which couldn’t thrive you have to visit the Dead Letter Office.

Disclosure: This review is based on a sample I received from a reader.

Mark Behnke