Scentzilla!

One of the funnier quirks of hindsight is that despite its much vaunted 20/20 vision, it turns out hindsight still suffers from glaring blindspots.

It’s too easy, and lazy, to dismiss all those infamous 80s fragrances as stentorian blasts at the nose. So they were loud. So what. Were any of ‘em good?

I would suggest that, yes, two decades later, some of them deserve a new appreciation.

One that ought to be revisited by those who survived the big hair, shoulder pads, and the egregious overuse of Nagel prints in the 80s is Chanel’s Coco. It’s no Chanel No. 5, but then No. 5 is so iconic as to defy fair comparisons with any of Chanel’s other fragrances.

Coco was released in 1984, its creation credited to perfumer Jacques Polge. Notes include mandarine, orange blossom, Bulgerian rose, jasmine, tonka, sandalwood, incense, leather, musk ambrette, and vanilla.

Coco arrives on the skin like a cartoon snowball doomed to tumble down the mountain into an avalanche. The force of it runs contrary to the current fad of light weightless fragrances. Yet sometimes we need a little rumbling, something to disturb the peace.

Worn judiciously, it conveys not only power, but elegance. I would argue that a quiet sense of cozy warmth hides somewhere inside the composition, as well. While Coco’s vanillic lilt lends that coziness, I would be loathe to characterize this perfume as just another vanilla.

The three concentrations of Coco all vary enough to warrant mention of those differences. All are appealing in their own ways.

The eau de toilette is predictably thinner, but neatly shows off the drier qualities of the fragrance, which gives it a rather leathery feel. It may perhaps be the most comfortable choice for men to wear out of the three.

The eau de parfum wears as sweeter, with more enjoyably spicy connotations. The heart of the edp smells like flowers run through a juice machine. I like the edt, but the edp better satisifies cravings for a rich fall fragrance.

And then… there’s the parfum. Oh my. It’s so strong as to be quite nearly terrifying. The sweetness is there in spades, and the powder evolves into the smell of pulverized cream cake soap. Darker tones in the base come across as sweetly resinous. The drydown invokes incense generally and sweet myrrh specifically, as well as calling to mind the aroma of old leather handbags. The spiciness plays softly in the parfum, noticable yet not particularly predominate.

I cannot recommend any one version of Coco over the others. (Though I am willing to dissuade folks from buying Coco Mlle. in lieu of Coco. Please.) They are all fine choices - depending on personal preference. I happen to be currently wearing the parfum, but when that runs out - who knows which I will choose next? I rather like them all.