For some time now, I have debated with myself whether to go down the vintage road to heartbreak or not. I feel the need to expand my fragrant knowledge and smelling tiny samples of vintage classics is a necessary part of acquiring a scented “education” in my opinion, and I do that whenever the opportunity arises. But what if I fall in love with one of those old, beautiful perfumes?
I own a few vintage minis, but am afraid of actually wearing them, because I am painfully aware of the value of every single, irreplacable drop.
Enter Laurie Erickson (and Dawn Spencer Hurwitz too, see my review of Pandora here).
Laurie heard us fumeheads whine and lament and in more than a year of hard work, developed a beautiful floral with the name of Nostalgie. Harking back to better days, Nostalgie is all I wish for in a perfume. Rich, nuanced, deep, high quality naturals, powerful and longwearing and, most importantly, very, very beautiful.
“This fragrance, inspired by the classic scents of the past, features aldehydic topnotes, a heart of precious jasmine, rose, and mimosa absolutes, and a base of Mysore sandalwood, natural oakmoss, violet leaf absolute, tonka, amber, vanilla, orris, and musk. Nostalgie dries down to a warm, lightly spiced amber and sandalwood base with soft floral accents. Fragrances today are rarely composed with so many fine naturals; the ingredients and the style rekindle memories of vintage perfumes.”
- from the Sonoma Scent Studio website
Nostalgie includes notes of aldehydes, jasmine, rose, mimosa absolutes, mysore sandalwood, violet leaf, orris, amber, oakmoss and musk.
Nostalgie opens with that typical Laurie Erickson touch of tiny champagne bubbly aldehydes, no big nose-blasting screechy aldehyde whack that some perfumes (cough, Chanel cough) have and that I don’t care for so much, but just an effervescent sparkle lifting the jasmine-rose-mimosa bouquet up towards the sunlight. (After writing this review, I read Dee’s and saw she says almost the same thing about the aldehydes, great minds thing alike, I did not copy that. )
The base is what I love the most about this fragrance, and it is what makes me crave this perfume (and it is dead certain that I will buy a bottle eventually!). After the initial florals fade out a little, what remains and remains for hours, is a perfect blend of mysore sandalwood (the real thing, ahhh!), amber and oakmoss. Soft, powdery, silky, woody, a bit dank and mossy, sweet and ambery smooth, this base pushes all my buttons and is toe-curlingly lovely.
Nostalgie wears softly, but tenaciously, its creamy sillage is undeniably there but never overpowering or dominating, I would absolutely wear this to the office. I received four compliments from absolute strangers on Nostalgie every time I wore it, which makes it an absolute winner in my book.
And those compliments made me think…
Isn’t it maybe the case that people, and I mean regular, non-fumehead, just going about their daily business people, do like a real perfume more than, say, the L’Eau d’Issey style non-entities or the newest Paris Hilton super-fruit cookie dough concoctions we are sold today?
Maybe people are not as dumb, as the industry relying on mall rat focus groups, wants them to be. Maybe the tides are turning, with a global crisis going on, we need more substance than the pinkest cotton candy could ever deliver.