Chanel 1957 Chanel perfume – a fragrance for women and men 2019

Smell the Money

I wanted to test this for the strangest reasons. I wanted to test this due to a compulsion borne of frank irritation and incredulity.

First I’m kind of out when it comes to Chanel. I used to buy a LE bottle as a treat once or twice a year when they were $110 for the 75 ml bottles. Then they raised the price to $120. Okay still doable. Still expensive and extravagant but not like crazily so. Then the price jacked to $160, and now it’s literally $200 for a 75 ml bottle, a price increase of nearly 100% that took place in less than 10 years. That cost is way too exorbitant for me. I mean, things will cost a bit more every year but that price increase is insane to me and as it is, I don’t buy the higher end Chanels anymore. I don’t bother with them at all because, well, they priced me out! I suppose plenty of people are buying them and they’re profitable but $200 for 75 mls of an eau de parfum just seems like too much just on principle.

Second, I just can’t believe that they are hyping a MUSK perfume and charging the buku bucks for that. I love a good musk as much as anyone else but ya’ll know–(laundry) musks are dirt cheap, not complicated, and as a perfume style are frankly basic. There’s nothing wrong with that, I love me my Jovan Musk, E & J French Grey, plenty of Narciso Rodriguez perfumes, you get my drift. Those perfume don’t cost an arm and a leg, though. In my head I cannot separate that simple perfume style from the frank cost.

There’s a beauty in simplicity, an art in mastering a form.
And there’s plenty of crazy and complicated perfumes that are cheap, so being one thing doesn’t mean that you are another. I freely concede that. But musk? The stuff that every laundry detergent is scented with? And honestly 1957 just sounds like a giant snooze fest to me in terms of what it’s supposed to do, and the notes themselves. But I’m just sharing where I’m coming from with this. Totally biased and preconceived.

Call me a pleb. Worse, a philistine. Maybe it’s just as well that I’ll never have a 6.7 oz $350 dollar vat of Chanel 1957 on my perfume shelf next to my Jovan Musk Oil and Narciso Rodriguez for Her Eau de Parfum.

What I do have, though, is a nice 10 ml decant of the stuff. A seller on Ebay had them for $22 shipped, which more than reasonable (actually, this person was practically doing us plebs a favor:P) and, all else aside, I have so much perfume that 10 mls of anything is more than enough.

So 1957. I don’t think it’s supposed to smell like the 50’s. I mean God everyone smoked, deodorant wasn’t in wide use, most people washed their hair once a week, women were flouncing around in the original skanky oakmossy versions of No 5, Youth Dew, Cabochard, Miss Dior, Revlon Intimate, Rochas Femme, and Shalimar. They did not smell this measured and polished. Because 1957 is very nice, and fairly clean, and musky. But it doesn’t remind me of that time period (and when I read the copy I can’t figure out if that’s the intent, or not.)

There is a nice topnote of orange blossom flanked by bergamot that sits on the olfactory equivalent of a grey cashmere sweater. It’s very nice and the orange notes do last a bit. The musks–smooth, a hint dark, and very velvety, are infused with a very Chanelish accord of faintly honeyed Blue Iris and abstract non-floral jasmine. Lasting power is great, well over 8 hours, and a dab’ll do ya. Actually wears kind of heavy. I guess 8 musk notes will do that.

And that’s kind of what 1957 smells like. It smells good, it’s a linear musk perfume, to but to me smells unfinished, like it’s part of a drydown or something. The closest relative is another numerically themed Les Exclusif 1932, with that musky iris slightly rich abstract jasmine “I’m wearing Chanel” base. Ultimately it’s the perfume equivalent of wearing a soft, warm, fine fibred merino wool sweater–it’s textured and as a presence that lets you know it’s there, it will keep you warm, and it’s a damn fashionable sweater.

I know that most of this review was me waxing poetic but I don’t know. This is one of those things where if it was cheaper, and less kind of ridiculous overall (Chanel presents…Musk…) I might actually like it more. After all, I did enjoy the new Chance eau Tendre (both perfumes were done by Olivier Polge, and who knows maybe one was a prototype for the other), which has a similar style. 1957 though, it’s a bit blaring though those laundry musk perfumes do get grating to my nose after awhile and there’s not enough going on. It smells like a Chanel though and it’s not bad overall, I just can’t escape my overall bias.