Chanel No 5 Eau de Parfum Chanel perfume – a fragrance for women 1986

I respect this perfume (not as much as Arpege, which is moreso the unsung hero of this style and deserves grand recognition beyond what No.5 receives), but I don’t love it. It is…*itself*. And much of what I’m trying to explain is a challenge because of it. Maybe that makes sense? Maybe not.

As I’ve sniffed this on people or at the counter throughout my life, I’ve had various impressions, or I’ll recognize different elements here. I think it largely is dependant on how I feel, or how the weather is. This really is complex…but yet…somehow not. It’s nuanced, but in a brilliant way, reads as one identifiable *scent*…and that scent is overwhelmingly iconic. It really deserves credit for being so immediately recognizable. There’s no mistaking it, and everyone knows what No.5 is.

Is iris-leaning to my nose, and this has been my prevailing takeaway. It’s densely powdery. That of course, being the bulk of the wear time after the half hour or so of aldehydes that absolutely dominate the opening. After reformulations, they still remain a formidable fleet of sparkling aromachemicals. It’s quite soapy, bracing in it’s cleanness, and does indeed smell of upscale body care products (or…are many products based off of this iconic ‘fume?! You be the judge).

There are other florals here, and sometimes I get rose alongside patchouli. Though, that could be because that pairing is so popular in the fragrance game that it’s easiest for me to identify it. I’ve never thought that this is particularly “woody” though, I think it would lean more unisex if it was.

This feels very warm, and despite some of it’s prickly corners, it’s still smooth overall because of the ylang ylang. Yet, for something so warm, it manages to retain a highfalutin, uppity aura. I don’t understand how, but I guess that’s part of it’s mystique. It’s warm and cozy on the wearer, but smells unapproachable from the outside. If I were trying to seem elitist and intimidating, I’d reach for No.5. It’s composed, put-together, very *present*, polite, but not necessarily *nice*. It’s akin to an accomplished person who does everything correctly, but remains overly formal and has difficult tendencies to deal with.

Longevity and sillage are pretty good. Not nuclear, but decent. I think people think this is stronger than it actually is because they either hate it (and hated scents always seem larger) or No.5 enthusiasts are oversprayers. Or both. At any rate, I find it only to be about a 6.5/10 in potency. Maybe it was stronger pre-reform, I don’t recall.

This isn’t intended to be a comparison review, but I can’t help but hype Arpege instead! Everything No. 5 offers is similar to it, but Arpege is more inviting, comforting, less bracing, and more soulful (to me, everyone has a different idea of things). And no, not because it’s cheaper and I can afford it 😂

I actually enjoy rocking No.5 sometimes when I visit the fragrance counter, and maybe I’ll get a decant or something for occasional use, but this isn’t *me* at all. It’s taken me years to figure out how to review it, and I’m unsure that I even managed.

TLDR:
It’s iconic. Soapy. Stiff. Blended well. Warm in tone, yet pretentious in vibe. Not my thing, I only wear it in the spirit of “playing dress-up”.