Love in Paris

A couple months ago in a fit of … something … I ordered a bunch of samples. Not that I needed any more.  Believe me. I think there was a sale? Free shipping?  I’d read or heard something about every sample in the package that prompted me to want to try (or retry) it. Anyhow, they got here and I promptly forgot about them.

Now it’s been so long I can’t remember why I wanted them. A review on another blog? Mentioned by a friend? Something I saw nosing through The Perfumed Court? I decided it would be fun to sample each fragrance without researching it and try to guess what placed it on my to-try list. Which on one level creates a bass-ackwards review, but there you have it.I’m working my way through them slowly, and today we’re reviewing Nina Ricci Love in Paris.

The first five seconds after I sprayed on Love in Paris, I thought: ummmmmmmmmmm, NOPE. Whatever I thought might appeal with this one, I wuz wrong. Then I let it sit a few minutes and as usual my feelings for it changed a bit. I am pretty sure I must have read about a spicy gourmand phase in its middle, sweet but not too, with a mildly peppery funky note that reminds me of Sonia Rykiel’s Belle en Rykiel.

Created in 2004 by Aurelien Guichard, Love in Paris has notes of bergamot, star anise, apricot, jasmine, peony, rose, musk, woodsy notes and vanilla. The bergamot is a little alarming at the opening – it’s not clear at all what direction this fragrance is taking, and I was worried it was going to be this fresh citrus deal – before it settles into a musky, floral woods fragrance that is considerably less sweet than you might gather from that list. There is something quirky about it – Love in Paris being a really great name because while it is warm and ebullient and youthful, it’s not childish. There is something smoky and wistful about it, like the fading scent of illicit Gauloises in the scarf you brought home from your first semester abroad. Any of you looking for an anise powerhouse – you won’t find it here. I guess I can suss it out having seen it in the notes, but it added more of an aura of spiciness than the dreaded (by me, at least) Good ‘n Plenty vibe to the scent. I also get a long stretch of what smells like tea along with the florals in the middle, which of course pleases me.

I had to dig around to find what must have triggered my interest: Tania Sanchez in The Guide says this of Love in Paris: “conventional at a distance but odd in the details, what could have been an entirely boring floral isn’t at all,” and goes on to add: “An entirely unexpected, pleasantly salty, animalic-metallic note grows more evident as it dries down. Excellent work.” I agree with the comment about the attractiveness of the odd details; on me, though, the whole thing collapses like a souffle after 45 minutes or so, leaving me with a perfectly nice musky floral, whereas I would have preferred the salty animalic bits. I won’t be buying it, and I probably won’t even work through my sample. No matter how quirky the details, it’s just not my style. But it’s nicely done nonetheless and well worth trying for someone looking for a daywear woody/floral that’s not run of the mill, lightly spicy rather than sweet, that won’t annoy the people around you.