Perhaps Bob Mackie 1997 Eau de Parfum
6
Very helpful Review
Smells like the 1990s (for the nth time)
“Perhaps” was a different kind of mainstream scent back in 1997. By today's standards it is still clumsily unique in its own way in context of its time. It somehow got trapped in the transition between the late 1980s powerhouse florientals and the soft fruity-floral “slacker” scents of the late 1990s.
It begins with a mentholated fruity slap. I don’t see mint listed but there is a bracingly cold blast of mint flying below the radar, underneath the scent of canned peaches. The same peaches that graced Tresor, Tuscany Per Donna, and Liz Claiborne’s Liz made one last appearance here, subconsciously creating a time stamp that will forever read 1990s floriental. If one can find pleasure in the former listed fragrances’ peaches, then the latter’s peaches should present no problems. Given a few minutes the peaches share space with freesia and mimosa, giving this a very bright, yellow-floral scent that lingers for a very long time. The sunny yellow bouquet seems to be an attempt to mimic its more subdued contemporaries, such as Volupte, Happy, Sunflowers, and CK One. It’s nice but it creates confusion—is this going the way of a bang or a whimper?
The drydown turns to a typical 1990s floriental musky powderbomb. Again, nice but nothing new, if not downright confused. There are plenty of generic fruits, flowers, and amber. The juice’s duration is incredibly long-lasting, typical of that era’s fragrances (and a sorely missed characteristic in many fragrances produced nowadays). Sillage is tastefully strong enough and projection is just loud enough to let others you are wearing a bad-girl-gone-good.
I owned, then swapped away, a vintage bottle which smells exactly as I remembered. I was not over-the-moon with this one back in 1997 and I am still not completely in love some twenty years later. However, I do have a greater appreciation for this one, looking at it through “graduation goggles,” where former stinkers and powderbomb offenders are at once forgiven for past transgressions. You could do worse, but then you could do better.
It begins with a mentholated fruity slap. I don’t see mint listed but there is a bracingly cold blast of mint flying below the radar, underneath the scent of canned peaches. The same peaches that graced Tresor, Tuscany Per Donna, and Liz Claiborne’s Liz made one last appearance here, subconsciously creating a time stamp that will forever read 1990s floriental. If one can find pleasure in the former listed fragrances’ peaches, then the latter’s peaches should present no problems. Given a few minutes the peaches share space with freesia and mimosa, giving this a very bright, yellow-floral scent that lingers for a very long time. The sunny yellow bouquet seems to be an attempt to mimic its more subdued contemporaries, such as Volupte, Happy, Sunflowers, and CK One. It’s nice but it creates confusion—is this going the way of a bang or a whimper?
The drydown turns to a typical 1990s floriental musky powderbomb. Again, nice but nothing new, if not downright confused. There are plenty of generic fruits, flowers, and amber. The juice’s duration is incredibly long-lasting, typical of that era’s fragrances (and a sorely missed characteristic in many fragrances produced nowadays). Sillage is tastefully strong enough and projection is just loud enough to let others you are wearing a bad-girl-gone-good.
I owned, then swapped away, a vintage bottle which smells exactly as I remembered. I was not over-the-moon with this one back in 1997 and I am still not completely in love some twenty years later. However, I do have a greater appreciation for this one, looking at it through “graduation goggles,” where former stinkers and powderbomb offenders are at once forgiven for past transgressions. You could do worse, but then you could do better.
Exciter76
