Everlasting The Zoo 2016

Uncommented Scents No. 128

After initial skepticism and much critical distance (see my blog), I am ultimately quite taken with Luca Turin's and Tania Sanchez's new blockbuster on scents and fragrances (Perfumes. The Guide. 2018). I can relate to much of it, but not everything; that would be strange.

Overall, however, the new direction (Neoclassicism - self-taught - distance from the oligarchs, former heroes, and the mainstream: thanks to DasguteLeben for the insightful explanation) seems understandable and coherent, even if the strong support for friends and companions (such as Calice Becker) may be unsettling. But that's what one's own nose is for.

Now to a perfumer and his brand, which I briefly introduced in my last comment: Christophe Laudamiel. I’ll quote myself: "Enfant Terrible of the fragrance scene (just take a look at his entire body of work), star at IFF Inc. and now the head and nose behind his own brand 'The Zoo'."
Luca Turin strongly advocates for this potential new star in the fragrance sky and rates his creations almost exclusively good to very good. This also applies to Everlasting, whose longevity, according to the great master, is as the name suggests. To start with: I do not find that to be true! The scent only seems to have a strong presence at first, but soon weakens and lasts hardly from evening to the next morning (as predicted), at best as a faint hint. Nevertheless, it is certainly not a light or fleeting fragrance (longevity and sillage: 8.0). So please do not press the spray head more than once or twice! This is a warning to all unsuspecting gentlemen who are used to emptying their Ambroxan waters by a quarter at the first use.

I find LT's assessment clever and mostly correct, that the scent is "Laudamiel's take on the classic 1950s masculine": it is, however, simultaneously more refined and raw than the originals of the time, smelling at first like the eccentric child of Je Reviers and Old Spice. Can it be phrased more beautifully? No, it cannot!

Despite all the enthusiasm for these references, I do not want to withhold my own perspective: Yes, it smells like a classic men's fragrance, yes, there is something of the old (!) Old Spice in it, but Everlasting also reminds me, or even more so as an idea (and not in the sense of a fragrance twin), of classics from the 60s, such as Russian Leather, the old Habit Rouge, Prestige, Grès pour Homme, or older, mostly discontinued Galimards (Monsieur, Seigneur) or fragrances from Grasse in general. Hence the association from the title line: A man in a perfectly tailored suit in a sports coupe or convertible, probably accompanied, glides over the streets of the Côte d'Azur, leaving a trail of spicy, smoky, resinous, woody, mossy, perhaps leathery aura.

The latter notes are actually enough to imagine the scent and understand it. With one exception regarding the overall impression: In fact, one would not easily mistake the scent for a true vintage representative. It is less discreet than a man in the 60s would have tolerated. It is less aromatic-masculine than a man in the 60s would have wanted.

The drive in the sports coupe continues over the roads of southern France: In the trunk, many references to the 50s and 60s, but in the paint, new signs are unfolding: less chrome and more plastic. But that does not disturb; it adds to the charm of the fragrance.