Mimosa (1986)
by Czech & Speake

Having recently revisited my decant of PdN Mimosaique, and having enjoyed it very much, I pulled this sample back out - the mimosa fragrance that turned me off of the whole note originally.

And I feel no different now. This is sharp finger nails on chalkboard white floral, turn indolic (read earthy plus fertilizer) jasmine, then thick tuberose. The close finally softened up, and the unpleasant earthiness subsided, but the effort to get there was beyond my tolerance for suffering.

This is the polar opposite of the soft beauty of Mimosaique, and I am obviously a fan of the easier ride.

8th October, 2011.

The opening is very powerful and heavy on the florals. Mainly a white floral note that must be the mimosa. Jasmine soon joins the accord and finally the tuberose comes through in the base. The opening is just too much floral for me and there is a persistent indolic note throughout the entire fragrance. I’ve also come to realize that I’m not a fan of tuberose. At all. I’m not even sure I’d like this on a woman as it is definitely a feminine scent. Might be the worst from the C&S line.

13rd September, 2011.

Overall a good showing of tuberose and orange blossom. Slightly indolic and feminine. But that is about it. I think this would be a safe and fitting choice for women of any age. It is just the right balance between the stuffy old-world florals of yesteryear and the new age Acqua di Gio pour femme whatever that might be--something by Britney Spears or Paris Hilton perhaps?

11th January, 2011.

This is a gorgeous floral scent. It is so heady that it briefly has a slightly volatile, rubbery aspect. It is an ornate cloud: somewhat sweet but not cloying or heavy. The impression is that of lily of the valley – on steroids! A dry, earthy note emerges in the dry-down. Here’s a floral that I could wear once in a while and enjoy. I'm surprised at all the negative reviews. I'm no big fan of florals but I can appreciate this.

25th February, 2010.

The florals themselves do not come through very clearly for me; so, instead of a dominant flowery tuberose and jasmine, I am left with a rather strong indole note. It smells dirty – it even crosses over the thin line between floral and fecal. Usually the presence of a fecal note is not a negative with me, but the problem here is that it doesn’t come and go as a fecal note usually does in a fragrance… it stays as a continuing note and it gets overmuch. Judging from the other reviews, I’m not the only one who reacts negatively to Mimosa, but I’m not quite as turned off by it as some of the others seem to be. My greater criticism of with Mimosa is that I find it quite characterless. It is well made; it performs competently and lasts long enough, but its only real uniqueness or point of interest is a droning, shallow, near off-putting fecal note.

1st November, 2009.

Wow - so many bad reviews! I'm glad I sampled this a few times before writing a review. Mimosa is a fairly straightforward white floral. It starts of with a light mimosa note with a touch of geranium. Slowly jasmine joins the accord and eventually a tuberose base takes over. I'm not much of a tuberose fan so I stopped enjoying the fragrance as the basenotes emerged, but until that point I felt Mimosa was a darn good white floral (a genre I usually don't care much for). There are better mimosa scents out there, but this one isn't bad. Sillage was what you'd expect from such a fragrance and the longevity was well above average. As for whether paying C&S prices for a white floral is 'worth it' I leave that up to you.

1st August, 2009.