Azurée (1969)
by Estée Lauder

I always loved it, but have been told that by others that it smells to them like cat urine. Each to their own.

Is the disparity listed by Basenotes and The Perfumed Court due to there being two distinct versions currently extant since Tom Ford's revision? I just received this today as a sample -- not sure which one I received but might be the original. I definitely don't pick up on anything as potentially edible as orange blossom or coconut. Rather, this strikes me as the kind of Gloria Swanson-style scentbomb that could inspire health-conscious cities to ban perfume. I am a woman of "a certain age" who tends to appreciate dark and demanding scents (though, I admit, I am mixed about chypres and vetiver). But this one is actually turning my stomach! It's fascinating to me how scents with any intensity listed here draw such divergent reactions. The "leather-ette" middle is now becoming slightly more tolerable, but for the sake of my poor, disoriented cats I'm going to hop in a shower!

I'm gonna have to be honest here. I passionately hated Estee Lauder's Azurée. And I hated it for several reasons. One is that it smells terrible. Azurée is a cloying fragrance with an extremely obvious synthetic overlay to the whole concoction. There is no discernible flower note or other kind of pleasant note for that matter. Sad to say that despite the involvement of Tom Ford et al, Azurée's re-issued perfume is a textbook artificial-smelling Estee Lauder fragrance. Youth Dew anyone? Dazzling Silver perhaps?

Which brings me to my next point. I hate that Azuréeis what the Estee Lauder company thinks the American woman wants to smell like. I envision EL's marketing and focus groups repeatedly tinkering with the juice and dumbing it down so that (in their minds) it will smell generically "sophisticated" to a housewife in say, Kansas, and will thus prompt her to buy it. I've never been to Kansas but hope that the good people there and the rest of America don't fall for this awfulness that is being sold as "perfume".

Here are the notes, per The Perfumed Court: Top note of orange blossom, Middle notes of Tahitian flower, gardenia and coconut; and Base notes of vetiver, myrrh and sandalwood.

I bought this not long ago and it's become a mainstay in my collection. The opening is powerful - spray lightly or you'll be changing your shirt by lunchtime. I was 15 minutes into this one when nostalgia hit like a hammer, and I was reminded of Giorgio Beverly Hills for Men. It's not precisely the same, but the bright herbs and woods became a strong reminder, and ever since I've worn this one at least once a week. The drydown is addictive. A keeper, to be sure.

Artistically arresting, a bit difficult to wear. Dry, papery, peppery, bitter herbal, pungent. It has a soapy opening and is supposedly a "leather" scent, but it never segues into the animalic, indolic territory of Chanel Cuir de Russie, my benchmarch leather scent--especially the vintage juice. Rather, Azuree has in common with its two Estee Lauder classic "sisters" a certain sneezy dustiness. Whereas Aliage translates this note into overt greenness, Private Collectionlets it fade into a backdrop of florals and sweet amber. Azuree does neither. The same note hangs suspended in mid-air like a ray of sunshine made visible in dusty air for as long as the fragrance persists. Evocatively nostalgic, poignant, powerful, but not easy.

I have worn this off and on for years, although now it is very difficult to find. It is fresh and fun, but also rather masculine, therefore my husband also occasionally wears it. he says it smells like Aramis and I would have to agree. Longevity is amazing, and the drydown does not seem to alter the initial sneezy oakmoss opening. This fragrance does make a lot of people sneeze, so I never wear this to work. I have also felt recently that it feels a bit dated, as some other older fragrances do not. I am wearing it less and less, but when I do wear it I remember its heyday(and my own) with affection.