Star rating: 5 stars–outstanding/potential classic, 4 stars–very good, 3 stars–adequate, 2 stars–disappointing, 1 star–poor.
Rose petals floating on water is the aspect of S-Perfume 100% Love that lends it a serene and wistful quality. Luminous accords are arranged like delicate patterns on Japanese silk, their translucence evoking a gentle touch. The composition captures the moment when one loses oneself in a reverie of perfect contentment. If this sensation could be bottled, 100% Love comes close.
100% Love was created by Sophia Grojsman, the nose behind fragrances like Jaipur by Boucheron, Eternity by Calvin Klein, Paris by Yves Saint Laurent, and Trésor by Lancôme. 100% Love is a fascinating fragrance in terms of the development of Grojsman’s artistic vision, whose earlier creations have been revolutionary in terms of their structure, where most of the formula was made up of only a few ingredients, with carefully chosen accents ornamenting the composition. In case of Trésor, four materials comprise 80% of the formula. The result is a panoramic, rather than a sequential composition, unfolding like a fan. …
100% Love is panoramic as well, yet it pairs complexity with translucence. Delicate rose petals layered with a dusting of chocolate are the central facet of the composition, which is also ornamented subtly with incense. Rose is a note that Grojsman is famous for, be the lush pink petals of Paris, a soft apricot tinged flower of Trésor, or an imaginary blue blossom of Yvresse. It is interesting to see that in 100% Love rose has an abstract quality, as if painted in watercolors. It does not explode in a cascade of petals like the other fragrances mentioned, yet its dream-like aura is what makes the composition especially beguiling. Chocolate note provides a lovely sweet touch, yet nothing about the composition is particularly gourmand. It folds many associations within its ethereal form, from the first flowers to the first kiss.
It persists caressing and gentle, its quiet beauty underscored by a sense of confidence its creator instilled in the composition. Indeed, the concept and the name could not be more fitting. Like The Different Company fragrances, 100% Love requires to be sprayed liberally in order to create a thin veil of scent over the skin. While there is a special ethereal beauty to the composition in its current EDT concentration, S-Perfume will release a more concentrated version early next year.
Painting: Paul Gauguin. Nave Nave Moe (Sacred Spring). 1894. Oil on canvas. The Hermitage, St. Petersburg, Russia. From abcgallery.
42 Comments
parislondres: Hi V! I must try this perfume when I pass Colette next time. I tend to get distracted with all sorts of things when I hit Colette – trying to spot the famous hip young and old ones….
As you know, I am becoming quite a rose perfume addict (very slowly!). 🙂 The chocolate note scares me but if it is not too sweet then must be rather pretty.
Ms. Grojsman’s creations are quite impressive and your review makes me think this maybe something I could like… a lot!
😉 October 26, 2005 at 4:03am
lachezanne: What a marvelous review, V! You make me want to rush out and try this one! I am a rose lover, but the other notes in this, had I seen them only in a list, would have put me off. Your descriptions, however, always help me to open my mind and overcome my prejudices. 🙂 October 26, 2005 at 9:11am
Laura: Well, I was just in Colette and , while looking for a present for our son, tried the Surfer Spray (which was so fun and delicious-smelling) but didn’t try the others. I think the bottles put me off a bit— I imagined my extra decades made me an unlikely consumer of these scents ;D. However, your lovely description of the Love one makes me wish I HAD tried it! And I’m going to, next week! Yay! Really great reviews, V. October 26, 2005 at 5:26am
kaie: Thank you for your review! As always your descriptions are tempting. I will stop by Colette today and I will try these parfums. October 26, 2005 at 9:27am
Judith (lilybp): Like M, I was very put off by the packaging (and the blurbs). I think this is clearly aimed at a younger age group than mine. But you do make everything sound so beautiful. . . . Luca Turin liked S-ex; have you tried that? October 26, 2005 at 10:18am
linda: I am actually going to LA next week, so this review is so timely. Your lovely reviews never fail to spark my interest.
xoxo October 26, 2005 at 10:18am
linda: V, how strong is the metallic note you are talking about? I am a little bit afraid of anything too metallic. October 26, 2005 at 11:03am
linda: Oops, I meant in S-Ex fragrance. October 26, 2005 at 11:05am
mreenymo: I tested this earlier this year and was very, very disappointed. The perfume you described was not at all like the one I tested. It was sort of that sweet rose and fairly one-dimensional on my skin.
And the packaging is very, very strange.
Sorry! October 26, 2005 at 11:29am
linda: Tania, thank you for a laugh. The sperm put me off too. October 26, 2005 at 12:01pm
Robin: A perfect description of one of my favorite fragrance discoveries of this year. Besides being just frankly lovely, it is so different from anything else, even other fragrances by SG. October 26, 2005 at 1:00pm
Sisonne: V, another one I want to try – & don´t have a chance to until I´ll go to Paris next time – & I don´t know when that will be…*sigh* (Last time I didn´t have the time to got to Colette – what a pity!)
As you already know I´ve always difficulties with rose fragrances – they tend to get very strong on my skin. Maybe this is a softer rose? (I hope so!) I do like the chocolate aspect, it sounds very special.
The S-Ex fragrance sounds even more interesting, because I´m really into leather fragrances.
By the way, I´ve worn Trésor for several years, I really loved it. Now I don´t wear it anymore, but it´s still a very well-done fragrance. October 26, 2005 at 1:48pm
Marina: Really? You like it too, Vikochka? So does Robin…Hmm…I have got to learn to look past the image/ packaging and focus only on the scent. The spermatozoid on the bottle in this case kind of turned me off trying it LOL But now I definitely will get a sample. What about other S-Perfumes, anything else from them that you liked? October 26, 2005 at 9:59am
BoisdeJasmin: Dear N, yes, I cannot wait to hear your thoughts. I always forget why exactly I came to Colette whenever going there–there are lots of interesting things and people to observe.
Chocolate here is just an accent, which maybe come across as too weak for those who love this note. On the other hand, in the watercolour delicacy of the composition, it adds a sweet touch. Very special. October 26, 2005 at 10:27am
BoisdeJasmin: Laura, the Surfer Spray is fun, as are some other fragrances in the line. I only hope that they expand. I actually did not see the presentation as particularly age specific, however some of the comments here and on other blogs pointed it out. Yes, next week you can try all of the fragances! 🙂 October 26, 2005 at 10:34am
BoisdeJasmin: A, I am so glad to hear this! I agree that reading rose and chocolate among notes immediately conjures something rich, sweet and gourmand, however it is another but. It is more like a rose kiss, very delicate and tender. October 26, 2005 at 10:38am
BoisdeJasmin: Kaie, thank you. Come back and let us know then, please. I would love to hear your thoughts. October 26, 2005 at 10:38am
BoisdeJasmin: Marinochka, somehow it is one instance when I do not want a fancy, pretty bottle, as the focus is on scents. The entire presentation and concept seem to belong to the MoMa, as opposed to Louvre.
My next favourite is S-Ex, which is leather and musk with a metallic twist. Then suddenly a note of red fruit paired with transparent camelia resurfaces, and the entire composition becomes illuminated. Quite interesting and definitely wearable. October 26, 2005 at 10:46am
BoisdeJasmin: Judith, yes, I really liked it. As I described to Marina in my comment above, it has a very interesting (and yes, quite sexy) aura.
Sacré Nobi is a sculptor, and I particularly liked the synergy between art and perfume, as recognized in the line. October 26, 2005 at 10:49am
BoisdeJasmin: Linda, thank you! I hope that you will find them interesting. October 26, 2005 at 10:50am
BoisdeJasmin: L, it is just a metallic accent really, lending a certain edgy, sleek quality. October 26, 2005 at 11:14am
Tania: You do make it sound lovely! And yet the S-eX scent (I can’t believe I am typing this) sounds much more in line with my tastes. I really can’t get over the giant sperm image on the bottle, though. I’d have to decant it out if I were going to buy it, since there’s just no way I could spray myself from a bottle like that. No way! October 26, 2005 at 11:41am
BoisdeJasmin: R, no need to be sorry! Glad to hear your thoughts as well. It is a rather sheer rose, but in the end, this is what made it interesting for me, rose treated in a sort of dream-like, ethereal way. October 26, 2005 at 11:42am
BoisdeJasmin: T, I am laughing out loud. What is wrong with the sperm image? 🙂
Have been trying to reply to your comment without saying that you might like S-ex. Ok, I could not manage it… You actually might like it–leather note is very interesting, especially given that slight metallic twist. October 26, 2005 at 11:48am
BoisdeJasmin: R, thank you! It is definitely a perfectly lovely, almost heartbreaking, fragrance. October 26, 2005 at 1:24pm
BoisdeJasmin: C, I would contact the S-Perfume and find out about their shipping policy. They certainly have samples, which are quite generous.
The rose here is soft, petals floating on water, as I described it. It is ethereal, yet substantial enough. As for chocolate, I think that it is a lovely way to add sweetness, without obvious dessert connotations. Yes, like you, I love Tresor, even though I do not wear much of it lately. Perhaps, that is what I will put on later today.
Let me know how your search for the samples goes. October 26, 2005 at 2:02pm
Tania: Oh yes, S-eX, I have heard of it but never tried it…
You’re right. It sounds awfully funny.
That’s why I keep pronouncing it as “Essex.” October 26, 2005 at 2:26pm
Tara: I ordered a set of these samples from S-Perfume and was disappointed. None of them appealed to me at all. I must retest and see if my taste has changed. The sperm thing really put me off too. October 26, 2005 at 7:11pm
BoisdeJasmin: On the other hand, it might be kind of interesting to reply to question on what fragrance am I wearing. October 26, 2005 at 5:56pm
BoisdeJasmin: Tara, sometimes tastes change indeed. Yet, some fragrances just do not become more appealing. I would be curious to hear your opinion once you retest them.
I must be pretty much the only person who does not get bothered by the logo. I did not even pay much attention to it, to be honest. October 26, 2005 at 7:28pm
Evan: I’m always put off by overt sex references in perfume (actually in most things). It always makes me wonder if marketing types are just incredibly repressed horny people, or intemperate perverts. Probably neither, but they obviously thing (possibly correctly) that consumers are both. I admit that I prefer to think of perfume abstractly; I tend to dislike when I am forced toward specific images. I don’t like to think of perfume as utilitarian, a substance for enticing sex partners as it is often marketed. I’m trying to think of all the overtly sexual perfume names…
I prefer the more subtle “sexy” perfume names of the past of the past: My Sin, Indiscret, or even French Can-Can 😉 October 26, 2005 at 7:46pm
BoisdeJasmin: Evan, I cannot agree with you more when you say that you think about perfume as something much more than an object of seduction. Indeed, I would not be writing so much on the topic if that was the only thing I thought. At the same time, none of S-Perfume concepts strikes me as lewd or perverted. The entire idea seemed much more primordial and tongue-in-cheek to me. I just do not tend to pay too much attention to the accoutrement and instead focus on the scent itself.
And you are certainly right, subtle sexy is definitely very appealing! October 26, 2005 at 8:55pm
Katie: You got so much more out of this than I! But I’m glad you liked it so much. I feel with S-Perfumes that I am experiencing them through a perfume looking glass. My likes and dislikes seem to be the utter opposite of everyone and their dog. Would love to hear you expand on your thoughts about the Morillas spray, since that one was my own fave 🙂 October 26, 2005 at 9:01pm
Evan: V, I understand what you mean about irony: S-Perfumes are really unsexy looking, almost clinical. Something about the packaging, the bottles and the pallid, water-like juice inside them makes me think of a cold beaker at a sperm bank rather than rumpled, damp satin sheets. This may be an appealing image for some people, but it sort of puts me off whether sincerely smutty or ironic. Your description of the perfume doesn’t seem to fit the image they’re presenting. I’ll have to give the line a smell and try to forget about all the other stuff! October 26, 2005 at 9:12pm
Tania: I agree with Evan: the bottle does look incredibly clinical. That’s part of the reason I couldn’t possibly spray myself with it. I would feel like I was dousing myself in someone’s…er…specimen.
Speaking of bad overtly sexy perfume names, I would have to say Victoria’s Secret (no relation) Very Sexy is the stupidest.
I am waiting for the summer sheer version: Sort of Sexy. October 26, 2005 at 9:28pm
BoisdeJasmin: Katie, perceptions differ so much, don’t they? I suppose that it is part of the interest and the excitement in sharing the thoughts. I actually really liked the Spray, and even more I would have liked to smell it in the air. It has a very uplifting quality. I will definitely review it soon. October 26, 2005 at 9:49pm
Katie: And look at their advertising imagery!
http://www2.victoriassecret.com/collection/sort/index.cfm?rfnbr=2542&nav=dropdowns&cgnbr=OSFRGZZZZZZ&bn=VSVER
As a result I am waiting for the intense version: I’m Too Sexy For This Shirt. (Obviously I am trapped in a time warp where Right Said Fred jokes are still relevant.) October 26, 2005 at 9:50pm
BoisdeJasmin: Evan, that is actually an interesting observation. When I saw the packaging (the boxes, paper and the bottles), I immediately thought of the installation I saw at the Modern Art Museum in San Francisco last summer. I cannot remember the artist though. I cannot say that it is what drew me to the line, but it does not affect me one way or another. I suppose I was more focused on the fact that it was Sophia Grojsman who created 100% Love, and I love her creations. October 26, 2005 at 9:52pm
BoisdeJasmin: Tania, I should learn that I need to stop drinking tea while reading your posts. I just had a near accident with tea being spilled. This is really funny. 🙂
Victoria’s Secret… I had a boss who kept asking me all the time, “Victoria, what is your secret?” The joke got old after the first time. October 26, 2005 at 9:56pm
BoisdeJasmin: Giselle is certainly too sexy for that shirt! Smart move on their part. 🙂 October 26, 2005 at 9:58pm
Evan: That’s a good one, Tania. I’ll also nominate a few others in the copulatory/biological category whose names I hate:
Séxūal by Michel Germain (the accent marks don’t make it better)
Jovan Sex Appeal (not so dirty, but the whole cheap fin de seventies presentation makes me think it will make you smell like Mr Roper from the show “Three’s Company”)
Pherómone by Marilyn Miglin (reminds me of female deer urine used by hunters to attract male deer)
DNA by Bijan (Ick.)
Ok, I’ll stop. October 26, 2005 at 11:00pm
Deborah: I am interested in the following scents please let meknow what you all think of the way they smell?
Sexual by Michel Germain
Miglin Pheromone
Vicky Teil Sirene or Originale
Hermes 24 Faubourg
Thanks December 9, 2005 at 4:05pm