To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
shtirlec – :
A big throwback scent with florals coming out after the opening. Really intense, I can’t pick out individual notes.
But this is not for me, there’s nothing modern about it. I appreciate the history and can tell this is an interesting composition. It’s not a down vote, but it is a pass.
vadimmus46 – :
This is potent stuff. It smells beautiful in the bottle.
Upon application, it is sharp, spicy, sweet and cool with an undertone of dried wood. It makes me think of driftwood at the beach. Once the initial burst softens, the white florals begin to peak through. I dries down to a pink-powder bouquet with citrus. I quite like it for what it is, a full-on floral.
I think it would be perfect for a formal outdoors afternoon event, one you would wear a hat to, and I bet it would be gorgeous in warmer, balmier weather.
fhvfyjd – :
Said to have been worn by then, Lady Diana Spencer on her wedding day to become Diana, Princess of Wales.
Although sometimes rumoured that she wore 24 Faubourg, we can safely ignore this as 24 Faubourg was composed by Maurice Roucel in 1995 and marriage to Charles, Prince of Wales was in 1981.
It is to me a very complex scent and I wear it preferably to elegant, more formal dinners or events.
I expect it is a scent that still contains much natural ingredients and hence will slightly vary on different wearer’s skin.
neybegace – :
So..did Lady Di wear this or Hermes 24 Faubourg on her wedding day, or neither..? Who knows..but it makes for some fun speculation!
What I can say is Quelques Fleurs is lovely..very much a throwback type of fragrance, a definite nod to the fragrances of past. Quelques Fleurs has a way of making one feel special, from the packaging to the pretty embossed bottle to the scent itself..not the run of the mill candy bomb or fruitcholi that seems to be everywhere these days. Does Quelques Fleurs smell like it did back when it was created in 1913..? Again..who knows…Nobody around to tell us, unfortunately.
So history and packaging aside (but definitely worth mentioning!!), Quelques Fleurs, the scent itself..?again, smells like a fragrance from years past, perhaps the 70’s or early 80’s (which, coincidentally, was the time Diana dated and married Charles). For me, first and foremost there is an earthy green-ness to this, followed by a subtle (not screeching) white floral. There is a slight hint of powdery-ness and I do detect the lilac just a wee touch, both rounding this out to give this a relaxing vibe. Not an everyday frag for me, but nice for relaxing comfy laid back type of days, like Sundays or maybe days when I am home alone and just want to relax and still smell good, but don’t need or want any hugely ‘impressive’ fragrance, but..still something nice. I like it.
zhildin – :
This was a blind buy for me, and I love it. It’s smells like heaven just got cleaned with dove soap and strewn with white florals (especially jasmine). I am having a hard time detecting the citrus.
mazafakaaaaaaaaaaaaa – :
To me this modern formulation is a subtly vintage-tinted white floral with a juicy fruity overtone, which was an unexpected surprise. When I say vintage, I’m referring to the understated quality of the scent that makes it also feel like a fine soap- it’s light, clean and well mannered, but definitely not outdated. I quite like it, and perhaps when I’ve whittled down my collection a bit I will add this old gal. Not sure if it would perform as well in winter, but it’s very pretty in summer.
BessePayoxtax – :
From my sample of the current formulation, I get an hour of lovely sillage of this big, luxurious bouquet, with a slight emphasis on lush white florals. Then it shrinks down to a personal space scent that reminds me of an exquisitely scented, expensive French soap. This is an impeccable, elegant scent that is truly appropriate for any occasion…but a bit too reserved for me to splurge on a bottle.
FANCLER – :
I attended a 1940s themed event and wanted a perfume that would have been around in that era. Looking at the weather and what I owned, this was the logical choice. I’m not sure I’d worn it before as heavy florals intimidate me, but it worked beautifully. It definitely has lily of the valley, and “green notes” that were lightly grassy-minty-fresh as a back – drop, but beyond that I wasn’t able t pick specific notes. I didn’t perceive it as heavily powdery nor did it go all indolic on me, it stayed fresh and only mellowed slightly as the evening wore on. I applied fairly lightly and it was present with good staying power but not overwhelming. I only have a sample vial, one which went unused for too long; not sure I need a bottle but this was a pleasant and classy perfume.
I_have_many_money – :
Just like with other vintage/moderns, there really should be two separate entries for the vintage and the modern because, as other reviewers have noted, the two bear little semblance to one another, save only that they are in the same over-arching category of ‘floral.’ The reformulation, or Quelques Fleurs L’Original, billed as an EdP, is a pleasant enough floral. Vintage Quelques Fleurs, which comes in multiple strengths, including a parfum, an EdT (which is stronger than today’s EdP, similar to Chanel No. 5 or Opium), and others, is a powdery, mossy, spicy complex floral masterpiece, fit for a goddess, like nothing else I have ever smelled. Here, two completely different scents are being rated as one. That can only give a person the vaguest idea of what either could smell like.
soso0 – :
Powdery retro classic floral bouquet. Very nice. I don’t necessarily pick out particular notes like the people above, I get a well blended bouquet leaning toward white florals, with a little woods and maybe even a little spice? It’s very nice and I’m glad this classic is still around.
svetik_101 – :
I have Parfum sample and 50ml Edp of this. I like the Edp but LOVE the Parfum. Then I also have a little vintage Quelques Fleurs and it’s totally different; Spicy, a little similar than vintage Fleurs de Rocaille Parfum IMO. I don’t like that vintage Quelques Fleurs..
QFL’O Parfum is so beautiful floral bouquet, very strong good old style.
dne777 – :
Ok, I think I had differing expectations before I tried this. My dream perfume would be like a blooming garden following me everywhere I go – little whiffs of rose and lily and gardenia and hyacinth and greenery and and… From reading on here I was hoping this would be something like that. But alas….
This is not an innocent, girly floral. It’s kind of spicy. Actually, I’m not even quite sure what I’m smelling is all that floral. I’m not sure what it smells like. I think whoever compared it to hand wipes was on to something. It is also rather weak and one-dimensional on me, or my skin just eats it up. There are much prettier florals out there for far less money in my opinion. The history enthusiast in me wants so much to find a truly classic, vintage perfume I love wearing, but it doesn’t seem to be working out so far.
Well, I think I’ll have to plant a garden instead!
nikolay123 – :
(6 sprays total, one on each back-of-hand and two on each wrist, gently pressed together.) It’s nice and very ‘classic’ and ‘feminine’ and I can see why famous people like Princess Diana and Dita Von Teese wore it but to me it’s just another basic LoTV perfume. If you have Diorissimo or something similar, you really don’t need this one.
If you don’t have any LoTV perfumes in your collection though, you may enjoy having this be your only one. Imagine an engagement ring, and LoTV is the center stone. Oakmoss and Lilac are the two smaller diamonds on either side, making the LoTV look and feel even prettier and more luxurious. Surrounding the three stones are smaller diamonds, representing the jasmine, rose, and other notes. The very first green note listed in the “your votes” column… either I’m anosmic to it, or it’s just blended so well that I just detect it as a realistic LoTV note.
Projection and longevity are okay approx 1- 1.5 feet/ 3-4 hours. Spring/summer daytime. It’s a very timeless perfume too. No sharp edges like some other LoTV offerings out there. There is no way someone in 2018 could smell this and say “Ah! A perfume from the 1910’s or 1950’s or 1980’s! It feels like an upscale niche house could have invented and blended this formula just yesterday or 200 years ago. If you only want one LoTV perfume or one white-floral, this should definitely be a contender.
___
Also, I am not a fan of the fictional character reviews. If you want to exercise your writing skills on here, fine, but please, no more than one review per perfume, and it must be a perfume you have actually smelled and are reviewing accurately. No one wants to read about your Southern Sorority Sister roleplaying fantasy if you didn’t even smell the perfume and are just making things up and stealing info from other reviews. People spend a lot of money and invest a lot of emotion into blind-buying perfumes and they depend on honest, accurate reviews from Fragrantica, so it’s not fair to them when you make things up. Either that or write whatever made-up story you want, but put a disclaimer at the end so that we know not to take your pretend-review seriously.
usemoffem – :
I can attest what corkscrewcurly said is true. I read the thread started by the originale of that “entourage” talking about using the review section to practice her writing skills. We reported this to the forum but no action was taken. They even took down the thread.
Deroxxufou – :
I have the contemporary available L’Original EDP, but I also grabbed a vintage splash EDT on ebay without the “L’Original”. It’s a Canadian tester, 80%ish full 100ml.
Very very diff scents. While the L’Orig is green/floral/powdery; the vintage EDT is rather flat and pure baby powder/talc (after 10 mins of pure alcohol). This was a test from a drop to the wrist. Will update later if I need to. Very very light potency/sillage. Maybe this has turned, spoiled, been diluted, etc…
IMO, if this is the vintage, it’s not worth seeking out/paying for. The current version is very nice and powerful enough. (I find the current version not the potent-bomb others do, but it’s def satisfactory.) The current version is also way more interesting.
I find it hard to imagine Dita Von Teese wearing L’Original as her signature. It’s so innocent/fresh/powdery. She’s too sexy/hot for this scent! Haha!
While my wrist is basically a skin scent (up close to sniff) I am getting the baby powder sillage from time to time. So this does radiate. In fact, now 2 hours later, my skin is passed the baby powder and I’m getting more floral. Except now, 2 hours later, the EDT is just about gone from my skin.
I put the EDT splash on a tissue test, and after the alcohol dies down I DEF get the citrus/open notes, and carnation. I’m getting sharp florals and they are kinda “pissy” which I don’t mind. I like “skanky/indolic” in vintage scents.
But I’m still sure the vintage is WAY diff than L’Original.
Overall, my more potent tissue test is SHARP floral and powder. Little to no green. And L’Orig isn’t sharp at all. Or pissy.
olegs1980 – :
this was Lady Diana ‘s wedding perfume
svat600 – :
What about a relaunch of the exquisite ‘Essence Rare’?! Just a few, simple yet beautiful essences, expertly blended to make an incredibly lovely perfume.
One of the loveliest scents of all time and reasonably priced and very, very popular. So what do Houbigant do? Discontinue it! Of course! Perfect sense! Bozo’s!
Oh, it was used by me during a passionate five year secret affair and reminds me of the wonderful secret love I had, a love that, if you are lucky, comes just once in a lifetime.
If anyone from whoever owns Houbigant now – Procter and Gamble? – (they seem to own just about everything), Please,
Please, consider a Re Launch of ESSENCE RARE!
Thank you
sukub3 – :
Oh! how phony! I am so glad Corkscrewcurls has made this clear about this person using all the non de plumes. but – WHY?
Just why are they doing this? For what end? Is it really worthwhile writing such fake, rambling reviews?
Is whoever this is out of a job? Are they short on work but long on time?
It must be some strange person that can spend all this time typing away like this. I shall put a note next to my screen and just completely ignore any reviews with any of these names!
Many thanks to Corkscrew Curls, Shelly
колюня – :
Oh! how phony! I am so glad Corkscrewcurls has made this clear about this person using all the non de plumes. but – WHY?
Just why are they doing this? For what end? Is it really worthwhile writing such fake, rambling reviews?
Is whoever this is out of a job? Are they short on work but long on time?
It must be some strange person that can spend all this time typing away like this. I shall put a note next to my screen and just completely ignore any reviews with any of these names!
Many thanks to Corkscrew Curls, Shelly
jqp240speagoessenda – :
Powerful powdery floral with a vintage feeling.
A classic that I love.
PS: At first, I thought that I just like it, but for some reason I find myself reaching out for it frequently!
Buterbrodik – :
Well said Corkscrewcurly! It somehow marginalises the credibility of this wonderful site when it’s clear these are “fake” and self indulgent reviews.
My wonderful granny wore this in the ‘60’s, well possibly even earlier, but that’s as early as my memory goes. The fragrance was in a pale duck blue ceramic bottle, and had a very distinctive big floral scent. Today’s version is nothing like it, I bought the original and a flanker (might have been intense or something, apologies I have forgotten). Neither is even remotely like Granny’s fragrance.
Having said that, both are very lovely florals and I don’t regret the purchase.
LUKOVKA169 – :
stephen.bozer
SouthernBlonde
Gigi The Fashionista
lucia.lawson
eliza.gelman
carolyn.parker
auroramcandless
brian.fitzgerald
marina.zubov
sasha.talan
shauna.parra
etc etc etc (I think it likely there are more)
These reviewers are all the same person.
Most of their reviews contain long and rambling personal reveries about the perfume and a tendency to thank the nose, house and/or eBay. Some also have a preternatural ability to smell notes in a perfume – to the extent that you’d suspect a chromatograph had been used to distinguish the individual molecules.
Once I spot one of the names on a fragrance review page, I know there’s a very high probability of there being (at least) one other under (at least) one other pseudonym.
On Quelques Fleurs, I saw carolyn.parker’s review – scrolled down and… there are reviews from brian.fitgerald, auroramccandless, lucia.lawson, Southern Blonde, and two from Gigi The Fashionista (who – I think – may be the original/first persona).
If one of the personas makes favourable comments, so do the others (at least on all the perfume review pages I have read so far).
This person appears to need external validation but I don’t see why this community should provide it for them. These reviewers can “thumbs-up” the others’ reviews and enter competitions multiple times to win prizes. I also suspect that the owners of the images used as avatars have not been consulted or given their permission. Some of the personas have changed their avatar more than once – and I have noticed that the photographs used are definitely NOT of the same person.
(Thanks to Lizardbreath for confirming my suspicions.)
ziava – :
I sampled Quelques Fleurs L’Original from a carded sample vial. I wanted so much to love it. I should love it. A big, old fashioned floral bouquet in the middle of winter appeals to me. But after wearing it all day I can say “meh”. There’s something missing there, something a little flat, two-dimensional, despite the huge mix of florals. I’m left wanting something it doesn’t deliver but I can’t say what. I like it. It’s not a scrubber. But life is too short not to wear fragrances that send you to the moon. I don’t want to seem insulting, but it may be that it reminds me of a fragrance you can buy from Avon. Not to disrespect Avon, but this is supposed to be fine fragrance, and to me it just isn’t.
stylust – :
I received a 2ml vial of this today. I just smeared the little plastic wand on top of my wrist and instantly recognised the smell. Just so familiar to me…. then I kept thinking back and I remembered, my beautiful English granny used to smell beautiful, just like this. For that reason I wouldn’t purchase a bottle. I want to leave the memory of my gran as she was, dressed in Quelques Fleurs. I think this was her signature scent (I’m sure it was around in the 70’s and 80’s). Rest in peace my beloved granny.
alek1985vasnev – :
Timeisart
How very eloquent of you. You sound as common as muck love!
mogyglalo – :
I am sad to say that, after thoroughly testing this and Estée Lauder’s Beautiful….they are so very similar to my nose that I can’t justify owning both and Quelques Fleurs definitely wins between the two. The original Beautiful was indeed exquisitely beautiful but at this point in her life, she has not aged as gracefully as I would like; Quelques Fleurs, on the other hand, is a lovely, smooth Grande Dame. If I can offload my multiple bottles of recently-produced Beautiful, I will definitely fill her spot in my wardrobe with Quelques Fleurs. EDIT: Got it!
lesinkya – :
A big, bright, beautiful floral with a great deal of freshness. Green without being at all heavy handed about it… not that I don’t like those big green fragrances but here it brings a lightness to the beautiful floral opening, along with all that uplifting citrus. I’m picking up something a bit apple-y, too. Youthful compared to other big florals (e.g. Joy) but not childish; kind of a sparkling, more girlish Beautiful (EL). Much lighter than I thought it was going to be – from the notes this looks like it’s a powerhouse – and suitable, really, for just about any season. This is, however, an old school perfume and not one of the modern watered down aquatic nothings that are so popular nowadays. For noses only used to the current style this may be too much; even though it’s light and bright it’s still old-school dense. As it dries down it becomes greener, soapier, and more astringent as the oakmoss comes through. A lighthearted, feminine beauty.
noface46 – :
Wood covered with powder, flowers and good quality of an old classy soap.
It’s so French… If someone put this fragrance under my nose… I am sure I would see with my imagination: Marie Antionette right away after her bath walking in one of her: Château de Versailles…
France… whole history, women, sex and sensitivity… closed in one bottle…
lexar88 – :
A softly feminine blend of flowers and woods, oakmoss and bergamot- where all of the notes are too courteous to stand out, shout or get in each others’ faces- instead, they all politely defer to each other-
брогарр – :
This is the “Now Voyager” fragrance that was central to the plot of the 1942 Bette Davis movie of the same name. The name of Charlotte Vale’s perfume was never expressly mentioned in the movie, but it is given as Quelques Fleurs in the novel by Olive Higgins Prouty.
What’s it smell like? (modern version)
I get the similarities to “Estee Lauder” beautiful, but it reminds me of a less flamboyant “Fantasia de Fleurs” by Creed, because of the sweetness. To my simple country nose it smells like white florals paired with freshly cut grapes. Some reveiwers have commented that it has a slightly “urinal” smell with their chemistry. -When I first applied it, yes, but after five minutes of drying, it smells like a sweet floral. The sharpness is gone.
Like the love story of Charlotte Vale and Jerry Durrance Quelques Fleurs eminates a feeling of wistful sadness and longing.
dbnfktr81 – :
This lovely fragrance is POWERFUL! A lovely beast on me. This morning I resorted to spraying it in the air and walking through it… ahah now it’s wonderful. Just be careful on the trigger. When I received it yesterday I did the typical spray on and wow!!! Overpowering! I took a shower and still smelled the fragrance on me. Amazing the difference it makes in HOW you apply fragrance! I am a classics fan and wanted this in my collection. I’m glad I have it. As long as I never spray it directly on again! Excellent sillage and longevity.
35536600 – :
This lovely fragrance is POWERFUL! A lovely beast on me. This morning I resorted to spraying it in the air and walking through it… ahah now it’s wonderful. Just be careful on the trigger. When I received it yesterday I did the typical spray on and wow!!! Overpowering! I took a shower and still smelled the fragrance on me. Amazing the difference it makes in HOW you apply fragrance! I am a classics fan and wanted this in my collection. I’m glad I have it. As long as I never spray it directly on again! Excellent sillage and longevity.
надежда234 – :
These Are Some Flowers!
As old and old fashioned as this floral fragrance is, it’s so beautiful What I don’t understand is why the largest size bottles are so expensive. I realize that this is a vintage 1912 formula but I’ve worn many vintages including Guerlain L’Heure Bleue and Jicky and Coty’s La Rose Jacqueminot which pre-date Quelques Fleurs and they were more affordable! Quelques Fleurs comes from around the same time that Guerlain’s Mitsouko was launched. Aldehydes had not yet been introduced so perfumers resorted to making fragrances fresh with citrus. Zesty lemon and bergamot oranges. The heart is generously floral with carnation, rose, orchid, lilac, violet, heliotrope, iris, tuberose, jasmine, lily of the valley and ylang-ylang. Did I miss any flower? Like Estee Lauder’s Beautiful and Yves Saint Laurent’s Paris, this is a flower show, a parade float made entirely of flowers. So if you like floral fragrances and you call yourself a hardcore floral gal or guy, this frag cannot be missed. In the canon, it’s the biggest and brightest of the florals.
Green notes abound from beginning to end. It smells like a florist shop, a botanical garden or botanica where they sell plants and flowers. The green notes at the top are made of tarragon and the graphic scent of actual green leaves. There’s also a distinct lemongrass. The orange blossom sings! It’s an orange grove scent as it opens before it turns flowery with corollas, petals of pink, lavender, lilac, blue, white, and red. For me no one flower stands out over the other. They are all bunched up in a decorative and marvelous spring bouquet. There is a note of honey and powder note which sweetens up the scent and also gives it a very feminine quality. I wouldn’t say that the powder is too much. In fact it’s the least used of the notes. There is an orris root or iris which would have been super powdery or starchy but it’s not coming through very strongly. This is honeyed flowers held together with amber, musk, vanilla and sandalwood. The dry down is of oak moss.
Quelques Fleurs is a spring time fragrance but it can be worn in the summer if you like your florals in summer. I prefer to wear fruity perfumes in summer. This here perfume is just begging to be worn out in public on nice spring days in April and May. It speaks of day wear and sundresses, conservative wear. She is a lady like fragrance. At the same time it’s very subtle and has a light projection, though the longevity is superb. It lasts a whole day while you wear it from morning through afternoon. The scent is evocative of Edwardian flower girls around a Maypole, in cute dresses with sashes and bows. It also reminds me of Eliza Doolittle from My Fair Lady, selling flowers in Covent Garden. This is more Brit than French to me. It smells of clean smooth vanilla and honey, flowers, oak moss and a touch of musk and powder.
The big name ladies this perfume evokes, regardless if they wore it themselves or not, include Deborah Kerr (from the King and I) Julie Andrews (as Mary Poppins) Audrey Hepburn (My Fair Lady) and I would also add Angela Lansbury, and, yes, Diana Spencer AKA Princess Di whether the wedding day association is true or not. This is very much an Anglo floral scent for ladies, princesses, aristocrats, but it has a simplicity that can also appeal to the plebeians and domestics at home. It’s as much a garden as it is a flower vase in the home. This does smell like the finest quality toilet water for your bath. I have also poured it into my bath water. This is for both the lady of the house and the maid!
I first encountered this fragrance back in the 80’s. I was very fond of floral perfumes then and I found it to be quite modest and conservative not at all like the showy parfums de fleurs like Ungaro Diva with it’s glamorous rose and honeyed sweetness, or like the violet and powdery Paris by Yves Saint Laurent, or the green floral paradise of Estee Lauder’s Beautiful. It has the same kind of multi floral aroma but has a discreetness to it. This may well be the most perfect floral fragrance ever composed. I don’t know who the nose is. Does anyone know? What a frustration not knowing who formulated Quelques Fleurs! I wear this in spring time as a casual day wear cologne to put on for lunch and social events in Mount Pleasant and Charleston. I receive compliments on it every time. Despite the association it has with mature women, old ladies and mothers or grandmothers, it’s a gorgeous floral hands down. Anyone interested in how floral notes wear in a fragrance this is such an education in perfumery and I recommend it to all serious perfume lovers to check it out. The price is rather high but worth it. The alternative is the more affordable miniature dab on bottles sell on eBay and Amazon.com.
ENVI – :
The Cry of Flower Power Echoes Throughout the Land!
We Shall Not Wilt!
Let A Thousand Flowers Bloom!
– Abbie Hoffman
Has there ever been a more beautiful and more famous fragrance with this many floral notes? Has there ever been a fragrance for both men, women, and children, who just love to smell the flowers? How can anyone not like this fragrance unless you just happen to hate flowers or you’re allergic to flowers? Here we have an absolutely gorgeous and unbeatable floral fragrance to end all floral fragrances. This is artistic, abundantly floral, flowery, with leaflets and corolla that resemble the designs in turn of the century Art Nouveau, in illustrations by Aubrey Beardsley or glassware by Rene Lalique. We are in France, in Giverny, Claude Monet’s garden, with the famous water lilies and myriad other flowers around his house, or inside his floral paintings like Coquelicots (Poppies) & Agapanthus. To me this is a surreal, dream landscape of fields of ephemeral flowers of various pastel colors, and the closer you get to the flowers, the fainter and farther away they become. It’s truly a masterpiece.
The opening is of citruses with orange blossoms and a lot of greenery courtesy of all the green notes of tarragon grass, a vetiver, lemon grass and an herbal aroma. Indeed, as classified, it’s a green floral. For some reason, maybe because of the powdery iris, the violets, the heliotrope and the powdery notes, this is not too graphically real a green floral. This is more of a fantasy of flowers, with sweet notes and soapy cleanliness that does not smell oily and crude. It has so many flowers that it’s hard to even call it a mere floral. Quelques Fleurs is a brilliant symphony of flowers, with tuberose trumpets, lily of the valley bells, timpani of roses and carnation, tuba of ylang ylang and violin and cello strings of lilacs and lilies, harp string music of dulcet tones of iris, violet, jasmine heliotrope and orchids. The music it plays is divine.
Again like I said if you don’t care for the scent of flowers, then this is a nasal nightmare. But if you die for flowers, this is Flower Heaven. Every flower note you can imagine in a fragrance seems to be here. Not one flower dominates the other and they are in absolute perfect harmony, although not at the beginning. When I first wore it, it was quite a loud orchestra tuning up. The notes shot up with a floral ferocity. So many notes! It softens and becomes a distinct powder based upon iris, violet, lilac and heliotrope, while still maintaining the other floral notes of rose and white florals like tuberose, jasmine, and lilies.
The white florals provide the scent with a very soapy and fresh toilet water smell. It does have as so many other reviewers observe, a domestic household product smell, like bathroom soap, or toilet water skin freshner. If only it came with a matching body lotion! This is the best floral water to put into your bath tub to soak and luxuriate in! Last night I did just that and played the music I will share at the end of the review which I feel matches up with the fragrance. It has a long lasting effect. The citruses wear off, the florals too, and it eventually dries down to chypre airs of moss of oak, sandalwood, cedars and musk. I would not call this a floral musk. It has too much of an amber and honey which give it such a sweetness that a musk would lack. In addition it has vanilla! What more can you ask for in a sweet floral? As for the civet note that Fragrantica lists as one of the notes, there is no way!
Quelques Fleurs by today’s standard is rather outdated but it’s beauty and enchantment is in the fact that it doesn’t smell like anything in the fragrance industry today. If it must be compared to a more modern floral fragrance perhaps it might somewhat resemble Beautiful by Estee Lauder or Paris by Yves Saint Laurent. But it does stand on it’s own and is not that much like those aforementioned scents. Estee Lauder’s Beautiful is creamier and far more fragrant. Paris by YSL is powder and make up. Quelques Fleurs is a very simple and modest scent, despite it’s age, it’s classiness and it’s multiple notes. This is a very linear scent that has a classic very traditional formula of perfume: citrus top notes, floral heart and woodsy-musky-vanilla base, only that honey and amber have been included as well.
Both men and women can wear this, totally. It has a female association because it is marketed for women and there is the persistent story being passed around that Princess Diana of Wales wore this perfume on her wedding day. Whether it’s true or not, the idea is that it’s a very romantic and historic floral fragrance for women. Ladies have been rocking Quelques Fleurs since 1912, the year that the RMS Titanic of the White Star Line struck an iceberg in the North Atlantic off Newfoundland Canada and sank to the sea bottom making history. It has a womanly heart for sure but it’s simple and rather domesticated, not a glamour perfume, and certainly not suited to a wedding day. A guy can wear this easily in the day time when you apply it to your hair like a sort of fresh spray for your hair to smell good, or soap for your skin after a good shower or bath. The woods/vanilla and musk seem rather like men’s colognes I’ve worn with those notes in them. It has a unisex dry down despite all the flowers in the heart. It’s day wear stuff and can be worn with casual clothes although it does seem to be giving me more of a semi formal day wear attire vibe: dressy shirts, button up shirts, gingham, flannel. You can wear this to work and it won’t make a scene. It doesn’t have that much of a projection and or sillage. Longevity is good but not great. A most remarkable and beloved flower power perfume.
Ultimately my last two cents on it is this:
Quelques Fleurs is a creative inspiring artistic soothing therapeutic floral fragrance. It is so relaxing, peaceful and dignified. It is a fragrance for peace lovers, and for those of us that know the power there is spirituality. It’s for inspiration and meditation. It’s a Buddhist fragrance, Christian fragrance, and Transcendentalist fragrance. It’s a perfume for writers like Margaret Fuller and for Henry David Thoreau and Ralph Waldo Emerson, for the Pre Raphaelite artist Dante Gabriel Rossetti and the Impressionists Claude Monet & the Art Nouveau guys like Rene Lalique. It’s a fragrance for 1960’s hippies and the Flower Children.