The Secret of Chanel No. 5: The Intimate History of the World’s Most Famous Perfume reframes the story of Coco Chanel through a carefully filtered lens. Tracing the classic perfume to childhood smells and later personal olfactory experiences, Tilar Mazzeo shows that all roads in Coco Chanel’s life led to No. 5. The bottle design itself, even the perfume’s name, have deep connections to the designer’s past. Especially influential were the clean, austere aesthetics of the Aubazine Abbey, where the orphaned Gabrielle (a.k a. Coco) was raised. As a result of this clever spin, the book reads as a sort of symbiotic biography of the person and her perfume. Together they weather the storms of love, war, and business.
Throughout the narrative, Mazzeo weaves smooth transitions to clearly written lessons on the history of perfumery and ingredients, including a final chapter (“The End of Modern Perfumery”), on increased restrictions on materials imposed by the International Fragrance Association (IFRA, the perfume industry’s self-regulatory organization), a real threat to perfume formulation as we know it.
One of the book’s premises is that myths have been perpetuated about the perfume’s provenance and reception; even the quotes that preface the volume serve to set the record straight. Mazzeo identifies the true source of a well known quip about perfume and a woman’s future, often attributed out of context to Coco Chanel. Her full statement, from a 1969 interview, reads: “Perfume, it’s the most important thing. As Paul Valéry said it: ‘A badly perfumed woman doesn’t have a future.’” The three major myths treated later in the book seem a bit too dependent on arcane details to be widespread. For example, Mazzeo dispels the misconception that No. 5 was the first perfume to use aldehydes. Perhaps I’ve read too many perfume books and blogs, but this myth has evaded me. It is possible, though, that due to its massive success, its rivals, its imitators, its legacy, Chanel No. 5 has been given credit for putting aldehydic fragrances on the map: it is the one that created a trend and a genre, and in that way, it is the first. Likewise for the other myths, which I leave for you to discover. I imagine the perfume obsessed know better, and the remaining souls who buy a bottle of Chanel No. 5 every 30 seconds (yes, every 30 seconds claims the company, see page xiv), don’t pay much attention to historical fine points.
Overall, the book provided as much perspective on Coco Chanel as on Chanel No. 5. Many aspects of the perfume’s creation remain a mystery not be solved any time soon. Yet when her life unfolds as the the story of a perfume, Coco Chanel's tremendous drive, along with the less admirable aspects of her character, take center stage. From the savvy orchestration of a whisper campaign for the first formulation of No. 5, her push to launch competition for her own perfume, to her anti-Semitism and collaboration during the Occupation, Coco Chanel provokes more awe than empathy. Because her portrait is so spare (with even her fashion design rarely mentioned), there remains little material to soften those rough edges.
Mazzeo sets up anticipation throughout the book. Chapters close with cliffhangers or foreshadowings: “Someday, but not yet” (22); "It would be a future that none of them could have imagined" (72). Although some of the suspense and connections between Coco Chanel’s life and the eventual production of Chanel No. 5 seem over determined, the book remains a pleasant, easy read. Each of 18 chapters is short enough (10 pages or so), to be consumed in small doses, with plenty of summary and repetition within and between chapters, so that the book is easy to pick up, put down, and pick up again.
As Mazzeo concludes, “the secret of Chanel No. 5 and its success is us and our relationship to it” (214). This rings true today as it did during the Occupation and Liberation of France, when Nazi soldiers and American G.I.s lined up to buy bottles of the French perfume for their loved ones at home. As I savored quotes from interviews and letters, I found myself wanting to know even more about the people who bought and wore the perfume in those hard times. I also found myself longing to try all the early formulations of Chanel perfumes (not to mention those of her many competitors), and I am inspired to sample Chanel's current offerings for weeks to come. But Fragrant Readers, beware. If you were charmed by Audrey Tautou in Coco Before Chanel (or in the sultry No. 5 ad directed by Jean-Pierre Jeunet), this book may burst your bubble. A pre-Hays-Code Joan Crawford would win my casting call.
The Secret of Chanel No. 5: The Intimate History of the World’s Most Famous Perfume
New York: Harper (2010)
Hardcover: 304 pages
Note: examination copy provided by the publisher.
I’m really struggling to want to keep reading it, actually. I’ve not really been dragged into the history, desperate to know more. I’m finding parts interesting, but I can’t see myself recommending it to people that aren’t already Chanel-ophiles.
I see what you mean. I was thinking of it from the opposite direction Chanel-o-philes might not enjoy it because they are already so familairwith the history.
I have not yet read this, but I think the book would have been better if it had encompassed all of Chanel’s fragrances. My late Aunt was a fan of No.5 as well as No.19.
There certainly are uncertainties. It doesn’t sound as if we’ll ever know the answers.
Cheryl, I’m glad to see you’re back with another great review! This book has been recommended to me by two or three people, and I think I’m going to need to get it on inter-library loan—though I’m willing to bet your summary is more interesting than the book itself!
At the very least, I’m thrilled that hard-bound books on perfume are being published, few and far between though they are. I should probably buy the book, just as a show of solidarity, in hopes that the publishing world will respond in kind.
I’m reading the Kindle version!
Totally jealous of your Kindle! I keep wavering between it and an iPad… must. decide. soon.
I’ve been on the fence about this , too. I’m a bit partial to things whose names begin with ‘i” .
I know, me too. There are four Mac’s in my house as I type. And only two people!
However, my argument in favor of the Kindle is that if you actually plan to use it for extensive reading, there’ll be less eye-strain… but then again, it would be harder to hop over to check in on your favorite blogs between chapters!
Hmmm…maybe you need both!?
Oh, I like the way you think!
The NookColor is the shizzle for me
All the convenience of books-in-seconds as well as the ability to surf the internet, liaten to music, etc…with the bonus of being small enough to take to bed, no nitelite required!!
Now I’m *really* in trouble.
Thanks, Dee!
Yes, I agree–it is terrific to see perfumes getting attention. The author has been interviewed all over the place, including NPR.
I’m reading this book right now, and enjoying it. I knew nothing about Coco Chanel, so find her life story interesting. Also love reading about the history of No, 5, though there seem to be many uncertainties. I thought it was interesting that it’s believed to be the same scent that Ernest Beaux developed for the Russian czarina – Rallet No. 1, aka Le Bouquet de Catherine.
That’s a great piece of the legend! Don’t you want to smell of the scents mentioned?
Cheryl: I really enjoyed your review. I heard an interview with the author a few weeks ago on NPR, and it raised an eyebrow for me. I could totally be wrong here, but it seemed like she didn’t have so much intimate love or knowledge of the juice itself, esp. vintage. Smelling vintage No 5 really informs about what was going on. That being said, I look forward to reading this myself. I am fortunate to have vintage No 5 dating back to the 30s, and most of the decades leading up to the present. The vintage parfum is magnificent. I have some current No 5 too, but it certainly doesn’t have the depth of the nitro musks and other essences that made the early incarnation magnificent. I probably agree with the assertion that Coco wanted a “clean” perfume. I also agree with the part of it that is supposed to smell like a woman, not a flower. The old version of No 5 has nitro musks to die for – maybe not such a squeaky clean woman after all
Hi Ann, you will be disappointed with Mazzeo’s discussion of nitro-musks. She devotes a page to their replacement in No 5, but claims that the fragrance has not suffered. She believes that what we smell now is ‘remarkably close’ to the ‘1920 original’ (pp. 207-8).
But I’m with you. I have vintage and modern extrait and even allowing for the ageing of the former, they smell quite different to me.
I agree.
I could tell listening to her interview that she just didn’t feel it – you know – the passion for the old stuff. I figured I’d be disappointed in the technical stuff, but come on – how many of us nuts are out there anyway? I am still glad the book is out. I always like when fragrance is brought to other’s attention – who knows how many budding perfumistas are out there reading it!
Very perceptive!
Oh wow! That’s so cool, Ann. Sounds like you’re a fan of No. 5. Can’t say for sure I know what nitro musks smell like. Anyone know what year they were banned? Probably before we were born, eh?
I don’t exactly know what nitro musks smell like per se, but when you put the old stuff on, even given some off top notes, there is this incredible depth and warmth that you just don’t get with any of the current stuff. The development of the vintage over time is amazing. I can put a few dabs on and hours later this is this warm “abstract” aroma that just melds into the skin. I can see why for a while at least it was considered super sexy a la Marylin Monroe – now it is still beautiful, but it’s real heart is diminished. I’m no snob about it though – I have current parfum, the current Sensual Elixir, current body cream and soap, Eau Premier, etc. I just came to love the stuff these past few years, esp. when I got into the old stuff (I like having all the different bottles over time too). I like to wear them all for different reasons.
Wonderful description.I’ve never smelled older formulations. Sigh.
hey send me an email at anneroosie @ hotmail . com and we’ll work out a swap!
I raised an eyebrow, too.
I read it on a work trip and it was useful for that as it it is indeed an easy read. Mazzeo has done some solid research and the research is well-documented. I especially enjoyed the chapter on Chanel’s schooling at Aubazine which, tho’ the Mazzeo is speculating a lot without real evidence, may have laid the foundation for much of Chanel’s aesthetic vision. The Second World War sections were also really interesting too.
But on the whole I was disappointed. The repetitions, foreshadowings and cliff-hangers drove me nuts by the end. Some of that word space could have been used to build some better comparative context around No 5. Other fragrances and fragrance houses are mentioned only in passing and by the end the book was feeling like one long song of praise for No 5. A comparison with L’Interdit, for instance, which is a similar fragrance in style and target market, but which ultimately faded into obscurity, could illuminate both the marketing genius and the commitment to quality materials that has ensured the continued success of No 5. As it is Mazzeo makes these points about No 5 merely by dreary repetition.
Chanel geeks will notice a few slips late in the book. Coco Mademoiselle is surely not an ‘updated’ version of Coco (p. 202) but a completely different fragrance, and nor is it ‘unusual’ for those two fragrances to be sold in the signature square No 5 bottle (same page) because Chanel No 19 and Cristalle had already been sold in that bottle for years.
Apparently in the Nicole Kidman advertising film there is a ‘dangerous illicit love triangle that pits true romance against the desires of a powerful rich aristocrat.’ Love triangle? Nah …
Oh, and by the way, if you are hoping for a discussion of the introduction over the years of the various concentrations of No 5, and how their character reflect changing fragrance fashion, forget it. The author does not bother except for a quick mention of Eau Premiere at the end. I reckon that it gets a mention because, like Coco M’elle, it is one of the Chanels that average perfume buyers will likely have heard of.
Oh my gosh, so true about Coco Mademoiselle and the other details you point out.
You said it sister! A real technical work on No 5 would be fascinating, and also info on the bottles and advertisement The bottles and vintage ads are a really good source for dating vintage No 5. And Coco like Coco Mme? No way ever. Ah, this book wasn’t written for us, lol!
Wishing you two had written the book…
No, it wasn’t written for us, but as you said up there, hopefully it will be read by budding perfumitas.
Actually Mazzeo’s treatment of the marketing, packaging and advertising of No 5 is quite good. Writing about the luxury industry is her strength. And the stuff about Chanel’s fraught commercial relationship with the Wertheimer brothers is nicely laid out.
I’ve just started reading her Veuve Clicquot book (which was a bestseller) and I can see now that the Chanel book is based on the winning formula she used in that previous work: trace the rise of a luxury product alongside the biography of a hard-working woman. The difference: few people know the Veuve Clicquot story; everything known has been said about Chanel.
Could not agree more regarding Mazzeo’s interminable repetitions. They quickly frustrated me– so much so that I was unable to enjoy her sincere attempts to present a new synthesis of all existing facts, fictions, and fantasies about this seminal fragrance.
I hear you.
Annemarie, you have me wondering if Chanel got some say in the final edits–or if not direct control at least influence, perhaps in exchange for access to research materials? It would help explain why there’s so little mention of the changes in the perfume.
Thanks for the great review. I received this book as a gift last week. I haven’t started it yet but it has a prominent place on the ‘to read’ stack in my bedroom.
Let us know what you think.
I liked this book: it was a very nice travel read over the holidays (it’s available on Kindle). I love No. 5, and have read several biographies of Chanel, which added to my enjoyment. I recommend the book – it’s enjoyable and informative, but not boring.
Another Kindle user (see Karin’s comment above). The decision becomes more difficult…
Hmmm. This book has been sitting in my amazon.com shopping basket for a loooong time. Ever since I found out about her cooperating with the Nazi’s in Paris during WWII and even *living* with some of the officers at The Ritz (I believe) – well, it was a unique time in history and in war, ideals are usually the first thing to go, so I try not to pass judgment. It’s made me look at the Chanel label askance ever since, though.
I’ve seen pretty much every movie about her (even the silly but fun one from the 80s with Rutger Hauer and Timothy Dalton). The recent “Chanel and Stravinsky” movie seems to shine the harshest light on her personality, though there’s still that glamour filter.
I’m thinking I may pass on it as it sounds like it’s coming from an author that is not as zealous about fragrance as she is maybe about fashion, glamour and prestige. And maybe had a little funding from Chanel the company???
Regarding your last point, I wondered about that too. The author does acknowledge the assistance of Chanel but implies that it was with information.
[I posted this in the wrong place the first time]
I asked myself the same question, LaMaroc!
And I went through a *very* similar thought process about the book.
I thought this was a little scrappily written at times – the overuse of forced cliffhangers annoyed me a little, for example. However, it was an easy read and overall worthwhile, I thought.
The “suspense” was a bit too much at times.
‘cliffhangers’?! Everything’s been known about Coco Chanel and her creations for a very long time.
Yes indeed!
Nice review, Cheryl. I’m thinking I might pick this up at one point.
In one review I read, I found the WWII-era history of N°5 to be especially interesting — the competing licensing and the corporate war that ensued, and how two different firms were producing and selling N°5 versions in Vichy France and in the USA (and elsewhere).
I have a bottle of Le Numéro Cinq by Molyneux and keep meaning to do an arm-to-arm with Chanel No.5.
Guerlain’s Liu is a near dead ringer for vintage No 5. I would love to get some of that eventually too, but it is much more costly that used vintage No 5 on the *bay.
I had no idea!
I just looked up Liu on eBay–Yikes! nearly $300 for a 50 ml EdT! Never mind stocks, bonds, or gold–I should have invested in since-discontinued or reformulated Guerlains about 10 or 15 years ago.
I wish I had had a chance to smell the old stuff.
I asked myself the same question, LaMaroc!
And I went through a *very* similar thought process about the book.
Oops that comment should be posted under LaMaroc’s, Sorry!
“For example, Mazzeo dispels the misconception that No. 5 was the first perfume to use aldehydes.”
I thought perfumer Ernest Beaux developed aldehydes and first used them in No 5. Anyone else remember this?
The developer of aldehydes and perfumer of No 5 are one and the same. And if No 5 wasn’t the first, does she state what was?
The “facts” in this book seem kind of fast and loose to say the least.
Yes, she credits perfumes released in 1905 called Reve d’Or and Florayme, by Pierre Armingeant and George Darzens. She says nothing about these, but does discuss the use of aldehydes in Quelques Fleurs (1912) as a key influence on Chanel and Beaux.
Thanks for checking that out, Annemarie.
I always think of rêve d’or but couldn’t remember if she mentioned it, (The book is at the office, I’m at home).
Here’s a link to the history of the use of aldehydes in perfumery on 1000fragrances:
http://1000fragrances.blogspot.com/2010/03/origin-of-aldehydes-and-chanel-no5.html
They were indeed used before Chanel N°5, but Ernest Beaux is credited for using them for the first time in such a high dose, and for their specific olfactory properties rather than just as a way to boost other notes.
Thanks for the link!
The distinction is subtle–hence my wondering if most non-perfume-obsessed Chanel wearers are worried about it.
–the non-perfume-obsessed being the target audience for the book.
Thanks, very informative!
Ah, glad I read down a bit before asking about Quelques Fleurs. So it’s the concentration used that made No.5 new and different, then?
Yes,, that’s it, and as think of it, Chanel No, started a genre of perfumes with big aldehylic components.
Another article on this: http://perfumeshrine.blogspot.com/2008/12/myth-debunking-1-what-are-aldehydes-how.html
I got the book for Christmas,some parts I find very interesting then other parts, my mind wanders as to what will I cook for dinner..:-( but will finish it…I need to.
You sound like me…must finish a book started.
Do you also watch films all films to the bitter end? I do.
So what’s for dinner?
Thanks for the reviews. As I started this, my finger was hovering over the “Buy” button on my Nook (can I throw in a shoutout for the Nook? ), and I changed my mind. This one looks more like an ILL request than a purchase. I’d have been more interested in stuff about the perfume than Coco herself. I think I’ll find the WWII section interesting.
ILL would be a good way to go. It may not be the sort of book you would want to read twice.
There is plenty of info about the perfume, but if you have already read about Chanel No.5, probably nothing new. ILL sounds like the best of both worlds.
Great review Cheryl. My daughter had given me this book for Christmas and I was planning to take it with me on holiday but your review made me start it right away. I also ran out and got a No. 5 soaked touche from my local perfume counter as a bookmark.
Scented reading…love it!