1932 Eau de Toilette
Chanel (2013)

In general, I prefer Jacques Polge’s Exclusifs to Olivier’s, but this nominal commemoration of Chanel’s first high jewelry collection in 1932 opens like the elder Polge left a bowl of fruit to ripen a few days too long, and the base suggests it was a wooden bowl that is now slightly the worse for wear.

The drydown pares off the bad parts of the fruit—I suspect the aldehydes curdled the neroli—leaving something that would have suited Chanel’s mass-market tier. An hour in, 1932 smells quite nice, if not my style, and Polge père is largely redeemed. This makes a good case for Firmenich's Iralia, likely a factor in other modern iris fragrances. Still, as an Exclusif, Chanel is charging for diamonds and delivering paste.

I'm upgrading 1932 to a grudging thumbs-up. I encourage anyone who samples it to give it plenty of time to settle before arriving at a conclusion.

This is a curiously underrated fragrance, to my nose. It's a beautiful, wearable, classic-smelling fragrance. It has a signature Chanel smell that I think comes from the bergamot mixing with the lightly powdered floral concentrates. I find it similar to 31 Rue Cambon.

As a huge fan of powdery scents I enjoy this - for at least twenty minutes. Then this fades quickly away. The only notes I smell here are minimal aldehydes and neroli, then jasmine, rose, ylang, lilac, orris root, and musk, all blended so much I really had a hard time telling these notes apart. And even now, I am beginning to wonder if I smelled them. At any rate, this is lovely but not worth the high asking price. I have many other perfumes in my collection that are similar and last longer.

EdP version - aldehydes galore with a citrus backing. The aldehydes are going strong five hours later on me with a strong neroli scent. I like this one a lot. I am not completely in love for the Les Exclusifs price.

For me this fragrance, while very nice, is not unique enough to merit a full bottle purchase. I will happily use up my 4 mls of samples though.

1932 is stone cold elegance like a diamond.

This is so cold, it makes Guerlains Parure look like an earth mother. She's elegant, beautiful and unobtainable. The aldehyde opening is there to ward off the masses that love their La Vie En Belle. Chanel 22 seems like a warm crackling fireplace compared to this one. Imagine a grand open ballroom with shiny marble and crystal chandeliers. Thats 1932.

The heart opens up freshly beautiful with some spice. The base begins to warm her up but there is a very ice cold duality to 1932. Elegant ice queen in public, and after a few drinks loosens up a bit but she's still distant and in control. If waterford crystal had a smell, this be it. Silage is low, understated, rich elegance. Not for everyone. Drydown reminds me of Shalimar PI. More you spray longer it lasts. Recommend skin and clothing like a scarf. EDT version reviewed.

Meh. A pleasant, fuzzy fruity thing. The only really pronounced note is a rather pedestrian pink pepper - everything else sort of hints at fruit or iris or patchouli. The end result is a pleasant stew of chemicals that sort of smells like make-up.

Judged on its own merits, this probably deserves a neutral rating for managing to be a dumbed-down crowd pleaser without resorting to awful peach/strawberry/marshmallow nonsense, but it really stands out in a bad way in Chanel's excellent set of Exclusifs. If this were a Michael Kors or a Britney Spears or some brand from whom I expect unrelenting, absolute garbage, I'd be slightly impressed, but that's very faint praise for a Chanel....