Jean Patou Strikes Once Again Jean Patou Strikes

• Forums
• Fragrance Discussion
• Feminine Fragrance Discussion

You are using an out of date browser. It may not brandish this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or utilise an alternative browser.

Jean Patou Joy

• Thread starter mandyfin
• Beginning date Feb 28, 2011

• #1

I have never smelled this, it is very hard to find in Canada... I am allowed to choose a perfume as a gift and I am thinking of this one. What practice y'all remember of information technology? I usually like fruity florals... Hanae Mori, Fresh Carbohydrate Blossom, Jo Malone nectarine beloved blossom, L'artisan Violette, Bois Farine, Ananas Fizz.
Non sure what Joy smells like and would similar some feedback, or else I will order a Creed scent to endeavour....

give thanks yous

• #two

You might similar it if yous enjoy roses and jasmine. Information technology is a archetype - *erstwhile fashioned* - floral fragrance.

• #iii

It'southward a wonderful, complex floral. Not too sweetness though, then if sweetness is a must, try it first.

cacio

• #4

Forth the lines of Joy merely a fleck more affordable is Outset by Van Cleef and Arpels

• #5

I received my canteen of "Eau de Joy" (read - Joy EdP, pls!) .
My 1st thought? Onetime-fashioned! (especially the topnotes since there'southward aldehydes, but information technology stays like that for just a couple of minutes, so yous don't have to worry about smelling like a grandma!).
When information technology calms downwardly, it reveals a beautiful, shine and lushhhh combination of "bones-old-fashioned-floral-notes" similar jasmine, rose, ylang-ylang.
I beloved it! I really really beloved information technology!
It's feminine and (as I call it) the quondam glamour!

Wearing Joy won't give you an immediate "joy" like "Yippe, my mood'southward picked up!" only it slowly gives you an intimate happiness, but overall, in a classic kind of style.
I feel happy wearing it and I'grand then glad that I finally got a bottle for myself (which was difficult since I'd searched high and low for this one, trust me!).
Then, I think if you're the type of girls who honey/adore classic beauty (non that I really am), so I guess Joy will satisfy you lot.

• #6

I used to love vintage Joy parfum concentration. *sigh* They don't brand them similar that anymore. One time Patou sold its fragrance division to P & G, Joy as I knew it was no more. It's one of those I call up fondly but I simply cannot stand what passes for Joy, these days.

• #7

I used to love vintage Joy parfum concentration. *sigh* They don't make them like that anymore. In one case Patou sold its fragrance segmentation to P & G, Joy every bit I knew information technology was no more than. It's one of those I recollect fondly but I simply cannot stand up what passes for Joy, these days.

Totally agree

• #8

And then I've institute a sealed vintage 1 oz of Joy perfume in the Baccarat crystal in the gold box to exist had for $45. Is this quite the bargain? I was hesitant to get for this incarnation, as I am and so drawn to the await of the extrait in the black canteen with carmine cap. Is that much rarer and how does it proceed?

Would anyone be willing to hash out the differences in these two concentrations?

Terminal edited: Aug 12, 2012

• #10

for that price it is a no-brainer...y'all could resell this if it is not to your sense of taste. It remains one of the best florals, always. Enjoy:smiley:

• #eleven

mihailo- Your puns are cute :lolk: I know what you mean well-nigh making sure I actually enjoy Joy first. I've smelled the newer versions without beingness too impressed, but the sometime, which I've only sniffed in edp so far, is much better to me. I don't adore cloyingness either, but I do appreciate a well-constructed classic. Of grade, what is the point of taking on a classic if it doesn't fit? Similar wildroses said, I will probably but snap information technology up and if it's not for me sell it or merchandise it away to someone who can truly enJoy it. Your English is much ameliorate than my Serbo-Croatian :wink:

The only reason I didn't jump on this was the seller's willingness to concord it for me. Lucky stuff. I am still curious nearly the black canteen version, though. I observe that presentation and so beautiful and contradictory to the perfume's name.

• #12

a&i

$45 for i oz Joy? What are you waiting for?

I got lucky too once with Joy, I establish i/two oz for $25, the shop had two, one in the transparent one and ane in the black ane:
http://www.cagetti.com/Pictures/wickernorth.JPG

I take only opened the transparent one. It is simply sensational. The top is the most brilliant floral duet e'er, jasmine and rose singing among a background of other flowers. As appropriate for at present banned real jasmine, a big dollop of civet accompanies the florals and becomes suitably richer and luscious as it goes.

I have not opened still the nighttime canteen, merely my understanding is that the juice is the same, it was simply a different presentation (the dark bottle I remember is more common for grand or sublime). Well, if you lot don't similar it, you know where to send.

Only where on earth are you finding all these masterpieces for nix?

cacio

• #13

I'm convinced! Cute black bottle or no, I'thou going on dejeuner tomorrow to get it.

Saint Louis, Missouri! State of the not knowing what it's got, high crime (though known to be worse than it actually is...but you probably understand these reputations and the truths and fictions of them, existence in DC) :deplorable:, and underdog charm. :wink:

- - - Updated - - -

And that picture of yours, cacio. Beautiful pristine vintage all! Sounds similar you take some experience with masterpieces for a bargain ... the best way to experience perfume, IMO, if ane is lucky to find such things and patient in looking.

• #fourteen

Yes, that was one of the few lucky outings. A shop in the Wicker park area of Chicago (midwest, again, does it say something?). Vintage Diorissimo is merely as sensational as Joy.

Well, after reading your mail service I just had to put some of the Joy from sad bottle on. Right now, I'm listening to the light-green rose solo (information technology lasts forever on the parfum) with the jasmine just interjecting from fourth dimension to time. Eventually, jasmine with civety companion volition take over.

cacio

• #fifteen

the square bottles are non made, nor have they ever been fabricated, by baccarat. Patou did contract with baccarat in the years from 1923 until 1930 for the arc shaped flacons with the gold raspberry stopper designed by Louis Sue, and for certain special edition luxe presentations: At that place was one that was ever offered, designed in the 50's, in the shape of a ball gown, all facets, that was sold equally such: "the costliest perfume in the world in the finest crystal in the world." This came in a cake-like golden box covered in padded satin lined in velvet in their signature "wheat" colour. This bottle was originally designed for an house flop "Lasso," which was on the market for a very short while. The classic transparent bottles used for Joy, and their other, thicker version, gilt in 24K gold, used for 1000, likewise as the "Lotus Flower" bottle used for Sublime, were all made by Brosse, as was "La Flaconette," which is what y'all are calling the "blackness bottle." This bottle was the original canteen designed and made for Joy. Jean Patou collected Chinese snuff bottles, and this design was inspired by them. A "version" of this aforementioned canteen, made of jade greenish slag glass, was produced in 1975 and connected production through the sale to P&G, was made for thousand. At that place was meant to be a yellow ane for Sublime, but it never fabricated it into product. (Sublime, which was originally called "Declic," had its proper noun changed mere months before beingness launched, and was originally color coded in Lavander, the idea was that the canteen was to look similar amathyst.) The "red" cap is meant to evoke coral. These "Flaconnettes" all have thick daubers and ground glass stoppers: All the Patou parfum presentations take footing drinking glass stoppers: They never went over to plastic or half plastic. Brosse is non in the to the lowest degree a lesser quality of "verrier," (glass maker,) but non as renowned every bit Baccarat. Joy is 100% singular. There has never been a perfume like JOY, and there never volition be again. Patou held such a standard of quality on all levels, that information technology ultimately put them out of business. For 1000, they bought state in China to cultivate the Osmanthus bloom, built a factory there, all to distill it to their own specified standard during the 1 hr of its life--for the Osmanthis blooms and dies in one hour. Patou bought hundreds of hectares of land in Grasse just to accept plenty May Rose (the finest in the world) and Grasse Jasmine (Once again, the finest in the world) to produce their perfumes, equally in that location was no other way to obtain the necessary ingredients to make their products. Joy uses v different kinds of rose, three different kinds of Jasmine, and several other components, notably natural civet. Information technology is not an overly complicated formula, contrary to 1000, who got its name from the final essence count--which by coincidence clocked in at 1000. Joy's singularity lies in the concentration: Joy was so plush to produce, that the profit margin was low, in fact nil, and this is why Jean Patou did not really offer it to the public until 1930. It was created in 1928 every bit a gift to those who had lost their fortunes in the crash. These original bottles are ever the black ones--and they take a minor round label on them. Afterward versions have "JOY" baked on in 24K gilded. No other scent ever smelled like Joy. Le Galion made a re-create called "Snob," Borghese made one chosen "Ecco," and Guerlain fifty-fifty made one, called "Ode," but none ever could lucifer the richness of it. The extracts from the xxx's through the 70's all have a very high content in natural civet. In 1975 Joy was re-worked with a lower dose of musk, then in the fourscore'southward it was re-worked over again using artificial civet. Patou staunchly refused to use chemic preservatives in their scents, and then information technology is never wise to buy a stoppered bottle without its "Bauderuche" intact (dogie's stomach membrane around the neck of the stopper) The odor of Joy is indescribable. It is nothing like any perfume of today: It breathes a kind of "light," and vibrates on such an high frequency that it boggles the senses. It is and so rich in natural jasmine and rose oils that its pure strength is nearly impossible to "handle" by today's standards. The original "EAU DE JOY" (note: NOT "Joy Edt" or "Joy PdT", but EAU de JOY) was a unlike limerick meant to sublimate the extract, just might easily be worn on its own. The extract is a kind of masterpiece, in that location is no discussing this, and is still regarded past the industry as a benchmark in modern perfumery, and was fifty-fifty awarded the title of "The Perfume of the XXe Century." (by the FFP Federation Francaise des Parfumeurs) No other perfume has ever won such an honour. It stands in a league of its ain--and must be looked at today less every bit perfume, and more as art. Information technology suits a sparse skinned person. The platonic candidate to clothing Joy would be a natural blonde with very pale skin. Joy was ever more successful in Great britain, Democracy Countries and in the US than information technology was in France. There is no perfume that I know of that can compare to it. Perfumers at present are smart plenty to know that information technology would exist incommunicable to try to copy it, or even evoke information technology in any way--the but one I accept e'er smelled that fifty-fifty faintly comes close to it is Guy Robert's Amouage Gold Human being, which uses the "Rock Rose." (A Middle Eastern Rose.) It's not "peculiarly" wearable considering today's taste. It is not a dark perfume, nor an intellectual perfume, nor a peculiarly sexy perfume: It is just a perfume that smells so delicious that 1 is reminded of angels, and light, and sky. Henri Almeras is said to take laboured for months on cease to no avail to accomplish the richness Jean Patou required. When he finally came close, he presented his comp to Monsieur Patou telling him that it could never be produced equally there were not enough May Roses or Grasse Jasmine grown in the world to make whatever quantity of information technology, at which bespeak he was told to "double the concentration." It was then that Patou purchased the state in Grasse to grow the matters requisite to make information technology. All the way until its sale to P&Chiliad, who ramshackeld and destroyed Patou with such fervor that to this solar day in that location has never been carnage and so violent in French Perfumery, Patou was held in the family unit of its founder, and every unmarried bottle was filled by hand, using a pipette, with someone counting the drops. I personally witnessed this, so I know it not lore or legend. The Patou factory was in Levallois, but outside of Paris. P&G airtight all of this down, sold the fields in Grasse, and moved production of all product to the UK. Brosse no longer fabricated the bottles, and I have no thought what it was they were putting in the bottles they were selling, but it was not Joy. To me, Joy is probably the most "beautiful" perfume always made: It is not annihilation but that--a study in beauty--and and then it holds its name well. Information technology was the American lesbian party planner, Elsa Maxwell, a great friend of Jean Patou, and a protegee of his, who's idea it was to call information technology "Joy." A brilliant name for it: I can't call back of any other word that would practise information technology justice.

• #16

I was absolutely mad for vintage Joy at one time .
The Louis Sue rectangular bottles are exquisite with the ground glass stopper. Oh heaven ! The footling black bottles with the red stopper are wonderful too . The little black snuff bottle has an internal blackness dabber so application is very easy and glam as well.
I also have campagnon bottles - the piffling cylindrical ribbed bottles- very beautiful in style and aroma .

Eau de Joy which is a wonderful scent as well - I get more than rose with it. I accept a large one-time blackness canteen that sprays with a mighty force - definitely not today's sort of 'natural spray '.

I will say a word nearly the P & Thou version of Joy . I beloved information technology also . Certainly less civet greener on peak ( a niggling metallic ) simply it's very much a quality ingredient scent -rich is rose and jasmine. Pretty wonderful . The juice is golden ,oily and rich . The P & Grand bottles themselves are only as beautiful as the older vintage rectagular bottles I take. No departure at all ,in quality .
The minor xv ml bottle of Joy parfum extrait I bought from Roja Pigeon'southward place at Harrods ( it smashed to $.25 whilst travelling * broken bottle and broken heart * ) ...another story *sigh*,,,cannot think of it .) Extraordinarily beautiful ( P& G version ) - fifty-fifty better than the 1 oz I still take . No diffferent from the vintage but smells 'fresher' as in 'not old stock'. I wondered at that point if it was the potable alcohol used for NON US versions . Bear in mind- this whole thing about potable alcohol - I don't know much most simply I do know the scents and extraits I have bought in Europe and exterior of the US take smelt amend and different . eg. Chanels and Carons and besides at present the Joy extrait. And so I think in that location is something going on ,for certain.
Maybe Kumquat can tell us more .

P & M Joy EDP is some of the strongest gorgeous jasmine I take smelt and information technology'southward beautiful .
Now P & G have sold Patou , I wonder what the new versions will be like.... closer to the original civety Joy or something else entirely.
Frankly, I love the P & Thou version very much .

I one time wore vintage Joy extrait from one of my small-scale campagnon bottles . This guy I was talking with visibly moved abroad from me wrinkling his nose.............*LOL* Too much civet maybe ??

• #17

On the notation of "The Costliest Perfume in the World." JOY actually was the nigh expensive perfume in the world until 1963, when it was out-priced by the perfumery F. Millot, who, nether the proper name of Jean Desprez, unleashed Bal a Versailles, which was very slightly more than expensive than Joy, and remained and so during the time of its glory, which ended in the late nineties, when Jean Desprez was sold to Genesis International of Florida, and re-worked top to bottom, resulting in a dank, dark, musky odour that is recognizable today by either vibrant sunflower yellowish boxes, clearly marked "Made in the USA" or metallic gold boxes, marked "Made in the USA. Essences imported from France." This American "Re-do" is very different than the original Bal a Versailles, which, while frankly tainted past a kind of thrilling danger, was not nearly as saturnine. P&G has sold Patou to "Designer Parfums," of the Britain, current owners of WORTH, and Genesis International of Florida sold Jean Desprez to a company in Southern California that calls itself "Jean Desprez Paris." The "New" Bal a Versailles is non yet available to purchase publicly and is yet in "Alpha Testing." It seems they are using BN as a launch pad as the BN member "Jean Deaprez" actually *is* this company, and can exist contacted to procure bottles of scents they are considering re-launching under the name "Bal a Versailles." I accept never been in contact with them, as I have no interest in any "New" version of this odour, existence such a fan of the original, and owning a quantity of it that could very perchance out-live me.

• #18

MdM
thanks for the great history!
Just "The ideal candidate to habiliment Joy would be a natural blonde with very pale peel": is that Patou's advertising for anglosaxon wealthy ladies? How about dark haired Italian men? (in fact, my sister, who is natural blonde and pale skinned, told she doesn't really similar Joy...)

Mimi:

are you talking about the P&Thousand but pre-IFRA formulation, or the post-IFRA (ie 2011) formulation? Luca Turin was too positive on the pre-IFRA P&G. Just conspicuously IFRA makes old Joy incommunicable - so manifestly the parfum is now a rose soliflore. Never managed to scent the post IFRA, though.

cacio

• #19

How-do-you-do Cacio !
I bought the 1 oz P & G version in 2009- 2010, I believe, in US and I bought the P & 1000 version from Roja Dove's London, in March 2011. And so I estimate information technology'southward pre IFRA . I don't know !

The Roja Dove bottle was splendid - really very good .I was surprised how close it was to the vintage - no difference really. Even the SA at Roja Dove's said he cannot smell the deviation.
I dread to think what post IFRA Joy extrait is like now !

How nigh blackness haired asian ladies wearing Joy extrait ,huh ?? Smelt good on me ! *LOL*
I don't get how skin colour has anything to do with wearing perfume BTW.

• #21

.....What practice you lot recall of it? I ordinarily similar fruity florals... Hanae Mori, Fresh Sugar Flower, Jo Malone nectarine dear blossom, L'artisan Violette, Bois Farine, Ananas Fizz.

Not sure what Joy smells similar and would like some feedback, or else I volition society a Creed olfactory property to try....

thank yous

In its vintage formulation Joy parfum is one of the all-time things I've ever smelled, just somehow I don't think it would exist your thing. Like many of the classics, it conjures up a personal presence in the room that makes you feel like yous can literally touch it. Perfumes take become debased over the final 20 years, usually made for women less than thirty. IFRA restrictions aren't helping, only there are a few people trying to arrive work again. The closest Creed has always been as far from vintage Joy equally a hawk from the moon.

This excerpt from Luca Turin is elementary merely excellent. It sums up a lot nigh how I feel about Joy: ".....To call Joy a floral is to misunderstand it, since the whole signal of its formula (Henri Alméras, 1930) was to reach the ideal thought of a bloom, not 1 particular earthly manifestation. Joy does not smell of rose, jasmine, ylang, or tuberose. It just smells huge, luscious, and utterly wonderful."

The vintage parfum is nighttime, cerebral, and unbelievably sensual, with gobs of Mysore sandalwood and civet that goes on forever. About perfumes today completely lack this kind of chutzpah and temporal development. It always makes me exhilarated to smell information technology on a woman (love it on my girlfriend), and it can be a great source for manifesting ideas while wearing it on the back of my hand every bit I'm cruising down 101 or the back roads of Big Sur late at nighttime.

• #22

Mimi, I marvel at your stunning knowledge and passion!

Yep, I wish to accept Joy only as a piece of art. Maybe to wearable once in a slap-up while, only I am not the woman Joy was intended for... I'm a chypre through and through and shiver at blondness unless it has some prissy black roots (I was a natural dark blond through teenhood but e'er dyed information technology darker to hibernate the bubbly lightness). Nonetheless at that place are those moods in which an anachronistic abstract floral is poetry on the incorrect strange girl at the correct classic moment.

And ah, the seller had told me it was Baccarat, just considering how fiddling she wants for it, a strange mistake. Information technology is in fact however completely sealed, with papers, etc. An outlier treasure to exist added to my novice collection.

Concluding edited: Aug 12, 2012

• #23

Sorry to break the news to you all, just *existent* perfumes, (read vintage anything that's good) accept EVERYTHING to do with your skin and colouring: More often than not the nature of your pare, and how you process nutrients, which you consume, etc. I don't advise JOY is not valid for someone because of their skin or hair color. I assert that it is (was) ideal for a person of thin skin: Asians oft accept very thin skin. Italians often have thin peel. This is non a racially motivated give-and-take. It is a scientifically based one that has fallen out of favour due to marketing strategies forced on us by the industry that volition have united states of america believe anyone might vesture anything to great consequence. This is *somewhat* true now--as most things are synthetic--and even very high quality scents contain constructed fixitives and other ingredients. When you're discussing something like vintage Joy, you are discussing the very nectar of the Earth. This just tin not be put into the same league every bit annihilation you might find today, and, as such, it *suits* certain peel types, and doesn't arrange others *as well." In 1925, Jean Patou's slogan for Amour Amour was: "Etes-vous blonde?" and for Que Sais-je? it was "Etes-vous brune?"-- it's an affair of molecules--and how big they are--and how thick your upper dermis is: When the molecules are natural, they react organically. When they are synthetic, they don't: they just keep smelling like they should. Your upper dermis provides a cushion for these molecules--a kind of "house" for them to live in--this is why you go the "on me, yada yada yada" type discussions. Your upper dermis defines how "comfortable" the scent is--and how well information technology cam crouch down and take shape. Thicker skins absorb more--so certain scents misconstrue that way--fifty-fifty though skin in essence absorbs very petty, nosotros are talking about a infinitesimal, molecular reaction hither: Mostly, though, we are talking about vintage perfumes--which--surely--you volition all hold--are then very unlike than not vintage ones: Even when they are Caron, or Creed, or Amouage, or whatever they happen to be.

• #24

mihailo-Your English is much better than my Serbo-Croatian :flash:

Yeeeeey - I am not the only one who speaks Serbian!

• #25

Lamentable to pause the news to you all, but *existent* perfumes, (read vintage anything that'due south good) have EVERYTHING to exercise with your skin and colouring: Generally the nature of your skin, and how you process nutrients, which you consume, etc. I don't advise JOY is not valid for someone because of their skin or hair colour. I assert that it is (was) ideal for a person of thin skin: Asians frequently have very sparse skin. Italians oft accept thin skin. This is not a racially motivated discussion. It is a scientifically based one that has fallen out of favour due to marketing strategies forced on us by the industry that will have us believe anyone might habiliment anything to great consequence. This is *somewhat* true now--as well-nigh things are synthetic--and even very high quality scents comprise synthetic fixitives and other ingredients. When you're discussing something like vintage Joy, you are discussing the very nectar of the Earth. This just can not be put into the same league as anything you might discover today, and, as such, it *suits* sure skin types, and doesn't suit others *besides." In 1925, Jean Patou'due south slogan for Amour Amour was: "Etes-vous blonde?" and for Que Sais-je? it was "Etes-vous brune?"-- information technology's an matter of molecules--and how big they are--and how thick your upper dermis is: When the molecules are natural, they react organically. When they are synthetic, they don't: they merely go on smelling like they should. Your upper dermis provides a cushion for these molecules--a kind of "house" for them to live in--this is why you lot become the "on me, yada yada yada" blazon discussions. Your upper dermis defines how "comfortable" the scent is--and how well it cam hunker downward and take shape. Thicker skins absorb more--then certain scents misconstrue that way--even though peel in essence absorbs very piffling, nosotros are talking near a minute, molecular reaction here: Mostly, though, nosotros are talking about vintage perfumes--which--surely--you lot will all agree--are so very different than non vintage ones: Even when they are Caron, or Creed, or Amouage, or whatever they happen to be.

Yes, that makes sense. Cheers, le mouchoir de monsieur .

• #26

Please share the scientific papers where the skin thickness of different nationalities is discussed and proven?

I've searched google but can't find anything either there or on Pubmed or NIH.

Describing a person as "thick skinned" is highly offensive in the UK.

Please experience free to disparage my views but having read your theories regarding nationality, race, pilus colouring, skin thickness etc both in this thread and others I do find them racist, whilst they may not be racially motivated I discover them offensive.

Sorry to intermission the news to you all, but *real* perfumes, (read vintage anything that's expert) take EVERYTHING to do with your peel and colouring: More often than not the nature of your skin, and how you process nutrients, which you eat, etc. I don't suggest JOY is not valid for someone because of their skin or hair color. I assert that it is (was) platonic for a person of thin skin: Asians often have very thin pare. Italians often have sparse skin. This is not a racially motivated discussion. It is a scientifically based one that has fallen out of favour due to marketing strategies forced on u.s. by the industry that volition have u.s.a. believe anyone might habiliment anything to swell effect. This is *somewhat* truthful now--as most things are synthetic--and fifty-fifty very high quality scents contain synthetic fixitives and other ingredients. When yous're discussing something like vintage Joy, you lot are discussing the very nectar of the Earth. This but can not exist put into the aforementioned league equally anything y'all might observe today, and, equally such, it *suits* certain pare types, and doesn't suit others *likewise." In 1925, Jean Patou's slogan for Flirtation Amour was: "Etes-vous blonde?" and for Que Sais-je? it was "Etes-vous brune?"-- it'southward an thing of molecules--and how large they are--and how thick your upper dermis is: When the molecules are natural, they react organically. When they are synthetic, they don't: they just proceed smelling similar they should. Your upper dermis provides a cushion for these molecules--a kind of "house" for them to live in--this is why you lot get the "on me, yada yada yada" blazon discussions. Your upper dermis defines how "comfortable" the scent is--and how well information technology cam hunker down and take shape. Thicker skins absorb more--so certain scents misconstrue that way--even though pare in essence absorbs very petty, we are talking about a minute, molecular reaction hither: Mostly, though, we are talking nigh vintage perfumes--which--surely--you volition all concord--are and so very different than non vintage ones: Even when they are Caron, or Creed, or Amouage, or whatever they happen to exist.

• #27

Alityke, I am no fan of these theories either and once made it known to MdM a bit indelicately. I am too unaccustomed to someone saying "thick skinned" and information technology not suggesting a slur--similarly to how when in England I was offended by hearing someone say "Jap" but was later informed it is not a slur in England like in America.

MdM says he is really trying to talk from a beauty manufacture skin type perspective--something like the shade of foundation or lipstick even--and the phenomenon many of u.s. talk over of our skin doing weird things to perfume--I meet it equally: why not but endeavour a perfume no affair its intended audition, and if information technology works on you lot, it'southward for you! But here suggests at to the lowest degree partial truth to the pare blazon, should not be construed as only racial, event:

"On exposure to sun becomes swollen distinctly cellular Water barrier High Melanosomes Small; group melanosomes in keratinocytes less dense more than numerous in subcutaneous than basal layer Black Stratum corneum thickness 6.5 mm Stratum corneum layers 22 layers Stratum lucidum one-2 layers Remains compact and unaltered with sun exposure Water barrier Low Melanosomes Larger; individually dispersed melanosomes in keratinocytes more numerous in basal layer Differences have been establish amongst blacks, whites, Asians, and Hispanics in diverse areas of skin construction and office. Among them is the stratum corneum lipid (ceramide) content, which is highest in Asians, then Hispanics, so whites, and everyman in blacks. Melanosomal packaging and percutaneous assimilation rates for specific compounds as well vary among the different races. Reports supporting the occurrence of difference in transepidermal water loss, tyrosinase levels, skin elasticity, and water assimilation rates between blacks and whites, and reaction to pare irritation have been alien. No pregnant differences in corneocyte size, skin thickness, and skin biomechanics have been reported."

Source: http://world wide web.netwellness.org/question.cfm/31729.htm

Another source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14640777

Seems information is inconclusive and water and oil memory are of greatest import.

A friend who is studying to exist a dermatologist also tells me that melanin content or how one'south peel reacts to the lord's day as well as lipid-count and diet has a lot to do with any differences, merely that these differences vary widely enough within populations and don't correspond as well much with hair color, other than the obvious trend of super calorie-free blond stake people burning in the sun and darker skinned people being able to handle more lord's day, etc.

Parlaying these differences into a rules of vintage perfume is a bit old world and fussy for my taste, but and then over again perfume itself is old world and fussy, merely recently more democratized, though about that I am non sure, as more women seemed to wear finer perfumes back in the 1950s and all? Probably dorsum and so women actually believed in matching coloring and so forth.

And MdM thinks Mitsouko is horrible, then with all due respect to him and his knowledge, we all endure of what would be perceived by others as mauvais gout to some extent, or can at least seem to be speaking from a position of such when in different company. Basenotes forums have such a variety of tastes and perspectives, and I very much like that. I enJoyed Mihailo'southward irreverence, also and Larimar's contra-repping for 1000.

Last edited: Aug 12, 2012

• #28

Thank you or the quotes above, looks like the the concluding sentence does abroad with any notion of skin thickness differing. Yes there are subtle differences between individuals in melanocytes and the ability for individual skins to produce sebum as per the quote y'all use. With some trends amongst races. These have developed due to development have they not in response to environment over millennia?

To be straightforward aiming perfumes at hair or skin tones in the earlier years of the 20th century was a marketing ploy, the scientific discipline to back it upwards didn't exist in cosmetology. Let'due south face it, alibi the pun, but Estée Lauder, Elizabeth Arden and Helena Rubinstein weren't scientists but corking marketeers and tremendous snobs if their biographies are to be believed.

I'm uncertain there were ever perfumery "rules" more than societal rules nigh what was acceptable and what was not, see the "Bad girl smell" thread. Surely in the 50s fine fragrance was only an everyday thing for the very wealthiest able to afford such extravagance. Certainly my grandma wore her Lentheric Tweed just on the most of import occasions. To this solar day my mum treasures her perfumes and will merely vesture it for special times, despite me lavishing it on her and begging her to use it everyday for her ain pleasure.

Whilst the fragrances of the 20th century ergo "vintage" may have more organic, realistic scent-compounds I do wonder if the civets who yielded their anal gland product don't experience safer today and if the women who sprayed themselves in this luxury would have felt comfortable knowing they were covering their pulse point in whale vomit and cat's arse.

• #29

It seems to me that forums have get places where members no longer want to share their thoughts, accept fun, spend some quality time together, learn new facts etc.

All I see is a constant battle, competing, the urge to prove to be the smartest and the most valuable Queen of everything.

Please don't exist angry with me, I was talking in general, I did not hateful anything bad.

P. s. the discussion nearly peel types ended upward existence offensive to me.

• #30

It seems to me that forums accept become places where members no longer want to share their thoughts, have fun, spend some quality time together, larn new facts etc.

All I see is a constant boxing, competing, the urge to bear witness to be the smartest and the most valuable Queen of everything.

Please don't be angry with me, I was talking in general, I did not mean anything bad.

P. s. the discussion about skin types ended up being offensive to me.

What? People who are obsessed with perfume are non-PC, dramatic, and vain!? Incommunicable! :wink:

I lament these problems too simply enjoy discussions anyway. All we tin can actually exercise is exist who are IRL on here--bring unique personalities to the mix--but to also stay considerate. I love Alityke's and Mimi'south respectful yet no nonsense approach to dealing with BN.

That said, in person if someone tried to defend whatever real codifying or rules of who tin can and should wearable what or other crypto-pop eugenics I'd walk away laughing, completely dismissive of that person.

I've wasted plenty time in this life on those who wanted to tell me what I couldn't exercise because of gender, sexuality, heritage, class. Life is too short and there's too much variety of experience to heed snobbery or to be dragged down by privileged folks who fear others unlike them might encroach on their territory and ruin things: racists, sexists, et al.

I've witnessed nasty, bloodcurdling sexism on the men's board here to the point that I don't even want to post at that place. Really stupid, paranoid, mean-spirited stuff coming from what is conspicuously simply pissiness at not getting laid (I can dish it too).

This egoism volition ever be a problem in a hobby/obsession that is seen as requiring lots of coin to maintain, that caters to ridiculous image fantasies, and to some, was taken up as a tool of trying to become laid in the offset place. But I recall that could be said nigh many, many hobbies and things. Another of mine, music, very much and then.

Incidentally, thinking of snob reminds me of MdM'due south adorable story about his sister and him laughing over the Joy-like Snob and Cub perfume. Love it!

Oh, and dorsum to JOY hi. THIS IS A THREAD Near JOY Non ALL THESE JOYLESS AWFUL THINGS:

I bought the Joy today and take even so to open it. Sorry to have tempted you into breaking open up yours cacio, simply I imagine it was worth information technology! Volition post impressions when I've tried it. Waiting for the correct moment.

• #31

When I was in my 20's I had a dermatologist tell me that I accept "thin" pare and that thin skin does not age well. So he said "well we'll see".

My skin has actually aged fairly well.

Perfumes do tend to stay truthful on my skin with some exceptions.

I suspect every nationality has people with thin skin and others with thicker skin.

I think it is possible to talk almost thick skin versus thin skin without indicating race. I don't think the original comment was meant to betoken out race as the reason that skin is "thick" or "thin" but it could have been worded better.

• #32

Bask your Joy, Anomie et Ivoire.

Very interesting dorsum story. I accept worn vintage Joy parfum (blackness "snuff bottle), and the edt, which was more rosey; also 1000 in parfum in the Brosse (not Baccarat, as I thought) bottle that came in a lovely suede box, and I think at that place was an edt of that as well. Joy was more "me" merely 1000 was just so gorgeous. I miss those days! I have Eau de Joy now, in a black glass rechargeable bottle. I like it, it's lovely - I'1000 wearing it this evening as a affair of fact - just the vintage extrait is truly divine. I miss parfum that smelled a certain way.

• #33

It seems to me that a discussion involving perfume has more to practise with beauty and dearest than any other thing. Even abstract discussions with perfume as their unifying source of inspiration must somehow exist coloured with romance and gestures of loveliness. As this is my belief, and always has been, I accept sought to enlighten all of y'all readers with insights I have gained over a very long, involved life which, as coincidence would accept information technology, has had much to exercise with all manifestations of culture: Fine art, writings, philosophy, and PHILOKALIA. Philokalia means: "The Dearest of Beauty." As this has been the sole and unique motivation whence I have approached all of my input to Basenotes, at that place clearly has been some sort of misunderstanding, every bit spreading almost offenses tin not by nature be a part of such pursuits. In lite of this I might simply present my apologies to all of those whom I have unwittingly offended forth the way, but as well an expression of dear to all of those whom I may have somehow enlightened, equally the latter has always been my intent, and never once the onetime. To all whom I take offended, my apologies. To all whom I may accept enlightened or amused, my love. Good adieu.

le Mouchoir de Monsieur ane*Viii*2012

• #34

I take retracted my post due to my stiff disagreement with a thread participant's views and attitudes (every bit expressed in other areas of the site, and somewhat here) on subjects including social and economic class, sexuality, and racial and ethnic stereotyping.

Last edited: Aug 12, 2012

• #35

Of course it isn't your error, Anomie et Ivoire. It is a misunderstanding that will hopefully exist resolved. Delight don't leave, le Mouchoir de Monsieur. Your contributions to Basenotes are what help to make it a very interesting and unique place. How difficult it is to make ourselves understood on the 'net. Information technology is so like shooting fish in a barrel to say the wrong thing, when the intentions were right. Can we not all attempt to give each other the benefit of the doubt, while bearing in listen that our words are all we have to convey so much that were we face up to face would be easily made clear by facial expression, gesture, song tone. Let'southward give each other the benefit of the doubt. Please? :embarassed:

• #36

I would never send inpleasant or offensive PMs. I don't consider my comments re MdMs views on pare and nationality offensive to him. I wished to convey that I plant those views to be unacceptable and offensive writ large on a public forum. Being forthright I felt I should let the poster know the views and statements made are offensive to some. Being from a scientific groundwork I will tend to ask to run across evidence of scientific claims. It isn't the first time I've asked a poster for evidence. Just as others have asked me to support my claims.

My comments were not personal nor an assault on MdM. I'm grateful to Anomie et Ivoire for the quote and I thought we were having a contend, which is always enriching. Indeed ours views coincide on many of the discussion points.

As MdMs account remain active I assume they are however active.

As for Joy I was never a fan. I'thou in Larimar's camp in that I always prefer k

• #37

Le MdM and Anomie and Ivoire... take a break maybe but don't leave...either one of you lot...I am now contemplating a $700 bottle of perfume because of this thread FYI...

- - - Updated - - -

Of course it isn't your mistake, Anomie et Ivoire. Information technology is a misunderstanding that volition hopefully be resolved. Please don't leave, le Mouchoir de Monsieur. Your contributions to Basenotes are what help to make it a very interesting and unique identify. How hard it is to make ourselves understood on the 'net. It is so easy to say the incorrect thing, when the intentions were right. Can we not all try to give each other the do good of the doubt, while bearing in mind that our words are all we have to convey so much that were we face to face up would be easily made clear by facial expression, gesture, song tone. Let's requite each other the benefit of the incertitude. Please? :embarassed:

1+.

• #38

Of form it isn't your mistake, Anomie et Ivoire. It is a misunderstanding that volition hopefully be resolved. Please don't get out, le Mouchoir de Monsieur. Your contributions to Basenotes are what help to make information technology a very interesting and unique place. How difficult it is to brand ourselves understood on the 'net. It is and then like shooting fish in a barrel to say the wrong thing, when the intentions were correct. Can we not all effort to give each other the benefit of the doubt, while bearing in mind that our words are all we have to convey and then much that were we face to face would be hands fabricated clear by facial expression, gesture, song tone. Permit's requite each other the benefit of the doubt. Please? :embarassed:

Another plus ++++ from me lilybelle -

Please don't leave!

• #39

Of course it isn't your fault, Anomie et Ivoire. It is a misunderstanding that will hopefully be resolved. Please don't leave, le Mouchoir de Monsieur. Your contributions to Basenotes are what help to make it a very interesting and unique identify. How difficult it is to make ourselves understood on the 'net. It is so easy to say the incorrect thing, when the intentions were right. Can nosotros not all endeavour to give each other the benefit of the doubt, while bearing in listen that our words are all we accept to convey so much that were we face to face would exist easily made articulate past facial expression, gesture, song tone. Let'due south requite each other the benefit of the doubt. Please? :embarassed:

I'll add together a few ++++'s to this sentiment.

I didn't find the posts offensive at all - it struck me as an explanation of prevailing norms in the culture of perfumery in some other era and an endeavor to detect some possible rationale for that. Controversial possibly, but the writer fabricated information technology clear it was not a racial issue. My 18-carat feeling is that some readers may have difficulty with the writing way but I'll take impassioned enthusiasm and insight on this discipline (be it from le mdm or Mimi or anyone i else who wants to share their passion) anyday, over the alternative which ultimately will see it's expression in 'Like' buttons and the PC police force.

PS I should add I came in hither to mention that I bought a bottle of 2006 Extrait in lodge to get to know one more of the existent 'femme' classics and I do like information technology, although it seems, like many contemporary perfume renditions, to exist a bit one dimensional. I would love to experience Joy every bit it one time was, given like comparisons I have been able to brand between one or two Guerlains made 30 or then years apart I can only imagine how beautiful it must take once been.

• #40

It is sad to meet a postal service almost "Joy" become then confusing. It remains a dandy fragrance but perhaps no longer glorious. I do call back skin chemistry has a huge role in the flower of a fragrance; but I always thought that skin colour, hair colour or personality had less of a role than the advertisers and marketers of the by would take you believe.
I came to appreciate Joy rather late in the game. I had e'er disliked it because information technology was the namesake of my grandma Joy, who was a b***h of the offset order. My mother always kept her in the perfume and e'er tried to connect to her female parent. Information technology smelled wonderful on Joy simply she was such an awful woman that the association soured the fragrance for me. BTW Grandma Joy was a Jane Russell expect-alike with a Joan Crawford personality a brunette in the darkest sense of the word.
This is actually a symphonic floral. A classic fragrance that everyone should try wearing. It is something that should be in everyone'due south reference library. I honey it in vintage extrait, and adore the edt and edp in the current versions.

Similar threads

• Forums
• Fragrance Discussion
• Feminine Fragrance Discussion

study this ad

andersonsuslefor.blogspot.com

Source: https://basenotes.com/threads/jean-patou-joy.272349/

Share this post