JEAN PATOU
JOY PARFUM

1931

PERFUMER
Henri Almeras

bergamot
aldehydes
flower calyx
peach
bulgarian rose
tuberose
green leaves

rose de mai
jasmine de mai
lily
orchid
orris
ylang-ylang
lily-of-the-valley

musk
civet
vanilla
mysore sandalwood

‘Jean Patou wanted to send a gift of appreciation to his many regular international clients who would be unable to visit Paris in that first year of the Great Depression. He asked Henri Almeras to create something very strong, yet simple, no matter what the cost. This lead to the creation of the costliest perfume in the world, Joy. Renowned as “the costliest perfume in the world,” the Joy line was created in 1930 by haute couture designer Jean Patou. The perfume was first used commercially in 1931 according to trademark records. Jean Patou was the first designer to use his initials as a logo, presaging the monogrammed designer labels of today. The predominant ingredients of Bulgarian rose and Grasse jasmine-one ounce each, it is said requires 10,600 jasmine flowers and 28 dozen rose de mais, the scent is a timeless masterpiece in simplicity. During two short weeks in the summer, several kilos of blossoms are harvested from the Jean Patou flower fields in Grasse to achieve the 10,600 flowers required for just one bottle of Joy perfume. The luxurious composition is coveted by women around the world. Joy also made use of the Jasmin 231 base made by Firmenich. Jasmin 231 lent a trail of honeysuckle to the jasmine. Also used the Schimmel & Company chemical hyacinthine, and the schiff base citrindol (Indole/Citral) made by Firmenich.’ – Jean Patou Perfumes (Blogger)

This review is for a (until that moment sealed) vintage bottle from 1972. It’s my first time smelling any variant of Patou and I thoroughly enjoyed it (pun intended).

Being advertised as ‘the costliest perfume in the world’, boasting a large amount of the most expensive ingredients being used, especially a high dose of jasmine and rose (1 ounce of Joy demands 10600 jasmine blooms and 28 dozen roses apparently), so… no expectations right?

Straight from the opening, this has a lot of slightly soapy lemon on my skin. A similar, retro-style lemon that I smell in older Guerlain Habit Rouge. However, in Joy it’s more skanky straight away. It’s acidic, floral, but strongly leaning into the lemon. Which is interesting, as I’ve seen no lemons in any note breakdowns of this.

As the wear progresses, it warms up. Under the lemon, you can imagine a sandalwood. It has the slightest fruity tinge, a tropical one that one might get from ylang-ylang. I don’t smell much peach.

It started off subtle and I wondered if I had to apply more. However, it gradually gained so much strength in the first hour; safe to say, I applied plenty. It transforms into quite the behemoth, both in performance and in the scent, going from subtle and ‘joyous’ to a more radiant floral with a heavy, sensual indolic projection.

The jasmine and rose to my surprise (given it’s acclaim), were not all that prominent to me at first. It took a while to fully register as I get mostly the indols of the jasmine from this. It’s a bit green, but not overly ‘jasmin-scented’ in the floral sense and rose even less. There was more of an acidic, civet-esque animalic challenge in the first minutes, but the indolic nature of the jasmine (and perhaps tuberose) really start to push through after.

There’s an interesting juxtaposition between a clean element and a growing, warmer (and at times sweeter) element. When smelled up close, I get something akin to a white musky cleanliness along with the civet-like acidity. On the other hand, the overall composition goes in an spiced floral ambery direction.

That last part is especially noticeable once most of the acidity starts to fade. The spicy, warmer and sandalwood-y base starts to take center stage. I also get more of a common mossy green-tinge that I’ve experienced in my short-lived vintage-exploration thus far once this reaches it’s drydown. The florals are definitely all over it, but it lacks the freshness or sharpness that one might expect from jasmine at this point (given that it’s an 50 year old bottle, maybe not so surprising). It goes quite peppery spicy in the late drydown.

I don’t get much of a fecal or barnyard quality from this, but a rubbery, warm and spicy skankiness. More sensual/sexual, than fecal. It’s not an easy one to pull off, but I don’t get any aversion or repulsion at all; it’s surprisingly well-rounded. It’s daring, more so than challenging to me, even though I expected a lighter scent from Joy.

This is a different type of, primal, darkness-lurking-around-the-corner kind of Joy. It definitely smells expensive and opulent as advertised. If you’re not afraid of a hefty dose of indols, this one should be on your to-try list.