Going through the cupboard I opened a random bag and saw some samples that my scent twin had passed on a while ago. One of them I had tried, but not written about, so here we are.
As she pointed out in her review, Fath de Fath is the quintessence of feminine, fine and French. Being vintage you have to cut the opening a break- age makes it a little off, but when it starts going it becomes a gorgeous flowery chypre (although others insist it’s an oriental, but I’m getting bowers of white flowers and oakmoss, so I say chypre.) Lily of the valley, a very light tuberose and I think heliotrope are in there with some orange blossom, while the dry down gets decidedly funky with patchouli and a surprisingly carnal civet.
This is really one of those that make you think “they don’t make them like this anymore..” It’s sad really. I don’t really kid myself that there is much about the fifties that I would like to revisit (or frankly, much of the past, even that I lived through unless it was to go back to my 6th grade self with a note of the cost of a house above Wilshire and advice to study law) since things like women’s, gay and civil rights weren’t around or were at best nascent. But the perfumes that were around and available then? In a New York minute!
I have heard that there was or is a reformulated version out there that bares the name Fath de Fath, but reading reviews of it on Basenotes, it is described using words like “travesty.” Never a very good sign. Decants can be found online. My sample was sent to me by my dear the Non-Blonde.
Image: Internets
I sometimes wonder what went wrong with “Women’s Lib”, which I watched unfold as a young child. The main thing I remember is them talking about stopping women being treated like sex objects, and yet when I look around at popular culture, it seems the opposite has happened. The hyper sexualization of very young girls is staggering, as anyone who has tried to find clothes for their elementary school aged daughters could tell you.
Rant over!
Adore vintage, and seldom meet one that I don’t enjoy, though Bandit and Jolie Madame didn’t thrill me. ( I suspect it’s a leather issue, not a vintage one.) I’ve never tried any Jacques Fath perfumes; this sounds good!
Hey There Tom,
Sorry I’m alte to the party.Never heard of this one but it reads like a dream, please keep a dribble so I can sniff it in November.
Portia xx
I’m a big fan of vintage, even the drugstore varieties. At the moment I am in hot pursuit of anything Coty from at least 30 years ago. Fath de Fath is not one that I know, but your comment about past craftsmanship and use of materials certainly resonates. When I sniff an old Je Reviens or Emeraude, I get an impression of power and presence. Recently I acquired a vintage Shalimar perfume and felt as though I was in a fragrance 101 class as I followed the entire scent through its drydown. Maybe a closet radical in 1962 felt utterly daring when wearing a popular high end fragrance that reminded him/her of days old undergarments.
Ha! I love that!
You are absolutely right, Tom!
My two vintage miniatures are guarded like treasures and I’m happy to say they are in quite excellent condition.
The new version is a rather harsh copy -not too bad- but it does not at all compare to the original.
I might just have to seek it out just to see (smell)
I’ve gotten a couple vintage perfumes recently, and I just can’t smell their beauty, apparently. I think they’ll just have to be something I admire from afar.
They cab ba a challenge. I like skunk, so I like that they used civet.
I’m so glad you wrote about this one. This is one of those “coincidences” where I keep seeing things about Fath de Fath a lot lately. Now I know that I definitely need to try it!
It’s really pretty!