Jules (1980)
by Christian Dior

Weird scent in category-wise : In times it smells so obviously fougere, but then it has some shades that are so common for typical chypre leather/wood fragrances of the eighties.

I don’t like it that much. I wonder if some people would either if this wasn’t Dior and that exclusive-like…

I feel slightly foolish not being able to put my finger on it precisely why I feel so strongly that Jules hasn’t kept time nearly as well as some of its relatives that I actually like, but to me it smells somewhat thin and also very generic. And yes, in some specific ways it also smells very old and dated. It smells a lot like some cheap chypre classic for men from years behind.
Somewhat animalic yes, but in that matter this shouldn’t be too hard to handle for anyone.

I see this mainly as a gem for some funny men who require that certain masculinity out of fragrance. Also, for some kind of snobs perhaps as well as for people who thinks it is impossible to disagree with Mr. Luca Turin.
Perhaps for the rest of us this is just a mediocre and dated remain from the past that could retire from the word of fragrances – for good. At least I wouldn’t mind.

Dior’s Jules belongs to a fragrance group that I like to think of as BFFFs: Big, Fat, F#cking Fougères. These include scents like Kouros, Havana, Lauder for Men, and Pascal Morabito’s Or Black. They’re all titanic, spicy, animalic scents that somehow manage to be at once savage and sophisticated, and I love them!

To my mind, Jules occupies the middle ground among these giants. It does not flirt as dangerously with the reek of wild animals as Kouros does; it does not strive for Havana’s spicy exoticism; nor does it breathe the same dark, threatening smoke as Lauder for Men and Or Black. Jules is also a bit sweeter and brighter in its drydown than the rest of them.

For all these reasons, Jules doesn’t compel me quite as much as the others. On the other hand, I can see how this same relative “neutrality” could make Jules the most appealing of the lot for many wearers. In any case, its quality is unassailable, and if you share my taste for monster fougères, you ought to give Jules a try!

Got a 10 ml from Ebay. I am really getting into the idea of the animalistic/rude/sweaty fragrance and Jules is the real first step on a path that will eventually lead me to fork out the 110 e’s for Muscs Koublaï Khän.

Jules starts off rather mysteriously and classy, definitely a scent from a bygone era. Very, very French somehow and at times it seems to foreshadow Fahrenheit. Weird at first but pleasant and it gets better with the spicy middle. All those associations of woods, dead leaves are quite understandable. It’s definitely an autumn scent, should work well with brown clothes (something I’m quite partial to.) I can understand where those with the urinous angle come from, there’s just a hint of something “off”, a sweet/sour note that basically is very pleasant but doesn’t resemble any real toilet I know of. The only problem with Jules is the longevity which is a bit average.

I wouldn’t mind having a bigger bottle of this stuff, but at the moment it’s guaranteed I won’t run into someone wearing Jules so it has the attraction of a “little secret”. Maybe it will get reissued in the future when there’s a hype/comeback for Big Masculine Scents, but I won’t hold my breath. Dior probably will release something like Higher II Light instead.

Top: albanum, artemesia, bergamot oil, cumin, green notes, laurel, lavender and wormwood
Middle: black pepper, carnation, cedarwood, sandalwood, rose and jasmine
Base: amber, oakmoss, tonka bean, olibanum, musk, fir, Russian leather and castoreum.

Not worth the exorbitant prices on ebay, but this is an excellent fragrance. Jules opens with a spicy herbal blast very similar to Santos Concentree (Cartier - 1982) but as it dries down it differs greatly. The drydown is very smooth and the more prominent notes are the leather, oakmoss and fir, some cumin, wormwood and sandalwood are left over from the opening.

Jules is not as dark a scent as Santos Concentree, but it's in the same vein. The dryodown is slightly sweet and very green and masculine.

I love Vibert's review and description as a BFFF. Jules is squarely in the category of 80s powerhouse masculines. Highly aromatic, I detect a lot of sage in its early stages with galbanum, tobacco and even a touch of citrus lurking underneath. The drydown is unusually smooth, with tobacco/woodsy notes entering the mix as the aromatics mellow out. The base is more 'leathery' smooth than actually smelling of leather. There are moments, particularly in the top/heart, when I can almost detect flashes of another 80s great, Ralph Lauren Monogram. However Monogram was anything but smooth, and in smoothness Jules is more like Aramis Tuscany per Uomo Forte.

What sets Jules apart from its brothers and makes it so enjoyable in today's age is that volume is turned down, and accordingly the 'obnoxious' factor associated with so many 80s powerhouses isn't nearly as noticeable. Accordingly, the sillage isn't outrageous (which isn't necessarily a bad thing), but the longevity is very, very good (8 hours).

Few masculines born of the late 70s/early 80s have stood the test of time so well. Polo is one, Aramis Tuscany, and the now-defunct Rochas Macassar. Dior Jules is among these greats. It's rare that I feel like wearing an 80s masculine, but when I do Jules is at the top of my list. Although increasingly hard to find do not despair as bottles are out there and can always be ordered directly from Dior in a pinch.

This review is based on trials carried on on two samples, one from a bottle dating from 1981 and another one recently bought.

After wearing the old sample on my left hand and the other one on my right hand, I could identify some differences that I can't blame on reformulation - 25 years must have had an effect on the old sample. Still, differences are minimal. Thus, descriptions about Jules being "raunchy" and "manly" because of its indolic floral, animalic and leatherish notes are right. However, these floral notes are more prominent in the vintage sample, heavy animalic notes dominate the actual sample. In this one, floral notes are present in a shy, subdued way.

Jules opening is characterized by straightforward animalic notes, ground for the descriptions on its manlyness. The drydown is marked by the heavy presence of leather to such an extent that I have to run the risk of saying it is the most leatherish scent I have ever tried. Having said this, it is clear that notes are easily associated with what could be described as bodily smells. As I have said before, floral notes clearly present in the old sample are very much tamed in the new one, perceptible to some extent, but in a very subdued manner.

As you may have thought, Jules is not for the faint of heart or for lovers of contemporary perfume styles, in that sense it is in the antipodes of "fresh" and "clean" scents. For those thinking of buying Jules blind, take in mind it is far form being a safe buy. This may baffle those having read Jules being a "holy grial" or "must smell"; it might be so for those appreciating difficult to understand scents or aficionados into particular, unique or full of character scents. These statements can make readers conclude that Jules is a curiosity, at the most, a scent to be enjoyed at home but not to be worn. However, this is not so, Jules' strong character makes it suitable for winter time, and its sense of tradition makes it perfect for formal occasions.

Jules might not be everybody's cup of tea, but it is enjoyable in its uniqueness.