Diamonds: Preserving old cuts
I recently inherited a diamond ring, a gift from my father to my mother in 1947. The cut is 'transitional', between Old Mine or European cuts and the newer Round Brilliant styles.The stone has brilliance and sparkle, but not the extreme dazzle of today's, more blinding than Regis Philbin's teeth. When I took it to my jeweler's, he suggested recutting to the current style.
His point: the stone will be worth more, "better", even though I'd lose up to 40% of the size.
His partner suggested only a repair to a chipped girdle. I agreed; instead of another average-sized diamond, I have a subtle, sentimental and substantial stone.
I prefer these old cuts to the modern shower of sparkle- they look like minerals. When I see a woman with a solitaire engagement ring, I recall Coco Chanel's waspish comment that "a woman with a diamond might as well wear a price tag around her neck", even as my reptile brain responds, "Oooooh!"
if you have an old mine or European cut diamond, don't recut it to the modern standard unless it's damaged; don't remount it unless you choose another antique-style setting. Otherwise, the stone will look out of place, like steel-framed windows on a 16th-century house. Only rarely does this juxtaposition work.
The ultimate anti-bling is a rough or minimally-cut
diamond.Patti Hansen wears a 10-carat uncut diamond from Keith. If he would just call to tell me it's conflict-free (the ring, not the relationship) I would be in Jewelry Heaven.
You can see some mouth-watering examples at designer Todd Reed's site; I would love to wear the dan
gle earrings (above, $6,250) or the multi-stone ring (below $12,500).
Comments
Thanks for joining my followers. I like your site! I agree with so much of what you've said. And I'll follow yours, too.
Frugal, I wrote a long comment with some research at the post on diets, and it didn't "take". Unfortunately I had too much work after, that day, to get back to it. If one is writing something long or detailed, it is better to always do "save", but I forgot. :-(
lagatta: People keep sending me comments about nutrition, their own experience, etc. and I appreciate them, but I'm simply reporting the results of the study.
"Conflict diamonds are diamonds that originate from areas controlled by forces or factions opposed to legitimate and internationally recognized governments, and are used to fund military action in opposition to those governments, or in contravention of the decisions of the Security Council."
There does not have to be armed warfare going on at the time.
Also, it's very easy to 'launder' diamonds coming out of these areas, now that people are aware of ths issue.
So, buy Canadian diamonds.
And what would probably happen is that in a couple of years you'd wished you'd never done it.
I adore the look of rough cut diamonds. The examples in the link are fabulous.
I would never recut a sentimental diamond, no matter how "out of style" the cut was. I'm glad you left it as was.
By the way, I've nominated you for an award on my blog. I really enjoy your posts.
Tiffany have recently increased their stake in two Canadian diamond mines- including buying 100% of one mine's production. (They will both buy and sell the supply.)
Some people are willing to pay a 5-10% more for a Canadian diamond, for a guaranteed "ethically clean" stone. Of course, not everyone cares about the political aspect of the purchase.