Quote:
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Yellow diamonds, I thought, were traditionally not suitable as engagement rings, but rather as additional adornments for later-in-life gifts.
B_R_C?
|
:shrug:
Diamonds first became popular engagement ring adornments largely because of 15th C burgundian/hapsburg mimicry. They only became really ubiquitous in the last century or so, though, under deBeer's marketing deviousness. Anything is suitable as an engagement ring, including no ring, or the very traditional plain gold band (rings were often exchanged at betrothal, not the actual marriage). I know rather a lot of people of Irish descent who get emeralds, people who get some other stone they have some affinity for, etc. It's all good. All you need to be properly engaged is a consenting prospective spouse.
I understand pearls are the engagement ring of choice in Japan, because of their perfection and unity. I rather like that.
However, as a general statement of social observation, one gets weird speciality jewelry (like colored diamonds) for older established women rather than younger ones. This is a practical matter, since younger women may not have the basics yet, while older ones already do and therefore only need things that are unusual.
For me, IF the manufactured diamonds are entirely the same (i.e.: undetectable), I'd go for a synthetic, sure. (I was under the impression that they in fact have a slightly different molecular configuration than naturally occuring diamond, in that the hexagonal carbon structure was the same two-dimensionally, but not 3-dimensionally, but maybe they fixed that problem.) Even if they were detectable I might, just to fuck deBeers. I'd also probably get a slightly larger one that I would otherwise, but not much bigger. I'd never get something that, were it real, I
couldn't afford, even if I might not in fact be willing to spend that much on it. The thing to remember about wearing fakes of any kind is that many people will assume it's not fake if it isn't clear that it's fake. So, I might get 2 1/2 carat earrings instead of 2, but not 5.
I have no compunction whatsoever about lying in response to rude questions, so I'd gleefully respond "absolutely" if asked. Besides, they never seem to specify real what.
Dunno if I'd feel differently if it were an engagement ring, what with all the sentimentality attached. Then again, a simple argument "the stone in your ring should be absolutely perfect, and this was the way I could ensure it was" would win me over 100% on the point. (Not sure I'd marry a man dumb enough to actually admit it to me, though. How much the thing cost or where he got it is really none of my business.)
BR(whole thing makes me wish people just had the jewelry they inherited, or didn't, and that was that, because, love them thought I might, I just can't reconcile myself to the idea that blowing large amounts of money on vanities isn't somehow evil)C
