Once upon a time, there was a land where the flowers and plants had strange properties. Roses had the odd leaf here and there,
and in the centre of calla lilies one could find some unusual buds.
Actually, I just went to the flower market and found some lovely flowers for DW, and I thought: why not use them as props? Unfortunately, they didn't last long enough to take pictures of all the new pieces, but still, some nice shots came out:
So, what are we seeing?
The leaf is a 1950s concoction in 14k gold, carved and etched rock crystal and diamonds. Interestingly, about half-way through the stem the diamonds go from full-cut brilliant to single cuts. It's marked with a famous name, and it has the quality of make associated with it, but the mark itself is doubly struck and not well defined - so I'm not 100% positive this came in a blue box originally.
In the centre of the calla lily is an early 1960s ring - definitely American, and possibly by Oscar Heyman, but unmarked. It's a lovely flower/ballerina shape, with topaz marquises all around - note how tightly fitted they are - and a nice size (~0.65 ct.) centre diamond.
The centre stone is very lively, and I wish I had greater skills (and better, more stable lighting) to show you the details of the cut: instead of being the typical modern H&A cut, it shows a flower-like design in the centre that I associate with an older fashion of cut. In these photos, one can also appreciate the small platinum settings for all the diamonds, but in reality, when worn, the effect of the halo is to make the centre look like one huge diamond (9mm; about the size of a 3.00 ct rock!).
From 1960s to contemporary - but without losing anything in quality and delicacy - is the latest re-set of the diamonds that once were in my grandmother's engagement ring:
the diamonds can still be worn as studs, or together with a pair of slightly bluish green, medium-dark tsavorite pears, weighing 3.87 ctw. The platinum work is of incredible quality (and it is available through DBL). An image shot with the last light of the setting sun: amazing how the roses picked up the colour
...and last in this series, but not least, it's bringing us back to what I think is truly the Golden Age of jewellery: the 1920-1930 period. A pair of platinum, diamonds and natural pearls clips by R. Yard, circa 1930:
They would originally have had a fitting to wear them as a brooch, back to back as shown in the top photo, but are very wearable without the fitting as lapel clips on a symmetrically-tailored dress or jacket, or one above the other - all fashions seen in images from the period. Incidentally, it's interesting how the style of the jewel is something that one would identify with a slightly earlier period (early 1920s), but Yard opened shop in 1922, did not make clips until 1927, and was stylistically very conservative, so early 1930s is the most likely date for them. Like all early Yard pieces, they show an amazing attention to detail and exceptional quality of stones (in this case the pearls).
Moving forward a few years from the 1930s, and on to the late 1940s / early 1950s, one can still find examples of great design, but in yellow gold and with a much greater use of coloured stones. Since DW lost her yellow diamond earring a while ago, I have been finding lots of interesting pieces in all tones of yellow (but no earrings yet...), such as this bracelet/watch with citrines and diamonds:
The watch face - which is tiny, let me assure you: it's a problem setting the hands correctly on the Blancpain movement - is hidden under the central panel with diamonds, and bears the name of Laykin & Cie, an American jeweller famous in the 1940s and 1950s for supplying jewels and accoutrements to many Hollywood actresses - probably most famously of all to Lana Turner in "Imitation of Life" (1959), setting a record for the day of over $1 million for the film wardrobe and jewellery.
This is not - as far as I know - a piece worn by Lana Turner, but the workmanship on it is outstanding. Look at what happens if one puts the bracelet "facing up":
not the tiniest give in any of the links, after 50+ years of use. I wish my spine were in such condition...
The bracelet looks lovely together with the topaz ring...
... and equally at home with this late 1930s clip/brooch, also with citrines:
This American jewel is - in my view - one of the best pieces of Deco design I have: it has it all - strong, geometrical forms; stylised representation of the sun rising (or setting) in two-colour gold; invisibly set citrines on a rounded crest, surrounded by single-cut diamond bands set in platinum. It is bold, it is refined, it shouts happiness - and at about 2 in diameter it is not exactly shy. It also looks very good worn as a pendant. Can you tell I like it?
The 1930s were a great period for jewellery, but they missed out on a couple of tricks. One of them, since we are on the subject of yellow/orange stones, was that they had to "make do" with citrines. Mandarin spessartite was first found in Namibia in 1991, and in Nigeria in 1993. It lacks citrine's ready availability, which allows all sorts of calibré cuts, but it replaces it with much greater liveliness (it has a refractive index higher than sapphire!) and rarity - especially in large sizes. I think - given the colour and clarity - this is a Nigerian stone, which makes it relatively more common than Namibia, but at nearly 10 ct and totally eye-clean it's an exceptional find. Which no doubt is why Boucheron chose it for this ring, surrounded by other spessartites around the flower and down most of the shank.
The colour is really difficult to capture; in the photos it comes up with a slightly "burnt" tint which is not at all apparent in reality, where it's pure orange. Again - it's not a shrinking violet, but it's so much fun (and no one who doesn't know gems will think it's anything but a piece of costume jewellery. He he.)
Even garnet, however, is not a match to the true king of stones: diamond. And when the diamond is orangy-yellow, what one gets is this:
in a classical DBL interpretation of a style first launched by Yard in the 1930s (though Yard would have used tapered baguettes on the shoulders, instead of half-moons). Actually, I think Yard himself would have been proud of this ring - it has so many of his hallmarks: exceptional quality of the main stone (even if I say so), clean lines and superb attention to detail. Here it is, winking at you, Raymond!
The profile is typical DBL - low on the finger, and flowing through to the shank. You can just make out the small claw tips on this side view.
In case anyone thinks I am out of turn by comparing DBL to Yard, I'll just mention that a recent book on Yard had a foreword by David Rockefeller - clearly mentioning Yard as "the family jeweller and a friend" - which is exactly how I think of DBL and David (though unfortunately my availability of cash leaves something to that of Mr Rockefeller).
Since we are on the subject of Yard - here is another piece by him. Mid 1920s, but in the style of a few years earlier, reflecting Yard's clientèle's conservative tastes.
It's a rather small brooch, with a 1.23 ct Burma ruby in the middle of an expanse of polished platinum. Baguette diamonds and step-cut rubies at the ends of the platinum, flanked by oval scroll terminals with single cut diamonds and cabochon rubies at the extremities. Again a delicate Deco piece which stands out for design, quality of stones and workmanship. The platinum makes it change appearance rather starkly depending on where the light strikes it (let's not forget that platinum has RI almost as high as a diamond!)
And since we are on the subject of design, how about this? A pair of earclips (the term is well advised: they can be worn on the ear, or as small clips on the edge of a lapel or dress) by none other than Emile Puiforcat, circa 1935.
These are again quintessential late Deco pieces, in white and yellow gold scrolls, with a small arrow-shaped strip set with single-cut diamonds. The workmanship is amazing, to the point that these are the only earclips without posts that DW finds comfortable all day long. Puiforcat is much better known for its silver pieces, particularly cutlery and tea services, and it was acquired in 1991 by the same holding company that owns Hermès and for a while owned Lalique. One more detail of the design: the three layers are not soldered together, but held by screws. Getting the laminas to stay together this close is not easy!
Should you feel a little bored by famous names and all this Art Deco malarkey, here is something that is not Deco, is not by a famous house, and yet still manages to be special - in fact, I suspect it's a take on Van Cleef's
clématite earrings, just better (in my view, at least! VCA's pieces are cruder, and about 5 times as expensive, although they had the idea first).
a pair of American carved carnelian, gold and diamond earrings from the 1970s. The carving is excellent, and the carnelian is a delicate reddish pink which looks really lovely when worn.
What? I hear you saying you
do like Deco pieces? OK, OK, so here's another one.
A clip (but possibly designed to be worn as a pendant as well) by Mellerio (dits Meller), the oldest extant jewellery house in the world (est. 1613). Early 1930s, but using much older stones. These are truly OMCs! And do they fire!
The four central stones in this Maya-inspired piece are about 1.something each, with an open culet and very high crown. And all the other stones are the same. Here is a side view, showing the space for inserting a cord or chain to use the clip as a pendant, and the height of some of the crowns. By the way - although many of the stones are "down" to a K colour or so, face up they seem incredibly white
This is a piece that I had to "sell" to DW. She kept saying "but I already have a white (diamond) clip". Yes, you do - in fact you have three - but this one looks different. Proof:
Although the description of all three items could read the same (pearls excepted) on paper, they couldn't look more different (bearing in mind they
are mainly diamonds on platinum, and they were all made within 10 years of each other). The designers did an excellent job in all three cases in building an individual item with its own look and feel. And the photo shows only a minimal part of that: when they move around, they look even more different.
Of course, with colour, one has more things to play with. Tone, saturation and hue all play a much greater part - so here's a final shot with all the recent yellow pieces (well, nearly - the watch is being cleaned) to show the differences in design and colour that are possible:
And two more with flowers - just enhanced by diamonds - to show that in the end Nature can produce something just as lovely and varied:
colored diamonds
Author