TEMPLE IN TARGET

Just saw the new Temple St. Clair line in my local Target. The jury is still out on it--meaning I, the jury. More later . . . (Count on it!)

FPTMJFD8Z2HW

MAGNETIC APPEAL--WHAT AN ATTRACTION!

I don't like surprises, but I do like being pleasantly surprised. (Yes, there's a difference.) Such was the case when jewelry designer Petra Azar (someone I hadn't known) phoned to tell me she'd just read an online Guest Editorial I wrote for Silver Promotion News/Silver Institute about designer sterling silver. "You should know about me," she opened our conversation with, "because I make sterling silver jewelry like you've never seen before." Why is that, I asked? "Well, for one thing, I hold a patent on a special magnetic clasp."

Oh . . . as nice as Petra sounded, my kitsch antenna started to become extra sensitive. I can't help it--occupational hazard, I suppose. As soon as someone starts to mention magnets, two-in-one gadgets, "hidden" pieces and the like, my jewelry journalist's instincts kick in and I start to wonder what's the catch?

No pun intended, part of the beauty of Petra's pieces is about the catch. She holds the U.S. patent on what is called The Magnetic Power Clasp, which effectively eliminates the need for a clasp. About a week later, when I first picked up one of Petra's neckpieces, even knowing about the magnetic closing mechanism, I kept searching for a clasp! This is the point: The magnetic closure is so seamless, that you can't tell where the two sides of a pendant meet. Another practical feature of this Pennsylvania designer's patented necklaces is the proprietary "magic double chain." You simply hold onto the signed logo tag in the back of the necklace and the 18-inch double chain instantly converts to a 36-inch single chain while the pendant--heart, circle, rectangle, whatever--glides down to the bottom of the chain.

In this still-uncertain economy, there's something about a piece of jewelry that does double-fashion-duty, is affordable in precious stering silver, and is so well-made that even a sometimes jaded jewelry editor like yours truly is super impressed.

So thanks, Petra, for giving me a call. And you were right--you are a sterling silver jewelry designer that I--and my readers--needed to know about. More later . . .

THE BLEND TREND (A.K.A. TONE-ON-TONE)

I'm not saying that the Italians invented it but, at the moment, they're obsessed with it--and it's bellissimo! When I was in Italy to view the new collections for 2010, jewelers kept showing me lines and using the word "blending." (At first, I had no idea what they were talking about--blending? All these years covering jewelry and I'd never heard that one before.) But then, my "aha" moment: Oh, you mean monochromatic color combinations? Yes, of course, I knew that. In fashion, we call it tone-on-tone: layering like colors for an overall easy-on-the-eyes effect. Got it, right, like pairing pink pants with a crimson camisole with a scarlet scarf. So blending in jewelry? They were talking about matching the various shades of precious gold metal to gemstones and enamels in a color family similar to the gold shade.

Now that that's settled, moving on. Why are they blending? Partially because they can. Never in recent history has there been such successful experimentation with the colors of gold, especially rose gold and blackened gold. And sometimes champagne (a kind of beigy shade). So, with gold no longer just yellow or white, there are more metal shades to match to stones and enamels. As a result, black pearls are set in blackened gold, pink sapphires in pink gold, yellow citrines in yellow gold, and so on. 

Personally, I like the look. It's pretty and, in this new economic reality, where we're spending money more carefully and buying jewelry we can wear with many different outfits instead of just one or two, it makes perfect sense. I mean, just look at this necklace from Utopia. It is blackened 18-karat gold with Tahitian black pearls (and white ones). (http://www.utopia-jewels.com/).
Sometimes the simplest idea can be the smartest. That's how I feel about jewelry's new blend trend. More later . . .

THEY PASSED ON THE CHAMPAGNE . . . AND THE COGNAC, TOO

Sometimes I just don't get it. As a jewelry journalist, I want to tell people about the most beautiful jewelry, the best designers, the newest product--all that good stuff. But what happens? People get afraid of that. Well, to be fair, some people.

Case in point: Last week, I pitched stories to two different magazines on great jewelry with champagne diamonds (also known as brown diamonds). Folks, these diamonds are a hot design trend right now, and so many beautiful new collections with champagne and cognac diamonds are being made. And frankly, given that their prices can be less than their white (yes, colorless) counterparts, they're something for consumers like all of us to think about--especially in this current economy, yes?

Well, the two editors responded "no" to my pitch. In essence, they said they'd rather I wrote about white diamonds. (How innovative.) Look, there's nothing wrong with white diamonds--I have quite a few white diamond jewelry pieces myself. (My husband thinks a few too many, I confess.) But that's not the point. Don't they want to educate their readers on browns--for example, that they are natural color diamonds? How they come in seven different color ranges (see http://www.ncdia.com/), from very light champagne to fancy dark cognac? Here's a ring, for example, from legendary goldsmith Zoltan David--and I do mean legendary--with the most breathtaking cognac center stone. http://www.zoltandavid.com/ Or, how about this multi-strand champagne diamond necklace by Sandy Leong, somewhat of a newcomer to the contemporary fine jewelry scene but already doing different kinds of things (like working at times in champagne-colored gold, for one thing). http://www.sandyleong.com/

Fine, I understand. Every print and online journalism medium has a right to write to its audience about what it chooses. I, for one, am glad I can do the same here. Yes, friends, this is how this blog is going to go. More later . . .