But for myself, to wear on my own person, and to make the right kind of statement about my personal style and taste, I go for the straightforward and unembellished. It must impress with appealing design and understatement, and not rely on shine, glitter and gaudiness. As for value, it's nice to have something worth a bit, but I'd feel unsafe wearing something that might make me a target for theft. Nor do I want to be saddled with the cost of fancy insurance.
Nevertheless, for decades I longed to own some pearls and some diamonds. I finally bought myself a string of nice pearls in June 2010. And two years ago, in May 2018, four little diamonds were added to the 'wave' ring on my right hand, the larger two a present from my friend Jo, who is well into jewellery. So far as I am concerned, I now have what I want in pearls and diamonds. The same for bracelets and bangles.
But if you like jewellery, you can't help looking at what's on offer at any shop you go into. Well, back on 24th January, Valerie and I accompanied Jo into our local favourite posh jewellers, Pruden & Smith in Ditchling. She was picking up a necklace and matching earrings she'd ask them to create for her - they make pieces to order - and, while this was being examined and discussed, Valerie and I had a look at the lovely things on display. And I saw a nice silver ring with a diamond-like stone set in it. But it couldn't have been a diamond, surely? I enquired with Hannah, one of the people I'd got to know there, via Jo. It was actually a cut cubic zirconia, a synthetic stone, much cheaper than a diamond of course, in a halo setting. Here it is in my fingers. It was the shop's sample piece for display only - not for sale, but to give you an idea of what such a ring, when made to fit your finger, would look like:
I thought this was a neat design in silver, appealingly unfussy. Hannah said I could have any kind of stone in it that I wanted, but Valerie and I agreed that the colourless cubic zirconia stone went extremely well with the silver, and would be, for both of us, the nicest choice were we to buy. It was £350 to make the ring.
We girls make up a Gang of Five, and whenever one of our birthdays comes around, four of us chip in £20 towards the cost of something really good for the Birthday Girl. Jo and Valerie could see that I was taken with this ring, which, if I chose it for my birthday in July, would actually cost me only £270, as £80 would be covered by birthday contributions from my four friends. I readily said yes - I'd very much like this ring as my present! Nice to get this settled so far in advance! Hannah sized the finger it would go on, and I paid a deposit of £175.
Six weeks later, and I was wondering whether I really wanted another ring, nice though this one was. I mulled it over, experimented with a ring I already had but rarely wore. And then...
Well, let me now reproduce an email I sent to the other four girls two days ago, which takes the story onward.
Ladies,
I have given this a lot of thought, and have decided that I won't get Pruden & Smith in Ditchling to proceed with making the silver CZ ring I ordered and partly paid for on 20th January [I meant the 24th]. This was an attractive ring, very suitable for a birthday present, but I developed doubts. I've now cancelled that order, but substituted two new orders, one personal, and one which I hope you'll approve of as my birthday gift.
What were those doubts?
First, the two cherished silver rings I already wore both have a deep history. I've worn them for a very long time. I felt on reflection that something new and very glittery would outshine these two older rings, and take attention away from them. That would be wrong.
Second, having found a silver ring I already had, but never wore (because it tended to snag in my clothes), I put it on experimentally for a day or two, to see how I might feel about having two rings on my left hand. It didn't work out. An extra ring seemed to clutter up my left hand. I got fed up with having it on.
By now I knew that a ring would not be the right birthday present.
And then, going through my jewellery, I found my pearl necklace.
This is a very nice necklace indeed. Medium-length at 22 inches long, and made up of 69 Japanese cultured Akoya saltwater pearls of 7mm diameter - therefore jolly good pearls - with a 9 carat gold safety clasp. I bought it for myself ten years ago, and love it, but have never worn it much because it's too short to hang down over my bust, and too long to stay visible above my usual clothing neckline - it tends to shift under and below the neckline, so that you can't really see much of it. I'd bought it during a hot June, when wearing summer tops; in winter clothing, with higher necklines, it got lost.
What a pity! And yet it had never occurred to me to make it shorter and much more wearable. But I've thought of it now.
So, having consulted Rebecca at Pruden & Smith today, my necklace will lose 4 pearls and become a little shorter. And of course it'll be restrung.
I will be wearing it as soon as it's ready, which will be in time for my West Country holiday from the end of this month. I can't wait. I intend to wear my lovely pearl necklace often. And if it needs to be restrung every year, then so be it. Incidentally, the current cost at P&S for a necklace of medium length is £65 - that's what I've paid.
I'll now have 4 spare pearls. These will become the basis for my birthday present. Having discussed what might be done with Rebecca - I had some sketches prepared - I'm going to to turn them into a pendant with an 18 inch silver chain. The four pearls are going to be arranged in a cruciform pattern (perhaps like a four-petalled flower) using silver wire and end-studs, and hung from the chain. This pendant will be ready before my birthday on 6th July - Rebecca thinks they'll in fact make it well before then. The cost is £150.
I'd already paid a £175 deposit back in January, and have now paid the remaining £40 to cover both orders, so there's nothing left to pay to P&S.
I'm attaching some pictures of the pearl necklace as it has been for the last ten years. (It'll look very similar when shortened) Also Rebecca's own sketch of how the four pearls in the new pendant will be fitted together in a close cluster. As for the silver chain for the pendant, this will be the thin snakelike sort that I have for my labradorite pendant - much the same as my thicker all-silver necklace - and I attach a picture of that too.
Sorry for the length of this email, but I did want to fully explain.
Lucy XX
And these were the pictures I attached:
And these were my friends' emailed responses:
Jo: Fabulous, great explanation and super to get what you really want too. Yeah. Xxx
Jackie: That sounds Perfect!! Love the pictures and the explanation! Xx
Valerie: Hi Lucy, that was interesting like reading a short story, good for you go for it xxxx.
Sue: Well done Lucy! Great explanation and super photos. Sue xxx
Phew. I did wonder whether it was possibly high-handed to rip up a birthday decision and substitute another without prior discussion. I'd made up my mind independently, and had acted on that forthrightly. That's my way. But my friends had all approved. I expect they've got me down as a woman who knows her own mind.
And I know it's the right decision. My string of pearls will be a little shorter, but I'll be able to wear them to better advantage, and much more often. And I'll get a nice pearl pendant for a birthday present, which I can wear on its own, or with my usual 'slow-worm' silver necklace if I want to. (That's the thick necklace in the two bottom-most shots above, that usually adorns my scrawny neck when out and around)
Readers with mathematical minds will have worked out that I'm also saving myself a tidy sum. I'd have paid out a further £175 when the original CZ ring was ready in late June, to make a total of £350 paid, with £80 from my four friends to offset it. Net, £270. Now I've paid £215, the entire amount due, with £80 coming back. Net £135. The difference between £270 and £135 (according to my calculator - I don't trust my mental arithmetic!) is (coincidentally) £135.
£135 is enough for eight nights' caravanning site fees. (Assuming that caravanning will be possible in mid-summer, should the coronavirus pandemic take hold)
