Today I noticed an ad for a gold tone “cluster” necklace from a designer named Giunta, as part of a limited time collection. The piece, selling for around $60, is supposedly inspired by “art history and modern design”. Picture your typical chain, but with several other gold chains attached to either side, which cross the neckline in different lengths (almost as if you’re wearing 3 or 4 necklaces, but with just one connection). On these horizontal strands hang a multitude of round beads and flat, long shapes, in one big cluster-hence the name.
I wonder about things such as this; $60 is pretty pricey for costume jewelry, and for the same cost, a person can buy something with small, “real” gems or made from 14karat gold. It all depends on how a woman prioritizes her jewelry budget money. Would you rather have a few real items, or a lot of fun and inexpensive things? There are advantages and disadvantages of both, such as the luxurious feeling of possessing quality, versus having to get it insured. There is long lasting enjoyment and resale value, versus its upkeep-among other aspects. But every kind of jewelry has its drawbacks. What I thought I’d do is give you my opinions about ornamentation and rate them from 1-5 in my preference; hopefully this will get you thinking about your own jewelry style.
Pins-I’ve never really like wearing them myself. My mother was a big pin-wearer, and left me with more than I’ll ever know what to do with. Those that would never suit me have been given away, and others that are fairly timeless and unique, I've kept. Perhaps I may wear some day when I'm older. But I’m left with another pile which I’m not sure about, because they’re so kitschy they may come back into style and my daughter may get a kick out of them. (Do you may remember those big flowers and rhinestone clusters?) When news anchorwomen wear pins, they look so polished; when I wear them, I feel like they’re wearing me. I give them my lowest priority at#6.
Earrings-I can take them or leave them for the basic reasons that my hair is usually covering my ears, and they annoy me when I'm on the phone. However, for dressy occasions, I’ll go with small gemstones instead of hoops or dangles; I think that a hint of glamour, instead of in-your-face metal, is more alluring because it’s more of a surprise. I’ve also lost more earrings than I care to count. Therefore, they rank 5th place.
Necklaces-It seems that I am forever choosing necklaces whose lengths don’t go with whatever necklines I’m wearing at the moment, and so I end up changing them, or changing what may be hanging on them as pendants. I like the feeling of necklaces and the choice of styles, however, so I’ll rate them a 4. But I don’t like that some of the more delicate styles often break if they get caught on clothing, or become knotted. They rank number 4.
Watches-I don’t wear them at home, but always like to know the time when out. I’m not too picky, but I do prefer a mix of gold and silver tone for my watches. Since I see them as somewhat of a necessity, I’ll give them third place.
Rings-Rings used to be my favorite accessory until my fingers inexplicably swelled and I had to get my wedding and engagement rings cut off. They were resized, but now need a resetting, which I’ve procrastinated because my fingers continue to change sizes. This makes wearing rings more trouble than they’re worth, due to discomfort of one sort or another. Yet, I almost always wear at least one ring, if no other jewelry. They fall between the number 3 and number 2 spot, depending on how fat my knuckles are on any given day.
So that leaves, for my number 1 favorite-bracelets. I own many bracelets because I love having something around my wrist. I’ve some of my mother’s bangles, several beaded bracelets, a few with gemstones, and one that with inlaid turquoise that my husband bartered for in Mexico. They are the most user-friendly as far as I’m concerned, and rarely fall off. The worst thing would be the clinking when more than one bangle is worn, which annoys even me-so I no longer indulge.
What’s your favorite jewelry? Comment and share!
Here is wishing all of you moms out there a happy belated Mother’s Day! As I was going through the extensive Sunday supplements last week (it takes me awhile) something struck me much more than it ever has, and that is the preponderance of somewhat silly poses in which models are placed, probably per the photographer’s instructions. But the really funny thing is that it seems to depend on the store that’s sponsoring the fashion shoot.
For example, what rubbed me the wrong way-repeatedly, I may add-was Macy’s circular. It’s bad enough that they used girls who barely looked 18 in their Mother’s Days ads, with 4 year old kids placed next to them, but some of the poses looked just too extreme for anything a “mother” would undertake. First was a gal whose right hand was resting on her bare upper chest while she balanced on her right leg with the left bent at the knee and her foot sort of glued to her calf. Her head was tilted to the left, and, although not an outside scene, her long hair looked to be flying in the breeze. Um…OK. On the same page was a girl who was standing in a rather knock-kneed position (but with her feet separated), leaning to the right, with both arms sort of wrapped around each other and held along her right side. Now, I can’t even imagine doing that kind of contortion in dance class, let alone to show off a dress. Next I came across a lady standing with her right knee completely turned out to the side, with the foot of her toe on the floor, left hand on her hip, and right arm bent at the elbow, palm up. Actually, this isn’t too bad, but just think about it-when’s the last time you stood this way? What took the cake was the pose with two models that was probably as difficult to hold as it is to figure out. The one lady is leaning backward at least 30 degrees, supporting herself against the other model’s back. The one leaning had the added responsibility of keeping her knees bent, and, it appears, keeping all her weight on one foot as her one knee is lifted higher. The other model, for whatever hilarious reason, has both hands covering her mouth as she, also, balances on one leg with the other bent higher than knee height, with the foot actually wrapped around her other knee.
Have you ever in your life seen two grown women stand like that? It’s somewhat bothersome, to tell you the truth, like the ads are trying way too hard to promise gleeful happiness if only we buy their stuff.
So, curiosity peaked, I turned my eagle’s eye to the J.C. Penney’s magazine. Now, this was much more normal. Their models are either standing still, in positions we mortals can relate to, or in the midst of walking somewhere, sometimes even carrying shopping bags. I rather like that. It makes me feel that they’re really living their lives instead of just leaning on each other or standing on one leg.
From there I went to an Eddie Bauer magazine, which just showed up in my mail. OK; now we’re getting more reality. These models looked older, and a few even had some crow’s feet (although still very beautiful). It probably has to do with their audience and the price of their items, but I must say, they present their selections quite authentically. I saw a couple of models pulling ropes on their sail boats, one riding her bike (with the mussed hair and determined expression of a true bicyclist) and others who simply presented having a good time in a very unaffected manner. Three cheers for the folks in Eddie Bauer’s marketing/sales/advertising department-they got it right.
Women don’t particularly want to see cutesy poses, mirthful laughter, or arrogant stares. That does not put us in the mood to part with our money to have what the cutesy, mirthful, arrogant models have. Give us reality that we can relate to, but just a slight bit better. We’ll be much more apt to picture ourselves wearing what’s advertised.
