BLING AS SOCIAL STATEMENT
In a time of stress, jewellery becomes armour
Since US President Donald Trump’s inauguration in January, Pamela Love has received more requests for pieces from her Dagger jewellery collection than any time since its introduction almost a decade ago. And Love, a New York designer, has no doubts about why her retailers and social-media followers have renewed interest in the fierce-looking, but harmless, miniature daggers dangling from earrings and necklaces.
“Women want to feel tough,” she said. “They want something that reminds them they are tough, and they want something that shows the world they are tough. It’s not about violence. It’s about feeling strong and protected.”
Jewellery, that peculiarly i ntimate accessory, has long been associated with protection, whether spiritual, emotional or physical.
“Clothing can be a form of armour as well, but jewellery is more personal,” said Hannah Martin, a designer in London. “You wear it next to your skin, and it imbues more of that strength than, say, a tailored jacket.”
Marion Fasel, a New York jewellery historian and founder of the online magazine The Adventurine, agreed: “It’s a history that stretches back to the dawn of time and across cultures, from prayer beads and amulets on.”
During a period when many think advancements in equal rights and civil rights are under threat, designers and experts say it is not surprising that women are turning to jewellery for a sense of safety and for self-expression.
“Women are reacting to the current sense of threat in practical ways, whether it be in protest at the Women’s March or in using design and crafts as a way of expressing it,” said Rebecca Arnold, a fashion historian with the Courtauld Institute of Art in London. Armour rings have been part of Lynn Ban’s collection since she started it in 2011. Ban, a Singapore native who works in New York, said she was inspired to go one step further when she was commissioned to create jewellery for Rihanna to wear in photographs for W magazine last September. Told to imagine the pop star as the last woman in a post-apocalyptic world, Ban created a claw-armour ring, an articulated design that stretches up the finger and ends in a clawlike pointed tip.
“It continues the theme of my signature armour ring but is even more protective,” she said. “It’s like a weapon.”
It is no coincidence, she added, that the design — US$2,800-$3,500 (96,000-120,000 baht) at Dover Street Market in New York — was created during a time of political flux.
“Revolution and social protest have always sparked intense periods of creativity,” Ban said. “Just look at the 1960s.”
For some, making a stand and expressing a political opinion may be as simple as wearing a feminist-slogan T-shirt, such as those created by Maria Grazia Chiuri for Dior’s spring 2017 collection and any
number of fast-fashion brands. Considering the price of fine jewellery, buying a gold ring with an overtly political message is a more costly proposition.
Two days after Trump called Hillary Clinton a “nasty woman” during the final televised debate of the presidential campaign, Wendy Brandes introduced her Nasty necklace, which spells the word in either silver ($300) or gold ($950). Since some customers wore the design to the polls and to the Women’s March in January, the New York designer said, the necklace has become her second-best-selling piece, with part of the proceeds going to Planned Parenthood.
Brandes said her customers do not perceive her designs (which also include signet rings depicting a raised first and the Venus symbol) as one-season pieces.
“They tell me they’ll pass them down to their daughters,” she said. “People are now realising that the fight for women’s rights and democracy doesn’t end.”
For Arnold, the fashion historian, such overt messages are a necessary precursor in any movement toward a more subtle, longer-lasting aesthetic sensibility.
“Initially you need the very obvious statement or jewellery, but underneath a more subtle idea of strength develops,” she said.
She added that the bold, minimalist jewellery offered by the French brand Céline, the Los Angeles designer Sophie Buhai and others reflects this deeper trend, harking back to the mid-century period when enormous societal changes for women were taking place.
“It was a time of very strong women designers and a very strong visual aesthetic in clothing and jewellery,” Arnold said. Those mid-century designers included Vivianna Torun of Georg Jensen and Elsa Peretti of Tiffany.
“Peretti once said, ‘I design for the working girl’,” said Fasel, the jewellery historian, adding that it was no surprise that “she created the Bone Cuff, a bold and accessibly priced piece of jewellery for the pants-wearing woman”. The bold form of a statement piece has been replacing the recent trend for layering multiple delicate jewels.
“Wearing 10 Cartier Love bracelets speaks to me of insecurity and thinking your body should be loved, and needing to show that you are loved,” Arnold said. “Wearing one statement piece seems more confident.”
Selecting jewellery as a means of self-expression (rather than for just the sparkle or an impressive carat weight) is linked to the fact that more women are buying jewellery for themselves than ever before, taking gems out of the realm of being a mere prettifying accessory or a diamond-bedecked gift bestowed on a woman.
“With women buying for themselves, it means jewellery needs to be marketed at women specifically,” Martin said. “The really overtly feminist designs will die down after a while, but I think the sentiment will remain.”
Martin’s own unisex collection has always been preoccupied with power and definitions of masculinity and femininity. When the singer of the British rock band Savages, Jehnny Beth, wanted to borrow jewellery for her recent performance with Gorillaz in London, she immediately selected Martin’s substantial and sculptural Possession and Orbit Super Size rings.
Martin recalled the performer saying: “It’s got to be these ones. They’re going to give me so much strength on stage.”
Products aside, jewellers have joined celebrities and f ashion designers as well as their own customers in talking more openly about their political beliefs. Martin, for example, expressed her anger toward Trump in an Instagram post the week after his inauguration. While most of her followers were supportive, she said, one Trump-voting customer responded angrily, saying she would not buy Martin’s work again.
The designer said she had not intended to offend anyone, but she believes it is important for businesses such as hers to tackle politics.
“The current situation has forced everyone to take a view,” she said.
Love, who has posted on social media about her participation in the Women’s March and support of organisations like the American Civil Liberties Union, agreed. With 180,000 Instagram followers, she believes it is her duty to take a stand.
“I’m not just a machine that makes jewellery,” she said. “I’ve spent the last 10 years building a brand and a following, and if I don’t have the permission to use this voice, then what is the purpose of it?”
Wearing 10 Cartier Love bracelets speaks to me of insecurity and thinking your body should be loved, and needing to show that you are loved. Wearing one statement piece seems more confident