Blinded by the Light

(or: Why every engagement ring you've ever seen is ugly)
Marcel Tolkowsky has a lot to answer for.
In an instance of apparent celestial humour, he was born on Christmas Day in 1899, an unsung messiah for the zenith of the material age. Just on the cusp of a new century, one upon which he was to have a profound and disproportionate influence. In keeping with the symmetry for which he is most renowned, in 1919 he published a PhD thesis containing the specifications for the ideal Round Brilliant Cut of a diamond. He defined mathematically the optimum number of facets, their proportion and arrangement so that 100% of the light entering a diamond was refracted and reflected back through the top of the gem, achieving the perfect amount of brilliance and fire from the perfectly-cut stone. In this pinnacle of the stone-cutter’s art, he unleashed a century of bling.
To be fair he was only a single leg of the triumvirate that destroyed jewellery in the 20th century, the other two being the perfect global marketing campaign by DeBeers, along with the mass manufacturers’ glee in saving weight and increasing their profit margin, earning more while selling the consumer less and less on an annual basis.
It has long been one of the subtleties of a master goldsmith that they were capable of fashioning a ring that could artfully hold a gem for the appreciation of the wearer while gracefully achieving a degree of discretion with their metalwork. This heavy and dense, hard to manipulate, stubborn and expensive material would twist and shine, letting the wearer’s notice slip and bounce off its surface, leading the eye in an illusion upwards and to the centre, to the only point of focus, that fabulous light.
The master craftsmen contented themselves with the quiet triumphs of beautifully articulated edges, degrees of taper, balanced weights, galleries and nuanced detail providing structural support for the centre stage actors above them. Their purpose was to hold the gemstone for its own beauty, their success contributed to their own downfall.
Like the signatures inside a Stradivarius, denoting the workers keeping the spirit of the instrument alive, for the most part the only people who would appreciate the subtleties of the craft were other fellow craftsmen and bench workers and, perhaps in the future, the discerning collector or the well-informed expert on Antiques Roadshow.
As the greatest monopoly of the century propagated the desirability of the diamond engagement ring, everyone had to have one. Production was put to the pin of its collar to feed the demand, and if you could save a fraction of a gram here, shave a little weight there, you could handsomely reward yourself at the end of the year’s work, shipping thousands of rings to the far flung corners of the planet. The achievement of the optimum amount of bling drew everyone’s eye. One casts a cursory glance at the setting underneath the gem, but with a sad selection of mediocrity, it isn't the fault of the consumer that they have dross to choose from. The trade, in its ease of stunning the public with sparkles, is guilty of gradually distilling the structure of the engagement ring until all that is left is banal muck which has lost all touch with the original motivations that defined its purpose. After all the character has been removed, one can only reiterate and simplify copies of copies for decades until there is nothing of substance left.
We are approaching the 100 year anniversary of Tolkowsky's landmark achievement. And while we have the benefits of his insight in the precious gem, I believe that the result has been the eventual reduction of the goldsmith’s art, for the most part, to an automatic regurgitation of thrice-chewed cud. While the hip-hop community flash as much as they can physically hold, and fashionable belles try for the largest size at the cheapest price, the diamond designed by Tolkowsky  stands foremost, as a shining shield to prevent the eye from discerning if there is anything of merit beyond its brilliance. Much of the grace, elegance, or reason that once underpinned the object itself has been lost.
Blinded by the Light
A Journal about craft and creativity
What is Make Believe?
Make Believe Manifesto
Make Believe is designed for serendipity, scroll down and see what tickles your fancy.

But – for those that prefer a road map ...
Susan Zelouf
Delectably Ed Bing Lee
Jennifer Flegg
Sermon in Wood
Daniel Defoe
Robinson Crusoe
Cormac Boydell
A Space Beyond Words
Eleanor Flegg
Becoming Real
Heidi Julavits
Lost Mittens
Nicola Gordon Bowe
Shaven Heads and Golden Skullcaps
Catherine Ann Cullen
When the Bough Breaks
Deirdre Sullivan
Meet the Nameless Thing
Roger Bennett
Liam Flynn
Glenn Hooper
Wee Chair
Catríona ní Mhurchú
The Rabbit
Toyo Ito
Three Transparencies
Pamela Johnson
100% Cotton
Joke Robaard
How Do You Repair a Weaving Flaw
The Rubber Bandits
Controversial Artist (demo)
Vona GRoarke
The Making of Porcelain
Carlo Gébler
The ABC Con
Hans Christian Andersen
The Shirt Collar
Guillemette Bolens
Turned Tangible to the Eye
Tanya Harrod
The Last Sane Man
Susan Maxwell
The Map is Not the Territory
Glenn Adamson
Enda Wyley
Solar Eclipse
Scott Coombs
The Tao of Letterpress
Make Believe Proclamation #2 
Aubrey Flegg
A Royal Court at Killaloe
Paula Meehan
The Pattern
Nick Harkaway
Joseph McBrinn
Exhibition Review Egg Fight: Yinka Shonibare MBE
Jessica Hemmings
David Wilcox
Costume and Narrative: Narrative and Clothing
Petrus Spronk
Art and Life
Anthony OBrien
Ice Age Art
Patrick Chapman
Sentient Glass
Grace Wells
A Cure for November
Eleanor Flegg
Troubled Light
Blinded by the Light
John Hutchinson
The Gift
Patrick Chapman
The Celluloid Angel
Gemma Tipton
Plates on Walls and Pots on Plinths
Freddie Robins
The Perfect
Roger Bennett
Grace WElls
The Coat
Thank You