Not a classic….
Was reading the other day about what a classic jewelry wardrobe should contain: diamond stud earrings, a good strand of pearls, a good watch, pearl stud earrings…. They’re all certainly serviceable for most (but not all) women. But it reminded me of the feedback I had when someone read one of my scripts several years ago. “Not a complete waste of time,” she wrote, “but not a classic, either.” It made me think that if ever I was to start my own production company, it would have to be called “Not A Classic Incorporated”.
I love good basics, like the pearls and yes, diamonds. But I’ve come to love them sort of twisted – the Mikimoto Pearls in Motion, whose pearls slide up and down a chain and can be worn in different configurations. A spindly stick of gold set with tiny cubic zirconia, with a slightly larger one below – the look of diamonds without the price. My favourite watch is a Swatch set on a mesh sterling band – I get a ton of compliments on it, and it’s hardly “good” in the sense of Cartier or Hermes. But it’s great in that it goes so well with the other silver bracelets I wear on the same arm and, with the face of the watch on the inside of my wrist, is usually mistaken for another bracelet.
I used to think only gold could be considered classic and then became enamoured of silver. Like this fabulous Antonio Pineda sterling cuff with a pearl …. It practically demands its own airspace when wearing it because the wing juts out a good three inches. But it’s fantastic and classic in its own way.
So … classics or not? In 2008, what defines a classic? I love pearls, have a couple of simple strands and some more outrageous, gumball sized ones. Fake diamonds, real ones. Good watches and ones that are slightly naughty. How do you define classics in your own wardrobe, or do you shun them completely? Inquiring minds want to know…