Do the English, Europeans and Scandinavians find bling vulgar?

[bunnymother]

Here's a nice, tasteful question for you...

I saw the other thread asking about the value of people's wedding, engagement and eternity rings, and it got me thinking that quite often I notice big diamonds on American and, to a lesser extent, Australian women, but not so much on English, European and Scandinavian women. The people I am thinking of are all high earners (or married to), so its not to do with money. I am assuming its to do with taste/preference?

[Tex111]

In the US the engagement ring should cost 2-3 months salary so it's a real status thing that reflects on the man's financial worth. It's also seen as a measure of the man's feelings for the woman something big & showy is expected. I know women who chose cubic zirconia over real diamonds because the man couldn't afford one big enough.

[Onesleeptillwembley]

Not being judge, tex, but if it shows his love why have something fake? I don't get that at all.

[Apatite1]

That's very sad tex11, but yes, I know many conform to this "rule". I really find it distasteful to equate money with love.

[squoosh]

There's something depressing about buying a big lump of cubic zirconia hoping that people will think it's a diamond and therefore think your beloved is acceptably wealthy.

[mrscumberbatch]

Excuse the generalisations, but I have found in my experience that:

The British and American trends for the last 20 years has been for flashy modern settings. This has stalled somewhat in the last 5 years and there is now a lot more 'heritage fashion' trends and so the emphasis has been on heirlooms. Meaning that those without heirlooms have been looking at vintagey styles or less glassy cuts on their stones.

It's interesting, I often wonder if the lean towards 'heritage' is out of necessity as with many being financially squeezed there is more of a tendency to accept hand me downs or, in this case, second hand/family jewellery.

Scandinavians are spoiled for good and clever designers. They are more about 'the ring' in general rather than a stone. The whole thing has to be complimentary and simple (although usually deviously difficult to fabricate )


There are always exceptions to the rule of course!

[Fantasyfootballfan]

I don't agree on their being more interest in heritage pieces at all, certainly not where I am. Lots of my friends and family have inherited rings from their husbands grandparents and have then had them reset into a modern style, nobody has kept the original ring. The fashion appears to be to bling up the original single stone ring, usually for a 40th birthday or 10th wedding anniversary with a pave setting around the original stone to make it bigger.

[Slongette]

My engagement ring is a tasteful and not over the top and sits perfectly with my wedding ring....

On the other hand I have a whopper of a ring - We inherited the diamonds and I feel that if you have something that beautiful you should wear it! So I do and it's well bling (also known to wear animal print!)

[coffeeinbed]

I don't do bling.

[Financeprincess]

Re the royal family, upthread: I'm not sure that I'd describe their jewellery as subtle now, but Queen Mary was renowned for absolutely dripping in jewels. A sycophant said, "she wore jewels superbly, in quantities that would make any other woman look vulgar".

She was also renowned for admiring other people's bling, pointedly, so that they often donated it to her as a gift!

[NinjaKangaroo]

I come from a Russian and Georgian background. My family in both places love bling. I don't!

[ShyGirlie]

Really dont like bling. Would definitely prefer something simple and elegant which is high quality. Im old fashioned though!

[TheJumped]

Love a bit of sparkle.

I detest the snobbery sometimes on MN, the 'new money' thing. Saw it on the Chanel bag thread, seeing it in a more subtle and thoughtful way on here.

If you're rich, why not enjoy it? Whether that's subtle Dior bags or enormous diamond necklaces. Whatever makes you happy.

[Snowdown]

I love my ring - the diamond is apparently exceptional and certified - I don't really care though, I just loved the simple design of the ring the minute I saw it, I don't think bling or not bling ever entered my head, I was too loved up!

[SmashleyHop]

I'm American- quite happy with my simple, elegant engagement ring. Hubby designed it for me, so I find I love it more since he went through the trouble of attempting to be artistic. :) I only know about the area I'm from, but last I checked it was simplicity and quality that was trending over the big garish diamonds. Most of my friends wether they had money or not had simple rings- the largest of which was only a karat. Can't vouch for my British in-laws though. My SIL has a whopper of a ring so I always figured it was down to individual preference more than place of origin. Maybe there is something to it though.

[SecretWitch]

I've lived in the US for over 20 years and always laugh when people on this board talk about Americans. My circle of friends here have excellent quality diamond rings or only a plain gold wedding band.

[bunnymother]

I think I'd have liked Queen Mary: she was also instrumental in saving some of England's stately homes, as well as loving her bling.

It is interesting as to why some people don't like bling (large stones, lots of stones, let's just simplify it as bling). Some of the reasons make sense re Post War austerity carryover, reactions to a corrupt and opulent church etc, but some of them also read as disapproval for reasons of snobbery. When someone suggested to Elizabeth Taylor that her ring was vulgar, she gleefully agreed that it was and wasn't it great!? Or words to that effect. I like her approach: she liked what she liked and she pleased herself.

[bunnymother]

Actually, I shouldn't have implied that there was snobbery on this thread. It's been a reasonable, fascinating thread, and I've enjoyed everyone sharing their views.

[TheJumped]

It hasn't been nasty snobbery, but it crops up a lot ime on S and B and actually all over MN. You know, the whole 'real proper rich people drive battered old cars and have tiny old tellies' type thing. I'd rather have a Range and a huge eff-off telly ta

[bunnymother]

Well, here's another question: do you think people intend to be snobbish or are they just responding with their ingrained attitudes which, upon evaluation, are due to class based snobbery? In other words, is it so innate to view things a certain way that you aren't even aware that you do it or why?

And maybe I need to get back into a gripping book instead of posing endless questions on MM

[maggiemight]

No bling in California as far as I could see - though didn't visit LA.
No jewelry much at all in fact.

[BlessedAssurance]

Scandinavia here- and no bling. Very much looked down upon. Some even use their gold engagements ring as wedding rings. The rich guys try not to stand out too much maybe something to do with the dreaded "Janteloven".

[BuggersMuddle]

What constitutes blingy?

From some threads I've been involved with, the very idea that a man would spend more than a few hundred quid on an engagement ring is abhorrent. The woman is being bought / she's a gold digger / love trumps all and all that worthy pish.

Then there was a comment upthread about 'only a carat' (likely to cost thousands if decent quality unless inherited or you're lucky at a jewellery auction).

Giant bags and obnoxious Michael Kors fake gold watches are ubiquitous in the UK. I think they're blingy, but they're fairly cheap I'd say it's less tacky to have a Cartier / Rolex / Omega, even though it's clearly far more expensive. It's a more understated look.

For me bling is about size or an ostentatious style, rather than how much money you spend.

[Tweet2tweet]

Let's just hope a lot of the 'bling' bought isn't conflict diamonds.

I actually heard an interesting story once. Apparently the price of diamond is artificially high. That's because big jewellers like Debeers buy large stocks and then set the supply, making them seem rarer than they are. Other stones such as opals, which I find beautiful, are less popular because of negative marketing by companies like Debeers in times past. There was a campaign run that opals were considered unlucky, there is no truth to this. Debeers ran it as a campaign to prevent the demand for diamonds going down in the 1800's I believe.

So I suppose what I'm saying is that it's down to taste and personal choice. However I find the modern set diamond ring quite samey, an antique one, especially Art Deco can be stunningly though. I have an Edwardian one, imperfect, yellow diamond but my husband and I found it in small jewellery arcade and thought it had character and was perfect. Cost relatively modest amounts compared to some but it is special and reminds me of the day we found it.

[AfricanExport]

I don't do bling.. just my wedding band

HOWEVER

I have reached a point in my career where if I want to move up the next rung of the ladder - I need to get me some bling. So 9ct gold Russian diamond rings are being investigated (can't be asked to spend real money on it ). Also have to suit up and get a mulberry bag..lol. It's all about image.

I realise that sounds crazy mad. But If you walk into a boardroom in London there is a fair amount of bling, although I think it's bling with purpose. I.e. If I can afford these rings I must be fucking awesome and worth loads. I think it works as well.

[TheJumped]

Bunny - I don't think people mean to be snobby, they genuinely do think they're superior to the sort of people who enjoy more ostentatious and obvious fashion or displays of wealth.

Which deserved pointing out sometimes I think. I don't like snobbery, it shouldn't be an issue. And it's so disingenuous too - trying to make having money some sort of exclusive club - old or new, it all stinks