(i'm not going to lie and say there hasn't been a time in my life when i thought it would be nice to receive them [for what that meant] or buy them [for what that implied]. but that was some time ago, before i understood a thing or two [including myself]. and for sure, i've been influenced by the aesthetic of my sister, who sees the divine in raw and tumbled gems and burnished metals--basically things that aren't perfect and shiny and showy...)
i read this article last week, "have you ever tried to sell a diamond?" by edward jay epstein (from the archives of the atlantic magazine) and it is truly fascinating history--how diamonds came "to be," how their value and symbolism were crafted through advertising, all commissioned by a consortium. there was a moment while i was reading when i felt a little proud of myself for not being a "diamond girl," but then i also thought, ok, i wouldn't exactly throw them back if someone gave them to me. a few lines later, i read a whole paragraph (on page 4) about "the surprise factor" and how a woman's semi-passive role in accepting diamonds resembled male-female roles in a victorian novel, reflecting notions about sex and innocence. bah! they think they know me? now i will give them back. politely, of course.
take THAT ayers, yankelovich and debeers.
it's creepy, but an important read for the sick psychology of advertising. it's certainly relevant today, and applicable to other commodities and products.
***
***
i wanted to post a video of frank sinatra and antonio carlos jobim performing "baubles, bangles, and beads" (my favorite version of that song) but i didn't have any luck finding it.
but i'll share this anyway because the sigh-factor with the sinatra/jobim collaboration is just so high. change partners sets a wonderful scene.
and...quiet nights of quiet stars...sitting close, sharing wine and just listening to that song is worth more than...
