Here is a pendant I made with a green tourmaline and three suspended pearls:
Pretty isn't it? I thought it was so tasteful and reminiscent of antiquity, I was proud of my work.Until I started watching Ugly Betty, see below:
Can you see it, that B with three pearls pendant under it? Did the stylist steal my idea? Or is my idea really that unoriginal and banal as to be featured on that paradigm of bad taste, my beloved Ugly Betty. I was mortified.So there I am watching The Other Boleyn Girl, and this is what I see:
Its the identical pendant as Ugly Betty wears. Can you believe it? I hardly can. While I was enjoying the movie, and am going to have to rent the DVD, I cannot watch on my computer it turns out, this sartorial touch is a bit suspicious. I mean if Ugly Betty is wearing the same thing, can it be historically correct? I doubt it. Makes me question the rest of the art direction on the movie, I have to admit. I am going to have to research 16th Century costume and jewelry in England to get a handle on it.What am I to do? Abandon the three pearl drops?
What dear reader do you think?

3 comments:
What a hysterical finding!!!
You should read Hackenbroch, Yvonne. Renaissance Jewellery - New York & Munich, Sotheby Parke Bernet Publications & CH Beck, 1979. Very useful book.
The pendant worn by HM The Queen, in that movie, is certainly incorrect, but the spirit of it is ok (not the proportion though). This 3-drop spirit is timeless, and you find it commonly in Roman jewellery - often with 2 emeralds and 1 pearl.
Hi Hadrien, thank you for your comments. My post was more a joke than anything else, I was so amused to see the same necklaces in Ugly Betty and the Boleyn girl.
I hope all is well with you,
tom
Post a Comment