The Vanguard’s Jewelry Collecting Commandments
There are questions—good ones—that inevitably arise when embarking on a jewelry collecting journey: Should I buy by stone or by design? By preference or by historical period? Is just really, really, really loving a piece enough? Great jewelry collections offer insight and answers. As does one of our most trusted jewelry sources: Claibourne Poindexter, senior specialist at Christie’s Jewelry, whose expert eye has seen it all. We asked the man who has acquired and overseen some of the most important auctions in the jewelry world to share some secrets from the vault.
“In my opinion, the most interesting collections consist of many different periods and makers, rather than being incredibly specific about era or theme. My ideal collector of today mixes Art Deco and antique jewels together with important diamonds and gemstones and makes it all look great. Marjorie Merriweather Post is a wonderful example of a model collector. She was buying antiques and new pieces from Van Cleef & Arpels and even George Headley, who was a contemporary designer in Marjorie’s life in the 1960s, after initially designing for Paul Flato much earlier.”
“How to develop good taste in jewelry? Read, read, read! I have almost every important jewelry book and auction catalogue from the last 50 years and I think that is an incredible foundation from which to build on before you collect anything. After that, you find one expert you can trust and rely on their knowledge, combined with your eye and confidence, to acquire whatever it is that you fancy. Once you have done that and really studied, then you go out and start to visit the auction houses and various well-known jewelry dealers, where you can handle and examine the best of the best.”
“The biggest mistakes when building a collection? Doing it all by yourself without having someone to bounce an opinion off of—or whose expertise you can rely on. I also think being too narrow in your focus can lead to great frustration. I have seen people who have fallen head over heels in love with a jewel but because it is not antique or it isn’t by Boivin, they “can’t add it to the collection.” That is such a mistake. Free yourself up—one focus is not terribly interesting for long and it gets repetitive and boring over time.”
“Interesting question. Not necessarily, although they are certainly a key part of any great jewelry collection that one could dream up. There was an era, namely the late 19th century, where signatures became very important, with firms like Giuliano and Castellani in Europe and Tiffany & Co. in America starting to use maker’s marks to identify their pieces. Before then, the antique jewels of the period were largely unsigned, even if they were produced for, or by, a great house. So if you want 18th-century pieces, signed jewelry is not something that is possible to collect. From the late 19th century onward, you start to get “signed” jewels. I believe that when given a choice between two jewels of equal quality, one signed and one not, you should always buy the signed jewel for more money. To have a certain maker’s jewelry almost always shows a level of quality and individuality of that particular house or designer. With that being said, a lot of jewels which were made by certain designers or houses were not signed. If I see an exceptional piece of jewelry that isn’t signed but has all of the quality of being from a great house, I will encourage a client to buy it if I think it is truly wonderful.”
“I think jewelry from the 1980s and ’90s is starting to come back in a big way. We have seen prices for Bvlgari jewels from that period skyrocket in the last several years so I think those have high future potential. I don’t believe in no-fail design periods because I have seen bad examples from each and every era—they exist and I don’t like to pretend that they don’t. If I had to pick a period, Art Deco in particular will always have a wide base of collectors, because it works so easily in today’s wardrobes.”
You Might Also Like
