Worst Royal Jewels 2

[kimebear]

Well, if no one else wants the Danish emerald parure, I'll happily take it anytime!

 

[Lilla]

I can't figure out what the danish emerald parure is doing on a thread called "Worst Royal Jewels". To me this parure is incredible beautifull

 

[Thomas Parkman]

I could not agree with you more. The only reason I can think of is that we have yet another opportunity to drool and pant over such a marvelous concoction. of course there are no pictures that can do justice to any jewels of this quality.

BTW all of you who have disparaged the Burma ruby tiara need to go to picture of QEII at the banquet with President Sarkozy. The contraption is simply incredible. Unfortunately, being the computer mongoloid I do not know how to quote that citation here. But the whole ensemble is magnificent beyond words. I was sitting there drooling and eating every negative word I have ever said about it. I sat there thinking, well the Noble Warren has struck again.

You know good people, we really should form a Warren admiration society and send him lots of chocolate so that we can ruin and corrupt him. He does have a way of digging up the most wondrous goodies. And probably has the most gigantic storage barns in Australia for all the goodies he keeps hidden away. cheeers.

 

[jcbcode99]

Thomas, here is the link to the post Warren made with the photo--
http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/746639-post24.html

Now, I have to take a moment and comment about the Burmese. I think that there are times when the piece looks darn good--but more often than not, I find it unattractive. Not the stones, never the stones! But, the composition of the piece. It is supposed to be a rose in full bloom but it looks somewhat "flat" to me. I also think that the "swirls" or whatever look they have stuff shooting up from it--I've heard it described as antenna--and I agree. All in all, the piece just doesn't have any form--and by form I mean movement or continuity. It's just stones on a frame. The IDEA of the piece was beautiful, the drawing that the jewelers did before they actually made the piece is stunning--but the final piece just falls flat. I can only hope that the Hyderabad tiara wasn't sacrificed for this thing. I think it is just one of those pieces you have to see to appreciate.
In this pic, it looks nice:
http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/747630-post29.html

 

[PrinceOfCanada]

Hmm.. I don't think the Burmese belongs in here. It's not a spectacular piece of jewellery, and certainly pales in comparison to the Vladimir (probably my favourite) for example. Then again, pretty much anything pales in comparison.

 

[jcbcode99]

The Vladimir is my favorite as well--with the emeralds. A stunning piece of workmanship--and yes, anything would pale in comparison. But, like you Princeof Canada, I do think the Burmese does not belong here--it won't make the favorites thread because of the design (well, maybe it would, but not a post of mine!) but it certainly isn't the worse of the worse. Those honors go to the Golden Poppies and the Brazillian Aquamarine nightmare. Although you can't see me, I just want everyone to know I just shuddered thinking about the two pieces.

 

[Madame Royale]

I can't figure out what the danish emerald parure is doing on a thread called "Worst Royal Jewels". To me this parure is incredible beautifull

It's one of the loveliest parure's left in royal Europe...

 

[jcbcode99]

I completely agree. It looks heavy by itself but on it looks very delicate and graceful. It reminds me of CP Mary's ruby parue--are they by the same maker perchance?

 

[Stefan]

I completely agree. It looks heavy by itself but on it looks very delicate and graceful. It reminds me of CP Mary's ruby parue--are they by the same maker perchance?

Don't think so. They ruby parure was made early in the 19th century in France as it was bought by Jean Baptiste Nernadotte for his wife Desiree to wear it at the coronation of Napoleon I. in 1804. Amd accoding to Bjarne's book on the danish Royal Jewels there was no tiara at all, only a few hair combs. The emerald parure was made in 1840 by [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]C.M. Weisshaupt & Sons. [/FONT]

 

[Thomas Parkman]

Again the design of the aquamarine tiara of QEII is the problem. The gemstones themselves are magnificent. I think the earlier version of it was certainly more attractive. Whoever did the current one must have been drunk when he did it. The two worst are the Wurtemburg horror and the Poppies gone beserk "tiara" of QMII which for the sheer ugliness of it is in a class almost by itself. But the cough drop thingie of QSonaya certainly gives it a run for the money. Perhaps, for sheer silliness, the nine most frequent contributors to this thread should each submit a picture of him or herself wearing one of the poppies in the hair, on the nose, as a tie pin or a brooch just to see something that you would give anything to forget but cannot.

My favorites, since we are insisting on dragging everything into a jewel besotted mud here is the Fife and the Bagration tiaras. Fabulous beyond words. Cheers.

 

[PrinceOfCanada]

Those honors go to the Golden Poppies and the Brazillian Aquamarine nightmare. Although you can't see me, I just want everyone to know I just shuddered thinking about the two pieces.

I'll agree with you on the Golden Poppies. The only excuse I can come up with for that horror is that I choose to believe she had it made in the 60's, and everyone was on drugs.

But the Brazilian Aquamarine is underrated, I think. It's just that with pieces that huge, you need to be a fairly big person (taller, mostly) to pull it off, and you can't burden yourself with any other bling.

 

[PrinceOfCanada]

Okay, I thilnk I've just found a couple of EIIR nightmares..

Royal Collection - Dress for the Occasion What the hell were they thinking?

And this.. words fail me. I thought the Queen Mum had taste? Maybe it was George who picked it out.. Royal Collection - Dress for the Occasion

 

[jcbcode99]

I have to agree about that brooch of the Queen Mum's--the art deco piece. I read somewhere it's supposed to be a leaf, but other than the general outline, I just don't get it. I am not a fan of it at all.
But, the flower basket brooch--call me old-fashioned, but I really do like it. There is another one, seen in Field's book, of similiar design with some large diamonds composing the basket and I like it better. I need to find a picture so I can show you!

 

[vee]

I never thought I'd say that ANY jewelry could be hideous . . .

Well, so much for THAT!

This thread has some of the UGLIEST pieces of jewelry I have ever seen in my life!

 

[Thomas Parkman]

And the sad truth, good people, is that sado-masochists that we are we keep digging up more horrors. The gemstones in those little trinkets of EII really could I suppose be put to better use. But I guess they had to do something with them. Of course the flower basket brooch is a form that is centuries old. See the Jewels of the Tsars for some charming examples. One with yellow diamonds no less. Cheers.

 

[jcbcode99]

that is true, Thomas, the flower basket brooch does have yellow diamonds. I think it is a lovely piece--and as you said it is centuries old design--if it ain't broke......

 

[LadyCat]

I can't figure out what the danish emerald parure is doing on a thread called "Worst Royal Jewels". To me this parure is incredible beautifull

I have to agree. It is lovely. The photo of it on the younger Margrethe shows just how lovely it is. I have to admit I didn't care for the way the tiara looked on Margrethe with her hair slicked back into a chignon but that's a matter of personal perspective. As mentioned previously, it does remind one of Mary's (or should I sat Fred's ) lovely ruby parure.

Cat

 

[Warren]

Wondering where the tutti frutti posts have gone?
They are now in their own thread... Tutti Frutti

Why does this style of jewellery always bring to mind Carmen Miranda?

Warren
Royal Jewels moderator

 

[MARG]

Why does this style of jewellery always bring to mind Carmen Miranda?

Could it possibly be that wearing a piece of "Tutti Frutti" jewelry makes the same kind of statement as wearing a bowl of fruit on ones head?

 

[jcbcode99]

Well, I have a new addition that, in my opinion, is uglier than the Brazillian Aquamarines. I know, this is hard to believe--but at least the aquamarine's look ok sometimes. I cannot stand that ugly ruby swag necklace set in yellow gold that QEII wears. I really dislike it--it looks cheap and dated--like something a teenage beauty queen contestant would wear in the evening gown competetion. Why would she still wear this thing? She has at least two other GORGEOUS ruby necklaces at her disposal. It also fits to close to her neck--I just dislike this piece---
BelgaPicture - Category details
and that dress isn't helping, either.

 

[James in London]

I couldn't help strolling through the ugly jewels pages - and howled at some of the horrors contained within.

The ruby swag of QMII is hideous - you are so right. It looks so cheap and nasty. Like a drag queen's favourite bauble. And like many, I have always thought Burmese clunky, but I have a feeling the mighty Camilla could reinvigorate it. (In my previous office, The Queen was wearing it and Burmese in the stock pic of her we had up in our boardroom, and I was forever distracted in business meetings by sitting there trying to redesign both pieces to make them look halfway decent!) Mind, I'm not keen on that one with the three drops either, resembles the sign outside a pawnbroker. Why wear these when the beautiful George VI Victoria one sits gathering dust?

I think nobody has mentioned the George VI Sapphires. Now -don't get too excited, I love them, or should I say, loved, when they were longer, but I just think shortening them ruined the scale. And I have never loved the matching tiara either, can't put my finger on why - but I do think it has been commented on here before that the modern jewels commissioned by QEII haven't always been successful.

Controversially though - I love the aquamarines. I think especially now her hair is so white, they just dance about on Lilibet's hair, which must be hard, as I don't think it has moved in 40 years...

 

[Boris]

IMO, all three tiaras Queen Elizabeth had made for herself during her reign are, while not downright ugly, still complete flops.
The bad thing with the sapphire tiara remains that it looks like a (not too pretty) swag necklace turned upside down.
The ruby tiara has all the charm of those annoying, blinking Christmas lights some people put in their windows – to scare Santa Claus off, probably. A very plump design, in close up it’s one of the worst renderings of flowers I’ve seen in jewelry.
And the aquamarine one… the best thing about it is the Queen’s white hair behind it, because these days it blurs the weird byzantine chapel shape.
In the case of the aquamarine parure, the making of the tiara was really the undoing of the necklace. Removing its large, rectangular pendant to be used as center stone of the tiara and putting a bulkier piece in its place, with a far less delicate setting than the original one, threw the proportions of the necklace off-balance and quite ruined it.
I have to say that the avalanche of Arab jewels that went down on the Queen during the past decades shows better taste than her own commissions, and that’s quite a dubious achievement by our beloved Lilibet.
By the way, I don’t care at all for the Duchess of Cornwall’s hairstyle in combination with those whopper tiaras she's being loaned. Those strands of hair are whipped and sprayed into enough width in order to balance the massive tiara bulk, standing away from her head like a weird swirling halo - rather too much like a swirling halo of some Aztec sun God illustration.
The honeycomb and the Durbar tiara are screaming for an up-do instead, to put the emphasis up and behind them instead of below and around.

 

[James in London]

Gasp - I couldn't disagree more! Camilla's hair is perfect for these barbarian jewels - it's statuesque and balances then. Don't forget as well - if she had small hair and a smaller tiara, you'd see that she's is a lady d'un certain age, and I think that the whole thing together combines to make her look rather more youthful than she is. The proof of the pudding for me is that I hated the Boucheron honeycomb on the Q Mum, but love it on her. T'would be a dull world if we all loved the same things I guess.

 

[scooter]

Boris, I agree with your asessment of the poofy hairdo. I always enjoy and up do with a tiara. Such a classic style which not only shows off the tiara, but also gives something to anchor it to.

 

[jcbcode99]

I go back and forth on the Burmese Ruby tiara--sometimes it looks lovely, sometimes it looks hideous. I think it depends on the angle of the photograph. It is by no means a favorite (that honor is reserved for the Vladimir Emerald Drop tiara and the Girls of Great Britain and Ireland tiara, and the Persian turquoise tiara--actually, I could list about fifteen favorites so I'll stop right now before I get carried away). The sapphire tiara has always looked "off"--and I think Boris hit the nail on the head when he said it's a swag necklace turned upside down. It's has too many gaps in it. Lovely stones, but a less than excellent rendering of what could have been a masterpiece.
And, James in London, your comment about the ruby swag necklace along with the comment about that three drop thing were wonderful. I have tried to articulate my feelings about those two pieces for some time, but you nicely summed it up. I, too, adore Queen Victoria's ruby necklace. It's a pity the Queen Mother held onto it until she died. I keep hoping to see it on Queen Elizabeth's neck very soon. I simply do not like that swag thing--it looks cheap to me.

 

[Boris]

We might be used to Queen Elizabeth's short perm, permanently frozen since ca. 1950 or Camilla's poofy layers, but good hairdos to wear tiaras they're not. There's nothing like an elaborate hairdo to go with an elaborate tiara. (And to avoid any good ol' D. vs. C. controversy: Never liked Diana with a tiara either during phases when her hair was far too short to stick a tiara in.)
Anyway, a strange upside down necklace like the Queen's sapphire tiara remains strange, no matter what hairdo you might try to hide it in.
I couldn't agree more regarding the question which necklace to wear to divert attention from the dubious Burmese ruby tiara - the Victoria ruby necklace is far superior to any of the ones which have recently been on display, and so is the wonderfully delicate Greville ruby necklace, which the Queen has preferred to keep buried in the vaults for decades, for inexplicable reasons.

 

[Stefan]

The ruby swag of QMII is hideous - you are so right.

Which ruby swag of Queen Margrethe do you mean? Or are you talking about Queen Elizabeth II.

 

[James in London]

Sorry - I meant QEII, I'm getting my Queen's confused.

I do agree about a tiara needing a good up do - check Silvia and Princess Margaret in her day. But I think Camila's is as good a short do as any...

 

[iakynthi]

Most of them are not that elegant.I would choose as the worst the 2 tiaras worn by CP Victoria

 

[Boris]

Apart from the two 'button' or 'rosettes' tiaras (their current settings is only from the late 1950s, respectively early 1970s) which are deservedly (in)famous for being ugly, the Bernadotte collection of tiaras is absolutely the most beautiful of all, IMO.
And apart from matters of beauty, the Bernadotte parures which date back to the Empire are actually some of the most exquisite jewelry in the world in terms of craftsmanship.