What to do with an heirloom that never gets worn?

[swingirl]

That is a beautiful ring and although you might not like its style the next owner may. But if you change it, it won''t be an heirloom from your great grandmother any longer. I don''t car that much about a stone that was in the family but a ring that sat on someone''s finger is meaningful.

 

[Gypsy]

Here''s my opinion. My grandmother loves jewelry, but we have completely different taste in pieces. And she has given me quite a few pieces, and will be giving me more.

There is a ruby and diamond set (earrings, pendant, ring) that she gave me with many marquise cut rubies, and some truly UGLY diamonds in it. I have worn it before to make her happy. But it would make me much happier to re-set the set. When I told my mother she said that ''then it wouldn''t be your grandmother''s set''. And well, I agree it wouldn’t be her set... But whatever I made it into (rubies by the yard necklace is the intent), would be ''hers'' in my mind because it would be reminder of her everytime I *happily* put it on.

I would DEFINITELY get a second and probably a third opinion on how much damage that setting would sustain if you removed the stone from it. But if the damage can be repaired... I would reset the center stone so that I could happily wear the reminder of my heritage. I wouldn''t set the setting with anything else though. I would have it repaired and leave it empty so that if someone in the future wants to re-unite the set, they can.

Personally, I understand saving things for future generations... But what if you do pass it down, and THEY re-set it? And you''ve deprived yourself from years of enjoyment for no good reason.

My grandmother reset her mother''s engagement ring into a pendant (cluster ring with large oval center, they saved the head with the clusters but turned it into a pendant), and you know what? She refers to it as her mother''s necklace now and wears it all the time. When it''s mine, I''m planning on having the stones removed from their setting, re-polished, and then made back into another pendant.

If you look at the British Royal family they re-set things and alter settings on items (notably tiaras-- see royal jewels thread) all the time. And they are still considered heirlooms with all the historical significance attached to them as the original... Plus a little more history added as a result of the current incarnation.

 

[brgirl]

When my mother passed away, my sisters and I decided to take the small diamonds from a bracelet she had and incorporate them into necklaces for the three of us. For us, the decision of whether to keep the bracelet intact was a no-brainer because only one of us could keep the bracelet; the three of us could share the diamonds if we reset everything! So if you do decide to reset the center diamond, and the setting can''t remain intact, maybe you can use the other jewels in the ring and have them reset into something else as well? They also offered to melt down the gold in my mom''s bracelet to use in the new pieces, but it was yellow gold vs white gold, so we didn''t end up doing that...but that could be an option, too.

 

[Odilia]

Date: 11/16/2007 1:51:11 PM
Author: movie zombie

Date: 11/16/2007 11:50:40 AM
Author: Ellen

Date: 11/16/2007 9:12:01 AM
Author: MissPrudential

I had inquired with regional jeweler who deals with lots of antique jewelry and he said he wasn''t too confident that he could take the centerstone out without damaging setting. He said that for a different stone to be set into it, the prongs would likely need an overhaul. I really love the centerstone for it''s chunky brilliance but the setting just isn''t my taste.

I understand all the sentiments about preserving it for future generations but I have three other great family rings that I intend to keep intact. I''m really divided... because I love the stone and want to wear the stone... just not in the current setting.

So, I say, (after careful consideration) do what you need to do to make it wearable for you. It''s your ring, you should be enjoying it now. Life''s too short.

Miss p, the pricescoper who suggested a color stone replacement for the center stone and thus ending up with two heirlooms is an interesting concept....if it can be done w/o damaging the setting but if not, i''d let it be. .... i don''t know about the rest of you pricescopers but as i''ve aged my taste in jewelry....as well as many other things.....has definitely changed. perhaps sitting on this project for a year or two or three will clarify things for you. ..... so my compromise is support for changing the center stone to color but only if it doesn''t damage the setting. it is, of course, your ring and heirloom and so it is your decision as to how to proceed. good luck!

Although I was/am with the crowd that hates to see you dismantle it, I agree with this last part by MZ - even though I would have a tough time changing it because I''d feel bad taking that beautiful ring apart, IF I could do it without damaging the setting (like others said, get a second opinion), I''d try to leave the original setting as pristine as possible, so a future ''inheritor'' could either put a color stone of their choice or whatever in. But also like she said, your taste may change later. But if you really love the stone, I don''t blame you for wanting to use it in a setting you would wear. I also agree with her last statement: "it is, of course, your ring and heirloom and so it is your decision as to how to proceed. " I was thinking that if that diamond was in a hideous setting, probably no one would think you were obligated to keep it that way, just because it''s an heirloom!

p.s. to Ellen: I clicked on your thread, which I didn''t see last year. Did you ever post the "after" pics? I''d love to see them!