From Jacqueline Kennedy to Elizabeth Taylor?

ShoppingTelly

Help Support ShoppingTelly:

Curiosity got the better of me and I went to look at them on QVCUS. 'Silvertone', 'goldtone' 'brass and silverstone' etc, simulated is a prolific word across the range, such a rip off for costume jewellery, no matter how well made (reading some of the reviews not so well made, a lot of damaged goods being sent out.) And in glaring letters stamped CHINA. The prices are extortionate, all for a name.
 
maymorganlondon said:
I used to really enjoy the Jacqueline Kennedy shows, as at least you had a guest who was allowed to get on with the job of presenting the products he represented. I think that he rather sugar-coated (to say the least) the relationships she had with both JFK and Onassis, and it was very romanticised, but he told the stories well. But it was fascinating to see the pictures of her wearing the originals of the items. He had a nice manner too - not harsh and brash. It really felt like a touch of glamour... rather like when Tova does her diamonique shows.

Elizabeth Taylor will be something, I imagine. Her originals will have been more proper jewellery, if the famous items represent what sort of thing we can look forward to, whereas Jackie Kennedy's original stuff it seems was often stylish costume jewellery using base metals and artificial stones (not so much eek as resin or plastic).
Click to expand...

I just noticed the thread, and whilst I totally agree with you on the gentleman who presented the Jackie range, and oh yes did he ever sugar coat some of the stories, but the fact remains that Kennedy and Jackie, despite it all did love each other very much.

The other thing is that both Jackie and Elizabeth had very very expensive items of jewellery with not a faux or paste among them, with the exception of jackie's pearls, many designers including Chanel never used real only faux glass pearls, but as for sapphires, diamonds and rubies you can bet your bottom dollar those two women only had the real (and highly prized) thing, but I've never purchased anything from the range, and won't purchase anything from Liz's range either, as i just don't want anything but the real thing.
 
ohnonotshoppingagain said:
I just noticed the thread, and whilst I totally agree with you on the gentleman who presented the Jackie range, and oh yes did he ever sugar coat some of the stories, but the fact remains that Kennedy and Jackie, despite it all did love each other very much.

The other thing is that both Jackie and Elizabeth had very very expensive items of jewellery with not a faux or paste among them, with the exception of jackie's pearls, many designers including Chanel never used real only faux glass pearls, but as for sapphires, diamonds and rubies you can bet your bottom dollar those two women only had the real (and highly prized) thing, but I've never purchased anything from the range, and won't purchase anything from Liz's range either, as i just don't want anything but the real thing.
Click to expand...

Do you really think so? How could any self respecting woman still love someone incapable of keeping it in his pants. The entire family would do anything that still was still breathing. No man would ever humiliate me no matter what jewellery he bought especially when she was more than solvent herself. Mind you she obviously had problems considering her next choice of husband.
 
Is it just me, or is £75 for a book about Dame Elizabeth Taylor's love of jewellery, a bit extortionate? One to keep, unopened, and the other for my coffee table.
As has already been mentioned, it is brass! At least diamonique is sterling silver. I am sure there are fans of her's, who will buy a piece, because she had one like it. In diamond and platinum.
As long as there are hero worshippers, to swallow this celebrity bumf, it will sell.
When my mum saw the range, the first thing she said was "she was married six or seven times", followed by "it looks rubbishy."
Paste and base metal = overpriced tat. imo.
 
I've had this on in the background, on mute. I have to say that Jill is working her socks off, but what she's got to work with is not particularly attractive jewellery, and definitely not what Jill would choose - based on what she normally wears when not doing jewellery shows... possibly the only redeeming point about this range is that it is raising money for Liz Taylor's Aids charity.
 
loveallthingsitalian said:
Do you really think so? How could any self respecting woman still love someone incapable of keeping it in his pants. The entire family would do anything that still was still breathing. No man would ever humiliate me no matter what jewellery he bought especially when she was more than solvent herself. Mind you she obviously had problems considering her next choice of husband.
Click to expand...

I agree.

If my husband ever even so much as thought about cheating on me, it wouldn't be cheap paste tat he'd be wearing for earrings, if you catch my drift. :mysmilie_17:
 
I don't understand why QVC persist with fashion/costume/faux jewellery (a couple of exceptions), when you can find stunning pieces on the dreaded high street. Even Primark, Asda, Matalan and Sainsburys have nice throw-away bits for a couple of quid if chosen well. Next and Marks have better quality for reasonable prices. Then there are lots of smaller on-line companies with bespoke or edgier pieces, still cheaper than Q.

Is it just poor buying, a reflection of the completely different US market, or are they having a rocky time of it ?

The only range I will watch now is Frank Usher's and that's partly down to June who is mad as a box of frogs and a real asset to that company. Butler and Wilson stuff has taken a wrong turn IMO. If it's too expensive to offer the quality and designs of a few years back, try a different approach. Instead of giving us big blingy items in really cheap tinny materials, let's have good quality smaller items, in quirky but wearable designs.

Lola Rose just doesn't appeal to me - I don't see that 'richness' and depth of colour I associate with semi-precious stones, they might as well be poppet beads as far as I'm concerned. Same with Honora. They have very few classic designs that "shout pearls" , they are more trendy, short lived styles.

I must be a real old fogey but I know what I like. My Mum, who sadly died last month age 92, had a fab collection of what she called costume jewellery that she built up before getting bogged down with home and kids in the 1950'. She was proud that Dad chose pieces for her too. Some 'paste', marcasite, semi precious, simulated pearls etc. All well made of good quality materials and stylish designs that would stand up today, 60 or 70 years later.
 
My condolences, Eric's Mum. You are lucky to have some lovely memories, and to have had your mum a good long while. I do think that there was more variety of costume jewellery in the past.
 
Good post Eric's Mum and condolences too. You have similar memories to me - aaaahh the poppet beads - I wore mine with big baggy sweaters and a pencil skirt. My Mum passed 7 years ago in her 80s and she clung to her costume jewellery since the 50's. Lots of dangly screw earrings - I still have them, and big flowery clip on's from the 60s.

I agree with all your comments, and Lola Rose to me, looks like good plastic. Whose to know its a s/precious stone unless you tell everybody; and Honora has for so long gone down the dyed pearl route that they don't look like 'pearls' anymore.
 
Just before the Christie auction Channel 4 did a documentary about her jewels. It was fascinating and showed many home movies and clips of her wearing her bling. It talked about each piece and people involved with the jewels were interviewed, as were fellow film stars and friends.
An interesting section of the programme said that Liz Taylor was far far wealthier than Burton, she could buy and sell him many times over and the most expensive pieces were probably partly paid for by Liz herself. She liked to trot out the tale that Burton had "bought" her such and such but the reality was, she`d paid the lion`s share herself. Of course he did buy her many jewels but the biggest most expensive pieces, the Taylor/Burton diamond for example, were sought out by Liz herself and the programme actually interviewed the guy who delivered the unset diamond to her in Switzerland and he ended up staying with them for several days because Liz really wanted the diamond but Burton didn`t really seem interested. In the end she got it but even though she contributed most of the cost herself, she wouldn`t actually commit to it without his approval so she could legitimately say he`d got it for her. I suppose many wives do similar things, buy a handbag for example and then say " oh look what you`ve bought me darling".
If you can find the documentary online, its well worth watching. It`s called Elizabeth Taylor Auction of a lifetime.
 
I had a quick peek, and I mean quick about five mins, neither the jewellery/guest or presenter appealed to me...
 
Vienna said:
Just before the Christie auction Channel 4 did a documentary about her jewels. It was fascinating and showed many home movies and clips of her wearing her bling. It talked about each piece and people involved with the jewels were interviewed, as were fellow film stars and friends.
An interesting section of the programme said that Liz Taylor was far far wealthier than Burton, she could buy and sell him many times over and the most expensive pieces were probably partly paid for by Liz herself. She liked to trot out the tale that Burton had "bought" her such and such but the reality was, she`d paid the lion`s share herself. Of course he did buy her many jewels but the biggest most expensive pieces, the Taylor/Burton diamond for example, were sought out by Liz herself and the programme actually interviewed the guy who delivered the unset diamond to her in Switzerland and he ended up staying with them for several days because Liz really wanted the diamond but Burton didn`t really seem interested. In the end she got it but even though she contributed most of the cost herself, she wouldn`t actually commit to it without his approval so she could legitimately say he`d got it for her. I suppose many wives do similar things, buy a handbag for example and then say " oh look what you`ve bought me darling".
If you can find the documentary online, its well worth watching. It`s called Elizabeth Taylor Auction of a lifetime.
Click to expand...

I slso watched that Vienna. I seem to remember that she made most of her money in the latter years from beauty products endorsement.
I also think that quite a lot of the jewellery came from the film studios as a sweetner or as an end of film gift for both him and her. I always imagined that that was how Tova got most of hers as nice and all as Ernie seemed to be he wasnt that big a star to buy jewellery for their entire married life especially in the latter years when he did no films at all worth talking about.
 
I just saw a 'ruby & diamond' necklace priced at OVER £500--WHAT? they were ooooing & ahhhing over the packaging, well you have to get something for your money.
 
Silver Fox said:
I just saw a 'ruby & diamond' necklace priced at OVER £500--WHAT? they were ooooing & ahhhing over the packaging, well you have to get something for your money.
Click to expand...

Lovely packaging? Well that's all right then! We can, of course, wear the packaging as well... :mysmilie_11:

They really do take us for fools sometimes.
 
I think we all like nice packaging especially if it is for a pressie but some people seem to prefer the packaging to what is inside it.
 
maymorganlondon said:
I used to really enjoy the Jacqueline Kennedy shows, as at least you had a guest who was allowed to get on with the job of presenting the products he represented. I think that he rather sugar-coated (to say the least) the relationships she had with both JFK and Onassis, and it was very romanticised, but he told the stories well. But it was fascinating to see the pictures of her wearing the originals of the items. He had a nice manner too - not harsh and brash. It really felt like a touch of glamour... rather like when Tova does her diamonique shows.

Elizabeth Taylor will be something, I imagine. Her originals will have been more proper jewellery, if the famous items represent what sort of thing we can look forward to, whereas Jackie Kennedy's original stuff it seems was often stylish costume jewellery using base metals and artificial stones (not so much eek as resin or plastic).
Click to expand...

I hear she had a good collection of wedding rings.
 

Similar threads

M
Fast fashion - is there anything we can really do?
2
Replies
33
Views
2,184
merryone
M
M
Am I boring you?
2
Replies
34
Views
3,037
stratobuddy
stratobuddy
M
Presents from your kids
Replies
10
Views
979
mediastar
M
L
And you thought QVC was just a shopping channel?
Replies
5
Views
2,133
yesilkedi
Y
Akimbo
Blast from the past - gadgets of yesteryear!
Replies
11
Views
2,470
Moth
M

Latest posts

Back
Top