I wonder how much the American preference for huge rocks has to do with the saturation-level coverage of celebrities. If you see stars' massive rocks all the time, do they almost become your peer group in your mind? Suddenly 1-2cts seems pretty reasonable when most of the rings in your mental universe are 4 or 5. Most other countries I've been to do have one or two celebrity rags, but not the wall-to-wall coverage that I saw in the US. Celebrities just don't seem to ping so high on Europeans' radars, to make a sweeping generalisation.
Here in Hong Kong diamonds are very much something working women buy for themselves - all the advertising is aimed at career women. Engagement rings haven't really caught on here - off the top of my head I can only think of one HK Chinese friend who wears one (and she's married to a Westerner) - plain wedding bands are still very much the norm. Most Western expats (me included) are still very attached to ours, though! It's interesting that when you walk past a jeweller in the UK, Australia or the USA, often 80% of the stuff in the window is rings, but here there are a lot more diamond necklaces, earrings etc, and solitaire rings are a fairly minor part of the display.
great shots, though I admit that horse Alice band thing made me laugh out loud. I wonder if those pictures answer the original question of this thread - excessive bling and Starbucks/fried chicken are both thought of in France as VERY American.
I was thinking about this more after I posted. My theory is that the diamonds-are-something-you-buy-yourself mindset ties in very closely with the broadly Asian belief that jewellery is a useful way to hold back-up hard cash in case you fall on hard times. In the West the relationship with jewellery seems to be a lot more sentimental - maybe that's a result of the fact that the West has been largely peaceful for the last 50 years and that wars are something that happen overseas, even if they're involved.
Asia has many horrendous upheavals and wars well within living memory (WW2 on home turf - Malaysia, Singapore, Burma, China, Japan etc, the Vietnam war and its illegal incursions into Laos, Korea, the Cultural Revolution, Cambodia, the Tamil conflict in Sri Lanka, to name a few), and these cultures still have strong memories of the horrors of being a refugee. I think this means that there is still a very strong memory that economic systems can collapse, and it's prudent to have some portable wealth.
Most HK people my age (20s/30s) have at least one parent who fled Mao's Cultural Revolution. They had to pack up what they could carry and sneak across the border past armed guards in the middle of the night. I can't see many mothers who did that saying to their daughters oh! what a lovely engagement ring, and of course you'll never, ever part with it as it's a token of your everlasting love. They're far more pragmatic.
Originally posted by eyecandygirl Can I just add that in Malaysia/Singapore color is certainly the most important 'C'. A hint of yellow is enough to bring a sneer from round the table (sad but true). Generally the priority here would be color, carat, clarity then cut.
You are generally right in your assumption.
People generally have in their mind priorities starting with colour and then size.
Recently, however, there has been a sad trend with the major consideration being Cost. Hence the growth of low-quality diamonds from cut-price chain stores.
However, what they should REALLY by considering first is Cut. Without a beautiful Cut quality, your D flawless diamond would become a lifeless "white" rock.