Amidst the whole debate over the ethics of the global diamond trade that is explored in the new Leonardo DiCaprio film Blood Diamond, this basic question often gets lost. How did they become the norm for the about-to-be-married couple? What is it about those particular gemstones, which are notoriously hard in structure and (perhaps) even harder on the wallet, that makes them so desirable in the first place? And what does it say about you if you really want one? Or really don't?
So, to address this question, TIME.com's executive producer Cathy Sharick and I have agreed to a friendly e-mail debate. We come from opposite ends of the diamond engagement ring spectrum, and it won't take long to figure out which of us is on which side. By the way, neither Cathy nor I is married... yet.
I first had qualms about diamonds when I was about 10 or so. I remember holding my grandmother's hand and noticing that her wedding ring did not look like what I thought a ring should be. It was a large light blue stone. She couldn't even recall what kind and didn't seem to care. I asked her why she didn't have a diamond ring, and she replied that when she married my grandfather, people didn't give each other diamonds.When I realized that the tradition of the diamond ring stemmed from a very deft advertising campaign, I grew suspicious of their place in our society and their hold over young couples in love. After all, we were taught as kids that we should not go out and buy a Big Mac every time we saw a McDonald's commercial. So how did adults get so duped by the diamond industry's marketing that they thought they had to buy one or else their relationship wasn't worth it? To me, a diamond had become a giant gleaming commercialized cliche rather than a symbol of love
No comments:
Post a Comment