Posted on 01/06/2007 7:44:37 PM PST by blam
Diamonds are no longer a girl's best friend
By Chris Hastings, Stephanie Plentl and Beth Jones, Sunday Telegraph
Last Updated: 12:29am GMT 07/01/2007
Diamonds have been synonymous with Hollywood glamour since Marilyn Monroe declared them to be a girl's best friend in the film Gentlemen Prefer Blondes. But now a new generation of Hollywood stars is shunning the stones as a new film exposes the darker side of the international diamond trade.
Blood Diamond tells the story of forced-labour diamond mines
For the first time in the 79-year history of the Oscars, certain kinds of diamond will be absent from the annual prize-giving ceremony. Normally the awards, which will take place on February 25, are awash with sparkling stones, with some stars even choosing to wear them on their shoes.
But now many of the biggest names in Hollywood are asking agents and diamond experts to ensure they are not photographed wearing illicit diamonds.
The backlash against the stones has led to diamonds being dubbed the "new fur", as stars increasingly try to make sure that they are not wearing anything that might be regarded as unethical.
Leonardo DiCaprio and Jennifer Connelly, the stars of Blood Diamond, as well as Kayne West, the rap artist, the models Iman and Erin O'Connor – the face of Marks and Spencer – are leading the backlash. Blood Diamond, part of which was filmed in London's Hatton Garden diamond district, is set in civil war-ravaged Sierra Leone and tells the story of forced-labour diamond mining companies.
The success of the film, which has already opened in America and comes to UK cinemas at the end of the month, has led to an upsurge in demand for so-called conflict-free diamonds, which carry a certificate of confirmation that their trade is not connected with war, civil strife or human rights abuses.
Gaia Geddes, the jewellery editor at Harper's Bazaar, said: "You have the Oscars and Baftas coming up, and that's when the stars wear very big rocks. This year there will be a lot of focus on conflict-free diamonds and a lot of people will take a stand, just like they did with fur."
Connelly, 36, who plays a journalist in the movie, made a point of wearing "conflict-free" diamonds to the film's American premiere last month.
"I think what I got out of the film is a desire to be a more ethnical consumer," she said. "I did some research and there are companies like Bulgari, like Tiffany, that are striving to be clean and accountable and that provide written guarantees that their diamonds are conflict-free.
Iman pulled out of her contract as the face of De Beers
"No one is saying boycott diamonds but [buyers] can be pro-active and go to their jewellers and say, 'Can you show me a certificate? Can you give me a verifiable warranty that these diamonds are conflict-free?'"
Jane Fonda, the double Oscar-winning actress and friend of the film's producer, Paula Weinstein, has also revealed how she has made sure she only wears conflict-free diamonds.
African tribes in conflict with the diamond industry are actively targeting the world's celebrities in a bid to win them over. Last year, Bushmen in the Kalahari in dispute with De Beers wrote an open letter in Variety to DiCaprio, seeking his support.
Eileen Kelly, the manager of Abiba, a jeweller in Hatton Garden, said: "Recently we have had more and more customers come into the shop because of publicity about the film and ask where the diamonds have come from. We can say that we do not sell conflict diamonds. For the past year we have quite clearly printed on our receipts that our diamonds are conflict-free."
The campaign against the diamond trade had been building up even before the release of Blood Diamond. In 2004 Iman, who is married to the singer David Bowie, pulled out of her contract as the face of De Beers in protest at what she claimed was the company's eviction of tribespeople from their land in Botswana. In 2005, the actress Julie Christie joined a protest outside the Natural History Museum in support of the same tribesmen.
De Beers denies all the allegations levied against it in connection with diamonds. The company declined to comment last night, but a spokesman for the World Diamond Council, the representative body of the diamond industry, said: "We don't have any issue with the film. The important thing is that the movie is based in the past, in 1999, and the situation now is that the vast majority of conflict is over.
"The diamond industry contributes over $8 million (about £4.5 million) per year to local African economies, which helps to build schools, hospitals and provide employment."
OTOH, why aren't Russian diamonds considered to be "blood diamonds" too? The stinking Commies had blood dripping from their collective hands for generations.
As always, Hollywood is in the vanguard of what's most important: Feeling good about ourselves.
Fake diamonds make me just as happy,
and yes,
real diamons aren't rare at all,
not even a little bit...
Real alexandrite however, IS rare....
same with real padparadsha saphires,
pariba tourmaline, some corals,rainbow black pearls etc.....
Even an electric blue columbina zircon is more valuable in the right size.
Go for the stuff that appreciates in value every year!
Good for you. I like your attitude!
They can't wear diamonds. They can't wear fur. They can't be seen riding in an SUV, have to squeeze into a Prius. They can't eat meat. And with the Dems back in power, are gonna be taxed to death for the privilege of being p.c. celebrities.
Life is good.
DeBeers and the Russians were the world's main suppliers of jewelry diamonds, and they deliberately kept the price up. When wars broke out in some diamond-producing areas, the two oligopolists feared a crack in their oligopoly, undercutting their prices.
In a stroke of PR genius, they coined the term "blood diamonds." They could shut off the competition if they got the "good people" to spread their propaganda that "blood diamonds" paid for war. With this movie, it seems to have worked.
The worlds supplies of cut diamonds are controlled to keep prices high, there is no shortage of diamonds and in actuality would be affordable as fine cut crystal if the hoarded amounts were let out on the market.
If anyone wanted a gemstone of value consider the colored stones like rubies and sapphires, those are limited and do have realistic value, even amber is worth its weight in value.
Diamonds are overhyped just like a Rolex watch.
Not flawless color change alexandrite,
right now,
it's 8 grand a carat....and finding anything over a carat is
very rare.
Anything that screws deBeers is a good thing IMO.
All the conflict diamonds invariably come from former European colonies that were left with the basis for a fairly decent society. Most became corrupt basket cases. One country, Sierra Leone, that was able to beat back the sadistic terrorists, RUF, iirc, made the mistake of abandoning a military dictatorship too soon, and electing some quack UN type. The RUF immediately went on the offensive, and resumed killing, raping, maiming, and enslaving people. That's not to mention the absolute corruption of adolescents who probably will never be able to be integrated into any civilization.
Anyway, back to Brussels. I think it was Liberia that was doing about $10M a year in diamonds, and with all the conflicts, it shot up into several billion, since Liberia was the laundering operation for hiding the true source of "blood diamonds". All those old trading and smuggling trails from years gone by. Wink-wink, nudge-nudge.
YIKES...that's just crazy! About 40 years ago, you could buy a color changing, flawless, 2 carat stone, set in silver, for less than $50!
Your first link doesn't work. Can you repost it?
Joe, you're a genius.
I told my son the same thing when he was visiting for Christmas.
There seem to be a lot of naysayers belittling the value of diamonds. From an aesthetic point of view diamonds are the most beautiful of gemstones when cut and set properly. Criminal gangs and tribal warfare will exist over natural resources including gem deposits in underdeveloped nations until the end of time. So enjoy your ice.
I think you're thinking of another stone....
or maybe the big fakes that have been around forever....I've been a collector for a long time, and I've seen lots of the big fakes (I've got a nice doorknob) but finding a real one of decent size and colorchange is damn near impossible.
Real alexandrite has never been plentiful and it's never been cheap. Seriously, I have a tiny quarter carat that I got years ago and it was appraised as authentic.
Maybe you're thinking of the color change topazs or garnets?
Not I! I love my jewelry and don't care what the Hollywood idiots say. I also wear fur! :-)
all the stars and starlets can go back to wearing their red ribbons instead of diamonds .. a twofer!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.