Modern Design in Jewellery and Fans

Edited by Charles Holme
OFFICES OF 'THE STUDIO,' LONDON, PARIS, NEW YORK MCMII

JOHN RUSKIN has laid down some broad and simple rules which are especially applicable to DESIGN IN JEWELLERY AND FANS. He says, Never encourage the manufacture of any article not absolutely necessary, in the production of which invention has no share. And, again, Never encourage imitation, or copying of any kind, except for the sake of preserving records of great works.
It is in the thorough belief of the soundness or these principles that the Editor has selected a number of representative modern examples of design by British and Continental workers, which, from their beauty and freshness of treatment, bear testimony to the great advance that has recently been made in the right understanding and rendering of the jeweller's and fan-maker's arts. If articles of good taste are to be produced, there must be a demand for them. So long as a public is to be found that will purchase trinketry in imitation of wheel-barrows, cocks and hens, flower-pots, and moons and stars, so long will the advance in art be retarded.
The Editor has pleasure in acknowledging the courtesy of the owners of copyrights for their kindness in sanctioning the reproduction of important work; and his best thanks are due to all the artist-contributors, and especially to those who have made designs expressly for this publication.




FRENCH superiority in the art of jewellery seems to be incontestable to-day. No unbiased observer will deny the fact that with us there is more richness, more variety, more originality than can be found elsewhere; and the jewellery section in the Esplanade des Invalides at the Exhibition of 1900 showed to the whole world the progress made in this special branch of applied art by our craftsmen and our artists; showed, too, the verve, the imagination, the fancifulness, which are the special property of the French race in all that relates to articles of luxury, to those things which are essentially useless, if so we may term a woman's adornments; if so we may regard the beauty of precious stones, of enamels skilfully and subtly formed—of all that, in a word, which, taken from Nature's infinite treasure-house, serves to constitute that adorably vain, that exquisitely superfluous thing—the jewel. Ruskin once remarked, in his strange, penetrating way, that the loveliest things are those which are the least useful—lilies and peacocks' feathers, for instance. Furthermore, to depreciate the part played by jewellery in relation to decorative art would be equivalent to minimising the rôle of womankind in civilisation. Then, again, as regards decoration or adornment, has not the highest mission devolved on woman? Has she not had to assume the most active part in it all? The modern jewellery vogue has, I am convinced, done more in France to propagate new ideas in the way of decorative art than all the æsthetic theories ever evolved, however sound.