ChunkyCushionLover
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2009
- Messages
- 2,463
The new Wittelsbach-Graff
- Thread starter Lady_Disdain
- Start date
- Status
Pandora II
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2006
- Messages
- 9,613
Maybe I''m a philistine, but I don''t have a problem with Graff recutting the stone.
Historic jewels and gemstones have been broken up and recut since forever - why should it be any different now than in 1800. In 200 years time the new cut will be regarded as a historic stone as well.
I do admit that I''m the kind of person who likes to see things ''tarted up'' - for example if I go to look at a historic castle, I don''t get much out of a pile of ruined rock - instead I like the rebuilds where the original parts are preserved and the new bits done in a slightly different colour so that I can see what the castle would have looked like. (Lol, wouldn''t think I had a background in archaeology - my tutors would shudder I''m sure!
)
Even there, you get problems as so many things evolve over time with changes here and there - just how far back do you go for the ''original''? There are buildings here in London where Roman mosaic floors were found when they were carrying out rennovations - however there were two or three layers of mosaic as when the family got bored or fashions changed they just built a new one on top. If you were putting the building on display, which mosaic should you leave in place? The earliest? The latest?
Graff is also no fool and I would expect him to take the business of a recut very seriously - especially since there is likely to be a degree of outrage!
Historic jewels and gemstones have been broken up and recut since forever - why should it be any different now than in 1800. In 200 years time the new cut will be regarded as a historic stone as well.
I do admit that I''m the kind of person who likes to see things ''tarted up'' - for example if I go to look at a historic castle, I don''t get much out of a pile of ruined rock - instead I like the rebuilds where the original parts are preserved and the new bits done in a slightly different colour so that I can see what the castle would have looked like. (Lol, wouldn''t think I had a background in archaeology - my tutors would shudder I''m sure!
Even there, you get problems as so many things evolve over time with changes here and there - just how far back do you go for the ''original''? There are buildings here in London where Roman mosaic floors were found when they were carrying out rennovations - however there were two or three layers of mosaic as when the family got bored or fashions changed they just built a new one on top. If you were putting the building on display, which mosaic should you leave in place? The earliest? The latest?
Graff is also no fool and I would expect him to take the business of a recut very seriously - especially since there is likely to be a degree of outrage!
- Status
Featured Topics
300x240.png)