Bracelet

The architecture of a jewel

This bracelet model exemplifies the new stylistic recommendations dear to the Union des artistes modernes (UAM), which referred to all fields of artistic creativity, including jewelry. Members of UAM advocated “new perceptions of volumes” such as “initiated by Cubism.” A piece of jewelry should “be envisaged as [an ensemble of] volumes in space and should be visible from every possible angle.” It “should not, therefore, be flat […] for [it consists of] a balance of volumes and planes providing the light with different rhythms with which to play.”¹Raymond Templier, “L’art de notre temps,” Revue de la Chambre syndicale de la bijouterie, de la joaillerie, de l’orfèvrerie de Paris et des industries qui s’y rattachent (Review of the Trade Union of Parisian Jewelers, Goldsmiths, and Associated Industries), (1928): 15. The term “jewelry architecture” was coined at that time.

Modernist jewels

Other pieces of jewelry, similar and contemporary to the bracelet shown here, borrowed even more literally from the language of architecture. This same notion of superimposed planes is seen in another bracelet where two metal blades of different dimensions, placed one on top of the other, are sectioned in the center of the piece and pave-set with sapphires. These creations, with their overlapping forms, plays of proportions and scales, and varied surface treatments, were seen as a Modernist jewelry manifesto, firmly placing Van Cleef & Arpels among the key players of this avant-garde esthetic.