Issue date: 2/22/08 Section: Opinion

Media Credit: Fred Lambuth [Click to enlarge]

In America, little girls grow up dreaming of the day when their knight in shining armor will get down on one knee and present them with a big, shiny diamond ring. Eighty percent of American brides receive diamond engagement rings, which average $3,000. Though the widespread popularity of diamond engagement rings may imply some sort of long-established cultural tradition, it is a relatively new custom based on expert marketing. For consumer culture to function, it is necessary that people be willing to spend money on things they do not need, and perhaps do not even want. Their willingness to do so depends on how successful manufacturers are in creating meaning for their products by equating some abstract human experience or reality with the consumption of a certain product. There is no better example of this than the diamond engagement ring.

A diamond is forever; or, at least, it has been for the previous 70 years. The exchange of diamond rings does not come from some ancient tradition, but rather became widely popular because of brilliant advertising by De Beers.

In the 1930s, De Beers executives were faced with a tricky challenge: extending the demand for expensive jewels. As so many people get engaged at some point in their lives, equating diamonds with engagement, and thus love, presented an excellent opportunity to do this. Now infamous ads implied that diamond gifts are not just pretty jewelry, but declarations of love. Additionally, because diamonds are expressions of the love they represent, size matters. Successful ads sought to convince Americans that a man who doesn't sacrifice enough to get the biggest diamond he possibly can fails to adequately love his fiancée. The best way to get some poor sap to shell out a few months' salary on a rock is to persuade women that he should.

A De Beers ad displaying a gargantuan diamond engagement ring alongside the caption "She already knows you love her. Now everyone else will too," embodies the consumption that motivates such an irrational expenditure. Another De Beers commercial in which a man screams, "I love this woman!" in a crowded street before presenting her with a ring further drives home the point: nothing shows the world the extent of your love like spending an exorbitant amount of money on a lump of crystallized carbon; the bigger the better. By manufacturing a relationship between love and diamonds, corporate interests have generated a compulsion to legitimize and consummate love through the presentation of diamonds.

With this link firmly established, the marketing possibilities of diamonds need not stop with engagement. The 25th anniversary ring says, "I forever do." A pendant with diamonds arranged from smallest to largest symbolizes the growth of love over time. The circular diamond pendant represents the endlessness of love. Really, these pieces of jewelry have no meaning save what ad executives convince us of, a task at which they have been remarkably successful.

We want diamonds because we are taught to, despite numerous reasons to consider better alternatives - like price.

Diamonds are expensive because of their scarcity, right? In reality, diamonds are plentiful. However, the manipulation of markets by major players masks this. If all of the diamonds in existence made it to market, the market would be flooded and prices would plummet. Diamond cartels prevent this through the control of production and distribution, which allows them to control supply. At present, De Beers alone controls nearly two-thirds of the diamond trade, and owns one-half of the mines in the world.

Despite recent efforts to reduce dealing in diamonds that fund conflict or terrorism - termed "blood diamonds" - these attempts are not perfect. Because of the adept business dealings of organizations that mine and sell diamonds to fund crime, there is simply no way to be certain that a given diamond didn't literally cost someone their hand. Research on the part of the consumer helps reduce this possibility, but choosing an alternative eliminates it altogether.

Finally, given the complex and individual nature of love, why should our physical expressions of it be so uniform? There are plenty of gemstones other than diamonds, and there are artisans who specialize in making custom jewelry. A unique, specialized alternative to the diamond engagement or wedding ring makes much more sense for the most widely recognizable symbol of a couple's commitment to each other than a mass-produced piece of jewelry similar to that of countless others. When you run into someone wearing the same shirt as you, it can be frustrating; how much worse to see a near-replica of the symbol of your union on someone else's hand?

Diamonds and engagement go hand in hand only because a lot of people have spent a lot of money to convince us that they do. This engagement season, those of you preparing to make it official should question the high price of conformity and consider the alternatives.

Amanda Kiser is a senior sociology major

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools