It's pretty, fragile and perfectly acceptable for decorative use
- but a gemstone?
I understand where you’re coming from but it all depends on how you
define gemstone. If you stick with the traditional definition -
which includes rarity, beauty and durability - then you’re right.
But given the incredible variety of stones used by so many
contemporary jewelers to create high quality, high end jewels, I
would contend that this definition is no longer very useful. The
terms “precious” and “semi-precious” have also lost their usefulness.
“Precious” once referred strictly to diamonds, sapphires, rubies and
emeralds and “semi-precious” to everything else - from tanzanite,
opal, alexandrite and imperial jade to onyx, slate, obsidian and
petrified wood. The distinctions have become so blurred that these
traditional designations have rightly given way to the umbrella term
To me and, I think, the majority of the many designers working with
unusual stones in high-end jewelry, the term “gemstone” has become an
inclusive rather than an exclusive designation that embraces the
entire panoply of stones that are used to make contemporary jewelry.
If the stone functions as a gem, then it’s a gemstone. I really
believe it’s that simple!