There is never a reason to resort to the use of glue, except total
and complete incompetence.
I can think of two, Leonid. If asked to reset a stone into an
old/worn out or otherwise in dire need of repair, piece of jewelry,
and setting the stone properly would require rebuilding or repairing
the jewelry first, which would then cost more than the customer is
able or willing to pay. In such instances, sometimes, simply to
satisfy a customer who wishes a stone back in their jewelry and
doesn’t care if it’s permanent or well done… Well, then sometimes,
glue may be the only practical way to accomodate them. This does not
qualify as actual jewelry making/goldsmithing of course. But it may
be something that comes up in the course of being in the business of
jewelry work/selling/repairing, and the end result of satisfying a
customers request, with the understanding that it is not really a
good method and may be temporary, makes such a method practical and
acceptable. Unfortunate perhaps, but sometimes, the right way is
beyond a customer’s budget. This may often occur also in cases where
properly rebuilding a setting to properly allow resetting a stone
might cost more than the jewelry is actually worth. Examples might
include inexpensive silver jewelry… It is valid to say that the use
of glue is not a good method or the right method in general, but in
the real world, there are indeed instances where, for that particular
instance, it’s the best answer, even if not the best practice.
The second instance which occurs to me is in the “setting” of pearls
on posts instead of in prongs or bezels, or whatever. While the
classic method of splitting a post, ftting a tiny wedge, such that
when the pearl is pressed in, expansion of the post makes it
permanent, is nice, I can honestly say that in my whole career, I’ve
only seen this done in commercial jewelry a few times, and those were
old pieces. Everything else has relied on glue. Perhaps this is
simply an illustration of an industry that’s gotten lazy, but it
certainly is common practice.
Peter