Create a New Hope: Vote on a New Setting for the Hope Diamond
Thu, Aug 20, 2009
| Written by: Gina Buchanan
Mystery of the Hope Diamond, News, Pop Culture, Smithsonian Channel News
The Hope Diamond celebrates 50 years at Smithsonian’s Natural Museum of Natural History with a wardrobe change. Harry Winston, Inc. has designed three new settings and we’re calling on you to decide which design should win.
Designers at Harry Winston have created three new settings for the Hope Diamond. It’s up to the public to choose the winning design.
The three new designs are stylish, they’re fancy, they’re modern and stunning…but it’s up to you to decide which setting will make the Hope Diamond shine. Since Harry Winston donated the striking gem to the Smithsonian, he was essentially donating the big, blue beauty to the American public. Therefore, it’s only fitting that America decide the new setting. We’ve already chosen our favorite; leave a comment below and let us know which design is your favorite and why it should win. Or, do you think the Hope is perfect just the way it is? How do you think these new designs compare with the historic setting?
CLICK HERE TO CAST YOUR VOTE. VOTING ENDS SEPTEMBER 7TH.
Once the votes are collected, the winner will be announced and jewelers from Harry Winston will begin creating the new piece. While the new setting is in production, the Hope will be displayed au naturale, out of its historic setting, at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History. Once the new design is complete, the Hope will slip into it’s new temporary setting and be placed on display for a limited time. That’s right, temporary. We’re not trying to change history here, just a little sparkling celebration.
In the buff. While awaiting it’s new temporary design, the Hope Diamond will be displayed out of it’s setting.
We’re well aware of the infamous Hope Diamond curse and agree that the gem should return to its iconic historic setting. Our film crews are busy documenting the whole history of the Hope Diamond in an upcoming documentary scheduled to air in spring of 2010. Along the way we’ve collected stories of curses and the tragic tale of the Hope’s most famous owner, Evalyn Walsh McLean. If the Hope truly was the cause of all her troubles, maybe we shouldn’t tempt the fates. What do you think? Will all of this excitement stir up the curse of the Hope Diamond!?!
Tags: Hope Diamond, Mystery of the Hope Diamond, Smithsonian Channel HD
August 22nd, 2009 at 11:45 am
I think you should leave it as is. The new settings are trendy and it seems like a silly publicity stunt to change the classic setting it is in. I wish you’d reconsider.
August 23rd, 2009 at 1:18 pm
Please do not change the present setting of the Hope Diamond. My opinion, and my vote, is that it be left alone in its present setting…not reshaped in any way, just cleaned and repaired if necessary.
Thank you.
Liza West
August 24th, 2009 at 3:07 am
What a Lovely Piece of Beauty. It Could Help the Entire World.Guess I’ll Have To Be Lucky Enough To Win the Mega Millions Lottery Myself To Afford Such a Piece From Mother Earth. I Wonder Which Part of the World it Was Dug Up and Stolen From ? Wonder if it’s a Blood Diamond From Where the Slaves Were Stolen From and Sold To Many Other Countries ? How Else Did the Rich Become Richer ? Guess They Didn’t Have Insurance Policies Like In W W II. How Else Did Their Families/Relatives Got So Rich ? By the Deaths of Their Brothers/Sisters and Mothers/Fathers.That’s Why Now Insurance Companies Won’t Sell Policies During War Time To Soldiers In War Zones or Peace Keeping Missions ? So the Rich Can’t Steal From Everyones Heartache.That’s Why It’s a Hope Diamond. So You Can Hope Your Son/Daughter or Husband/Wife Comes Home Alive and Safe and Not Mentally Distraught Either.
August 24th, 2009 at 3:16 am
could the 3 new settings be more…um…unsettling? Lame. That is spelled L.A.M.E.
Choose elegance…not these amazingly poor designs. The Hope diamond deserves way WAY more
August 24th, 2009 at 6:45 am
What is wrong with the original setting?
This is the setting we all know.
This is the setting that it was donated to the museum and the public with.
Why change it now? Does it really matter? No one wears it. It sits behind bullet-proof glass.
Why must we always have the desire to change things. Leave the stone and the setting as it is.
August 24th, 2009 at 7:15 am
Why Not just Leave Alone, The Setting It’s In ,Is A part Of the History
August 24th, 2009 at 7:46 am
Thumbs down on all three designs for the Hope Diamond. If diamond can not be placed back into a historic setting such as the French Crown jewels, then leave it the same as when it was donated. The stone has brought thousands of people to the Smithsonian. Why mess with a good thing for the 50th anniversary at the Smithsonian.
August 24th, 2009 at 7:58 am
I think the setting should remain the same. It is historical and should not be changed. Please do not change it.
August 24th, 2009 at 8:08 am
I like the symmetry of the third setting– looks royal. But, I must say, I have always loved the classic Harry Winston setting that it is in, and felt it was a bit sacrelige to change it. I’m okay with a temporary thing, but– I’ll always dream of it in that setting.
August 24th, 2009 at 8:13 am
Why on earth would you change or even want to change the setting? It is HISTORY the way it is. Would you change the Star of Africa’s setting too? It is one of the worlds most famous and recognizable diamonds, change the setting and it becomes just another big diamond, you might as well cut it up or sell it! I remember seeing it when I was a boy on a trip to the Smithsonian, it was one of the highlights of my trip.
I always thought the main idea of the Smithsonian Institute is to preserve and protect History, the way it was, not to change it. Leave the setting alone. Thank you for your time. Jim Pauley
August 24th, 2009 at 8:23 am
What are you thinking?
The setting is perfection the way it is, not to mention the historical perspective would be totally lost.
I “Hope” that this change is strictly temporary !!!
August 24th, 2009 at 8:54 am
Leave the setting AS IT IS. The simple border of white diamonds exalts the blue stone, while leaving the focus intact. The new designs are garish, much like painting Lindbergh’s Spirit of St. Louis bright orange. It would be better to concentrate on the environmental presentation of this magnificent piece, much like some of Tutankhamun’s artifacts were displayed on tour.
The Hope Diamond’s setting has become recognizable in the historical legacy created.
August 24th, 2009 at 8:55 am
Although I think the three designs are stunning, they are not for the Hope Diamond. The present setting, in its simplicity, allows the diamond to be the focal point and yet enhances the beauty of this stone. The three new designs do not do the diamond justice.
August 24th, 2009 at 8:59 am
PLEASE!! Leave the Hope Diamond as is!!!!! There is no need to mess with history and perfection.
August 24th, 2009 at 9:18 am
I must say that, having seen the Hope Diamond at the museum, at first the idea of changing the setting was very upsetting to me. The current setting allows the Hope to shine without overpowering it. On seeing the new designs, I just feel that the settings are too much and would not allow the Hope to be as prominant and show off. I am please to see now that it is only a temporary setting. I believe that the current setting definately shows off the Diamond beautifully.Thank you.
August 24th, 2009 at 9:40 am
I prefer the design on the far left as it envelopes and showcases the diamond, making it appear more special. I am very happy to hear this is only a temporary setting.
August 24th, 2009 at 10:10 am
My hope is that the diamond retains it’s original setting. I can not image that England would rework the crown jewels.
August 24th, 2009 at 10:14 am
The first of the 3 designs seems to be the most fitting to me. The way the platinum (at least I hope its platinum) cradles the stone while enhancing the shape and color, is stunnnig.The design will show off a womans neckline to perfection .
August 24th, 2009 at 10:19 am
Those designs are awful! Please leave the diamond as it was. Isn’t it bad enough in this country we tear down historic buildings and don’t value history…now items preserved in museums aren’t even safe?
Is the item on loan from Harry Winston and this is why all the fuss?
August 24th, 2009 at 10:25 am
Leave it alone
August 24th, 2009 at 10:26 am
Why change it ?
None of these three designs is even worthy to be considered, in my opinion. Of course one might want to honor the former owner’s firm with the creation of a new design, but actually no Winston even works there anymore. So, why not an international competition ? Many jewelry designers might participate, even me, and with pleasure. Finally a serious challenge.
And, why hurry ?
August 24th, 2009 at 10:29 am
Our store read about remounting the Hope Diamond today. We are absolutely appalled that anyone would consider destroying this extraordinary masterpiece that has so much history behind it, it’s absolutely beautiful as is! Why would you want to change history? The three designs are not nearly worthy of this diamond, simplicity & elegance, how it is mounted currently is the way to go. Our age here at The Jewelry Station ranges from 21-70 years. There are 7 employees. Please do not change this great creation.
August 24th, 2009 at 10:41 am
I think it should be left in the setting it is in now. The new designs are not worthy of the beautiful diamond. Why upgrade the setting to a modern setting? The diamond is a part of history, its not MODERN!!! Its timeless and it needs a timeless setting. A simple setting to show the diamond, not flashy, which is how I see the new designs.
August 24th, 2009 at 10:56 am
I was shocked that the Smithsonian was even considering changing the setting of the Hope Diamond. It’s the most famous single diamond in the world. The Smithsonian wouldn’t update any portraits, Neil Armstrong’s space suit, dye Lincoln’s hat, or change anything else.
Just because the majority of the voting age population voted for change in 2008, this is one change I can’t believe in.
August 24th, 2009 at 10:59 am
The original is, by far, the best! Please leave it!
August 24th, 2009 at 11:00 am
If you are compelled to alter Hope’s setting (which is completely insane), these three settings are unforgiveable choices! All three reduce one of the world’s most breathtaking pieces of jewelry to costume choices from a 1980s Dynasty episode. For pity’s sake, leave Hope as she is- historical and exquisite!
August 24th, 2009 at 11:03 am
I have to agree with many of the other writers. The original setting is lovely the way it is. I have seen it that way at the Smithsonian, and it was much more exquisite than any of the choices you have. Please don’t change it.
August 24th, 2009 at 11:17 am
I think the hope diamond’s current setting is better than three new options.
August 24th, 2009 at 11:32 am
I like the elegance of the setting in the middle. I think changing the setting and direction of the stone temporarily is an exciting idea and will allow visitors to view the stone in a different dimension. It will bring more viewers and attention to its 50th anniversary. I am a person who very much likes tradition, so I’m glad that it is temporary and it will return to its original setting.
August 24th, 2009 at 11:38 am
Please do not reset the Hope Diamond. It radiates royalty and class in its current style.
August 24th, 2009 at 11:40 am
Although a novel idea to drum up business, the setting should be left alone. It is too risky to alow someone to remove a stone that we are quite sure is the real and risk having a fake put in its place.. will there be oversite? Furthermore in its orriginal setting it means more.. Would you take the jewels out of a pharoh crown just to see what they look like in another setting? It sounds fishy to me..
August 24th, 2009 at 11:56 am
Please DO NOT change the Hope Diamond’s setting in any way even if it is temporary. Why mess with perfection ??!!!! None of the three choices do this famous/infamous stone justice……it is legendary as is and to distub the integrity of the stone or it’s setting does not seem proper to me.
August 24th, 2009 at 11:58 am
I agree with everyone who says that the diamond should remain in its original setting. These new designs are gaudy and detracting. Leave it as it is.
August 24th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
I like the first setting that frames the hope in an almost botanical looking frame. It is beautiful and graceful. Nothing should be suspended from the hope. Remember, they said it will be returned to the original setting and this is a temporary change.
August 24th, 2009 at 12:42 pm
I must admit, I too love the original design. However the “original” design was really the one created to suit Evelyn McLean. Are there any images of the real original design still available? How about recreating the design that actually graced the throats of royalty?
August 24th, 2009 at 1:11 pm
Who’s responsible for the dumb idea of changing the setting? You want to take a stunning setting that makes the stone the centerpiece, not to mention loaded with history, and make it into some gaudy necklace where the Hope looks like an afterthought.
While you’re at it why not change the Washington Monument or maybe the Wall or maybe……
August 24th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
My initial reaction is shock that any significant amount of money can be spent on such a frivilous enterprise. I am one of the innumerable who are suffering deeply from loss of job, loss of stock income, imminent loss of home, and resultant loss of health. The sight of this headline literally sickened me.
August 24th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
The “original” setting provides a beautiful frame for the Hope Diamond and puts the viewer’s focus where it should be - on the Hope Diamond. The new designs draw the eye away from the Diamond; that is a disservice to its beauty.
August 24th, 2009 at 1:53 pm
HARRY WINSTON GOT IT RIGHT!!!
LEAVE IT ALONE!!! ALL OTHER DESIGNS DETRACT FROM THE HOPE ITSELF!!!
TOM BIRMINGHAM
August 24th, 2009 at 2:24 pm
I would like to see The Smithsonian add the choice “Orginal Setting”. Let us see how many people would rather it just stay the way it is.
August 24th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
I vote for choice #4–leave it in the traditional setting. These new designs are distracting and do not do justice to the stone.
August 24th, 2009 at 3:33 pm
Don’t worry, we like the Hope the way it is as well. That’s why the diamond will go back to its historic setting after the public has a chance to view the Hope in a new light. The Hope will be displayed out of its setting for a limited time and then in the new setting only for a limited time. As curator Jeff Post explains: “How often do you have a 50th? We needed to have a celebration”.
Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/53596307.html#ixzz0P81tROaV
August 24th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
Although the three choices are all quite nice, the real question is… in a time of economic hardship, why on Earth would you even consider spending the money to change a Classic Setting? If you want to get rid of that much money, then pick several American families who are in the process of loosing their homes and donate the money to them. Such a stupid waste of money shows a total lack of understanding of the current economic hardship that is currently happening to Americans after the excess spending of the previous administration, the bladent theft of capital by corporate executives, and the lack of concern by the right wing of this nation in regards to the fate of the common man.
August 24th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
Leave it alone. The Diamond is beautiful the way it is. Think of some other way to make money, but leave the Hope Diamond alone. It’s History and does not deserve to be desecrated in such a mannor. Please, please, do not change the setting.
August 24th, 2009 at 4:40 pm
It is timeless and priceless in its present setting. There is no need to change it in order to celebrate its history.
August 24th, 2009 at 4:46 pm
Leave the Hope Diamond as it is. The three designs diminish the beauty and elegance of the piece.
August 24th, 2009 at 6:48 pm
There are things that can be celebrate over and over again without being change; the sky, the sea, Beethoven’s Fifth Symphony, Egypt’s Great Pyramids,… Changing the Hope Diamond setting? Please, don’t. None of the proposed settings do justice to this spectacular blue diamond. Let it be.
August 24th, 2009 at 7:27 pm
I have to agree with the above comments. When and if the setting is ever changed, the goal of the designer should be to achieve Timeless Beauty… not an update to present fads..
August 24th, 2009 at 8:10 pm
Alas, the new setting, unlike the diamond, isn’t forever. After a limited-time, the diamond will be returned to its original, historic setting. Even the team at Harry Winston can’t argue with that logic. “I think the setting is part of the heritage, it’s part of what the Hope diamond is today,” de Laage says.
Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/A-New-Chapter-in-the-Hope-Diamonds-History.html?c=y&page=2#ixzz0P9Wj9hWu
I am VERY glad to read that this is not permanent.
August 24th, 2009 at 9:30 pm
Please do not change the setting! The current setting shows off the color and size of the Hope Diamond beautifully!
It’s about the stone, not the setting, so the simple and elegant way it is presented right now is perfect!
August 24th, 2009 at 10:00 pm
I also want to cast my vote for choice #4….leave the original classic setting intact.
August 28th, 2009 at 3:56 pm
The Hope Diamond is not just another piece of jewlery….it’s a part of history. Change for the sake of change is never a good idea. Ask Coca-Cola what happened to “New Coke”. We don’t need a redesigned Hope Diamond.
August 31st, 2009 at 6:21 pm
None of the three settings presented show the diamond at its best. Compared with the three new designs, the diamond’s current setting is much better. A classic diamond needs a classic design. If the setting is going to be changed (even if only temporarily) the setting must enhance the diamond as much as (or more) than the original setting. Also, why choose only one firm to design the new setting? There are many creative jewelry designers –why not allow them to have a go at the setting?
September 2nd, 2009 at 10:32 pm
The Hope has been reset and recut many times in it’s history. It’s a great read.
Didn’t the video say the new setting is only temporary anyway? After it’s exhibited it’s going back to the original setting, the same one it’s been in since the days of Evelyn McLean.
I just loved Journey of Hope.
September 4th, 2009 at 4:07 pm
I love the first setting with the ribbons holding the hope. I do prefer the original design, but seeing as it will be returned to the original seting people should not be so upset. It represents a renewal of hope!
September 4th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
This elegant diamond in the original setting at the Smithsonian is breath taking. It is the most gorgeous jewel in our history. Do not change it. The new designs will detract from this beautiful gem. I believe most people love it as is.
September 5th, 2009 at 9:49 am
I agree that the original setting is very elegant. Since we are voting for a temporary change, I would select Embracing Hope.
September 7th, 2009 at 7:27 pm
I am glad that the Smithsonian has allowed a peice of history to be given a new TEMPORARY!!! look and allowed the public to choose how it it be displayed. I will enjoy seeing everyone’s choice and enjoy it when it returns to it’s original glory… Girls like change.. even HOPE ! It has sparked a renewed interest for the Smithsonian for me, some of the other areas could use updating and a little change..to reflect our ever changing world…. Thank You Smithsonian!
September 9th, 2009 at 2:27 pm
It is beautiful and classic as it is. None of the new settings do it justice.
September 19th, 2009 at 9:20 am
Please leave it alone! Seeing it was wonderful. Its beauty shines, don’t distract from it.
September 20th, 2009 at 3:06 pm
PLEASE LEAVE IT ALONE! simple settings are best for jewels, especially something like this. All the settings you have offered only overpower it. Please please please leave it alone.
September 23rd, 2009 at 1:17 pm
while the original setting is beautiful, i love the new proposed temporary setting (left). it showcases the actual Hope diamond and adds a sense of grace. the original setting sort of overwhelms the actual Hope stone, but is still a classic design. i also think by having a new alternative temporary setting, the Smithsonian is re-igninting america’s passion and fascination with history’s relics.