I’m sure everyone here wishes the greatest possible joy to tennis star Maria Sharapova and her fiance, basketball player Sasha Vujicic. I know I do. I wish that to all couples in love.
And I certainly hope that she loves the purportedly eight-carat diamond ring she’s been sporting in honor of the engagement.
Now, with that out of the way, I clearly need to send a copy of Miss Manners to writer Chris Chase for penning this ‘whimsical’ piece on how Mr. Vujacic has cheaped out on the ring by not spending Chase’s estimate of Vujacic’s two-month salary. Chase estimates that two months worth of Vujacic’s salary comes out to $912,000.00, making the mere $250,000.00 he’s reported to have spent a pittance.*
Sigh.
We’ve been over and over and over this point here at Manolo for the Brides. Two months’ salary for an engagement ring is not etiquette. It was an advertising slogan for DeBeers. You know, the people who sell diamonds. Etiquette considers it painfully rude to even enquire as to the price of someone’s jewelry, let alone a piece so imbued with symbolism. Etiquette would also be appalled at estimating someone’s salary, even when it’s a matter of public record, for the purpose of shaming them into spending more of it. Seriously, these are things over which etiquette has a painful attack of the vapors.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: when choosing an engagement ring, the gentleman should consider the taste of his lady and the state of his bank account (and credit rating). The lady, given the choice, should be thoughtful of his wallet. Everyone else in the universe should just butt out. Er… with the possible exception of the jeweler who is sort of required if the ring is being bought new or adapted from a not-so-new source.
Besides, if Mr. Twistie had followed the two months salary ‘rule’ I would never have gotten the engagement ring I wanted. It didn’t cost nearly that much.
*(I know the article is meant to be humorous, but it’s still based on a crass assumption that needs to be deflated at every possible opportunity. Way too many people think that ‘rule’ is a real one, so I continue to tilt at this particular windmill.)
I agree it is very rude. If my husband had spent that much (not that i would have let him) i would have had a panic attack and said something like what about the house we want to build!?
Only $250,000? Why, that cad! Kidding, kidding. I didn’t get any carats of the diamond variety, and I was fine with that. As much as I like sparkly things, I liked being able to pay for part of the wedding and to put a down payment on our house more.
@Christa: I know I know! Cheaping out with a measley quarter mill???
Yeah, I think taking one’s personal priorities into account is pretty important when making a significant financial decision.
@Blossom: Of course, if your husband was making over five million smackers a year and your annual income was higher than his, the question of house vs ring might not loom quite so large. But it still would have been entirely between the two of you how you decided to spend or save the moolah. I would still absolutely have your back if you guys had decided to use a cigar band or that you didn’t need a ring at all, even if you could afford to buy Aruba between you.