The ring was inspired by the stone, a tourmaline, which had several interesting properties—the most interesting of which was its ambiguity. So dark as to be almost like jet, it suggested a Victorian gem. Yet in light the stone flashes green, bringing in another dimension. The fact that the stone was exactly as long as a finger is wide immediately suggested that it should go into a ring, set crosswise. But how to embody its contradictions? The stone suggested an earlier age, yet was still clearly Modern. My interest in the transitions mentioned above challenged me to make a ring which would systematically embody elements from each, yet still work as a unified whole. Again, the piece is concerned with the transitions to modernity, and embodies elements of these transitions: I have selected several such transitional points: The beginning of Modernity in the Renaissance, the consolidation of industrialism in Victorian times, the formalisation in design of the ‘Modern’ in the thirties and the Art Deco movement, and the brief triumph of the Modern in the sixties.  The notion of ‘turning corners’ became prominent at this point—I decided to represent these transitions by setting the various elements at 90 degrees from each other, along the axis of a box. In this way I could embody the metaphor of historical transitions. The ring is in the shape of a ‘60’s ‘box ring’, using the stone to determine proportions. The setting, however, incorporates the Deco detail in the claws (barely visible below). To represent the Victorian, I chose the foliage work typical of the Arts and Crafts movement, which was itself an attempt to come to terms with Modernity without losing what its theoreticians (particularly William Morris) sought—the integrity of hand craft. This detail was pierced into the shank. The scrollwork typical of high Renaissance rings (ca. 1500 - 1580) appears in filigree work set into the sides of the bezel (below).