How and When a Piece becomes a Classic? Spotlight Artworks by Klimt02.

The other day, they were talking on the radio about Piscou (Scrooge McDuck), explaining why he is considered a classic.

A classic is something that endures through time without ever losing its impact.

This raises the question: is that really the sole criterion for something to be considered a classic? Together with the editors and founders of Klimt02, we asked ourselves this “existential” question: How and when does a piece (jewellery in this article, but this could apply to anything) become a classic?

The first names and pieces that came to mind were the ones everyone always mentions: Gold Makes Blind by Otto Künzli, Pearl Grey by Manon van Kouswijk…
Then Amador noted that it might be more interesting to focus not on the works already universally recognised as classics, undeniably so, but on those pieces that have yet to achieve that status and have the potential to become so.

But what about pieces that have not yet achieved classic status?

Each of us undertook the exercise of selecting a piece by an artist that, in our view, should become a classic. By collecting our responses and comments, we tried to uncover the why. What qualities, criteria, or methods ensure a work never loses its relevance? And how might a personal (and therefore subjective) selection reveal shared principles?
By cross-referencing our answers, we aim to respond to the question: When and how does a piece become a classic?



Amador Bertomeu’s Choice: Julia M by Julie Decubber
Julie Decubber. Brooch: Julia m, 2020. Earthenware waste by ceramist Julia Morlot, stainless steel. From series: Tessons Exquis


   >> More about this artwork    ON SALE    and the author  


Why This Work Matters:

Julie Decubber’s piece crystallises multiple artistic influences, engaging with other disciplines and artistic languages, bridging jewellery, sculpture, and ceramics through a reference to Julia Morlot. The reuse of ceramic waste evokes Arte Povera, while its formal clarity, rhythmic repetition, and use of white resonate with the aesthetics of 1960s–70s minimalism (Donald Judd, Carl Andre). Its modular, relief-like surface recalls modernist and brutalist architecture, further enriching its conceptual depth. The work is radical and conceptually articulated, demonstrating awareness of historical precedents while actively questioning the present. It encourages dialogue across disciplines, engages viewers across generations, and reflects critically on the values and criteria that define artistic significance. The brooch is part of the artist’s research series Tessons Exquis, demonstrating genealogy and continuity within an ongoing project, situating itself within a broader lineage and bridging past and present.


Julie Decubber. Brooch: Julia M, 2020. Earthenware waste by ceramist Julia Morlot, stainless steel. From series: Tessons Exquis


Leo Caballero's Choice: Signet Oval by Esther Heite
Esther Heite. Ring: Signet Oval, 2019. Stainless Steel From series: Gebraucht


   >> More about this artwork    ON SALE    and the author  



Why This Work Matters:

Esther Heite reinterprets the classic and well-known form of the signet ring, redefining its construction by deconstructing it. Historically, the term “signet” refers to a small seal, traditionally engraved and used to seal letters, papers, and important documents by the upper echelons of society. For this reason, signet rings were often associated with gentlemen, carrying a legacy of authority.

The work embodies universal, timeless human themes transcending age, culture, and trends, while demonstrating perfect execution and a complete command of the medium. The choice of material and technique is particularly suited to the conceptual intent, allowing the piece to communicate subtle formal nuances while maintaining clarity and precision. Its design conveys originality and impact, leaving a lasting impression on the viewer. By questioning a historical form, this ring demonstrates endurance through time, inviting reflection and dialogue across generations. It further carries cultural significance and symbolic power, becoming part of collective memory, shaping identity, embodying key ideas, and influencing future artists.



Cécile Maes's Choice: Maria Konschake's doctoral research project Acts of Deviation: Artistic Reflections on Memory and Identity in Connection with Jewellery. 2021-2025. 

Most relevant project: Shadows of the Past


Maria Konschake. Ring: 1963/58/3 from Shadows of the Past, 2022. Black glass.


Why This Work Matters:

Maria Konschake works with historical objects from museum collections. In this series, fifteen rings are based on the so-called papal ring from the Schmuckmuseum Pforzheim (inventory no. 1963/58), exploring new aesthetics through the plurality of cultural memory and by challenging perceptions of reality.​

Through a rigorous approach, supported by the Archive of Possibilities research project, part of her PhD, she combines scholarly and archaeological methods to uncover hidden narratives. The use of method and medium—3D scanning, digital manipulation, and idea-driven material choices—ensures that the conceptual intent is fully realised, highlighting selected details while allowing others to recede, resulting in a considered and thoughtful digital re-materialisation.

The work and its subject demonstrate relevance across time, establishing a dialogue between past, present, and future, while embodying aesthetic innovation through new forms and multiple layers of interpretation that challenge conventional perceptions. The series conveys a universality of experience, establishing connections across audiences and inviting reflection on the continuity, transformation, and reinterpretation of cultural heritage.


Maria Konschake. Ring from Shadows of the Past, 2022. Black glass.


Now that we’ve gathered our selections, let’s see what patterns emerge. Looking across our choices, certain qualities start to converge, not necessarily in style or taste, but in what makes these works, for us, candidates for classic status.

First, there’s the Historical Dialogue. A classic sits within a continuum: it engages with what came before while also reinterpreting existing forms, creating echoes across artistic fields that intersect and influence one another. Julie Decubber’s Julia m, for example, draws on Minimalism and Arte Povera; Esther Heite deconstructs the familiar signet ring; and Maria Konschake works with the papal ring, transforming historical objects. It’s a bit like the little black dress. Gabrielle Chanel didn’t invent it. She transformed something that already existed into a symbol of emancipation and modernity. A classic does the same: it acknowledges the past while creating something new.

Then, there’s Universality Resonance. A classic speaks to universal human experiences. It resonates both semantically and emotionally, connecting with viewers across cultures and generations. — through reflection, recognition of references, and associations drawn from their own experiences.

Thirdly, the Balance Between Concept and Visual Language. Each of these pieces finds the sweet spot between conceptual clarity and material or visual presence. The idea can be radical or innovative, but the visual expression supports it fully. Technical execution is impeccable — the medium is mastered and used intentionally, letting the concept shine.

Cuarto: Depth of Meaning / Multiple Layers of Interpretation. A classic offers layers of reading: concept and material work together, each gesture or choice of medium adding to the narrative. Cultural, political, or memorial dimensions coexist, inviting reflection and dialogue. Decubber’s fragments-into-whole approach and Konschake’s digitally re-materialised historical objects both demonstrate this richness, giving audiences multiple ways to engage.

And finally, there’s the Enduring Impact. A classic endures. It remains relevant, inspiring, and influential over time, sometimes becoming iconic. These works influence other artists, enter collective memory, and continue to spark conversation years or even decades later. Like Giorgio Agamben’s definition of contemporaneity, they embody a lucid, critical, and poetic awareness of their time. They don’t merely reflect their moment. They keep speaking across generations by revealing both its lights and its shadows, what is visible and what remains hidden.


Classic is a word that seems simple, because of how easily we use it, yet it is a conceptual minefield.
Possibly, a classic is not born: it becomes.
It is not an old work, but a living one that continues to speak to us despite the passing of time. What makes it classic is not its age, but its ability to remain relevant — a form that keeps questioning the present.

The idea of a classic isn’t about revolution. It’s about functioning within a continuum, being aware of what has come before, and drawing inspiration from the past to question the present — taking unexpected paths that might inspire the future and, perhaps, become iconic.
Classics provoke dialogue between works, across artistic fields, and among viewers of today, yesterday, or tomorrow.

In contemporary art (and even more so in art jewellery, where historical time is short), “classic” can mean a work that has defined a language or a conceptual shift; a work that, even if it was once radical, has resisted banalisation and still makes sense; a work that has inspired later generations without losing its identity.

Another question around this theme is why it might interest us to consider what a classic is. Because this reflection essentially defines what we consider valuable.

To call a work classic is an act of symbolic power. This means it deserves to remain.
And in a discipline like art jewellery —where institutional recognition is still fragile— to discuss what is classic is to discuss how the canon itself is built.

It also forces us to review history: which names, pieces and gestures have we incorporated, and which have we forgotten? It invites us to ask about the criteria: is it technique, idea, influence, or the ability to move us? It situates us in time: what does it mean to be classic today, in an era where everything is ephemeral, remixed and decontextualised? Is it to guide our understanding of artistic continuity? To provide a framework for reflection? Or to help us decide what counts as good or bad art?

We believe that, as an exercise for the Klimt02 community — artists, curators, teachers, collectors — discussing what a classic is would be an act of critical maturity.

Doing this exercise means acknowledging that art jewellery already has enough history to speak of legacy, and enough vitality to keep reinventing it.
It is a way of looking back not with nostalgia, but with awareness. To understand where we come from, decide what is worth keeping alive, and imagine how the classics of tomorrow might be born.



  >> Discover other Artworks Featured by Klimt02 

 

About the author

Cécile Maes graduated from ENSA Limoges in design, specialising in Contemporary Jewellery. Her interest in jewellery grows from the human relationships games it involves. Social object, jewellery creates narratives and becomes a sign. Investigating classical typologies, her work is a re-interpretation where historical references and everyday exploration connect ideas to speak about jewellery, the reasons why we wear it and the meanings we give to it.

Mail: cilce.maes@gmail.com
Instagram: cilce_maes