Munich Schmuck Fair 2026. What Are We Really Coming For?

I am not sure whether it is because this is the third year in a row that I have come to the Schmuck Festival, or simply because when I think of Munich, I imagine it as the epicentre of important things happening. But I must admit that this year’s Munich escapade left me somewhat unconvinced.

Perhaps I am simply being foolish and failing to see what is happening right in front of me. Perhaps my initial assumption is wrong. Perhaps Munich Schmuck Fair Week is not so much a place for the presentation of exceptional pieces driven by strong curatorial intentions, aimed at an audience willing to spend time looking carefully and understanding what they see. Perhaps it is, above all, a moment for encounters. A moment where people come to introduce themselves, present their work, persuade others, and attempt to become part of this somewhat abstract group that represents the field.

Of course, all of this is also about business, about the transactions necessary for a market to function. And this aspect is particularly important for contemporary jewellery, which must continue to grow, professionalise, and assert its place as an artistic practice. Munich then becomes a place for networking, where people finally meet in person and exchange business cards that will most likely end up forgotten in an entrance tray somewhere. At times, I even have the impression that we congratulate ourselves a little too readily, as if presenting a project in Munich somehow confirmed one’s legitimacy within the field.

No, no, I am being a bitch. After all, that is precisely why I came: to meet people with whom I regularly correspond, to see what is being presented this year in galleries and exhibitions, and to develop projects with others driven by the same urgency to create, to connect and to share. And above all, to encounter practices that open up singular worlds, both physically and conceptually.

Yet this sense of discovery felt somewhat scarce this year. Very few exhibitions/shows/presentations (I am not entirely sure what to call them) truly gave me the feeling of entering an artist’s world, a project, a particular way of looking at the world.

I am not referring here to SchmuckMünchen itself, which has a clear and well-defined direction. Each year, the exhibition offers a panorama of what's happening on the international contemporary jewellery scene. This year’s edition, curated by Sam Tho Duong, sought, in his own words, to appreciate both craftsmanship and innovative proposals capable of representing the avant-garde. The same applies to Frame, where international galleries orbit around the Schmuck pavilion. There, things are quite explicit: we are in a fair, the clear materialisation of an art market model. One knows what to expect: a selection on display, the promotion of artists through curated selection, and the possibility of sales. A perfectly legible pro-to-pro dynamic.

What left me more perplexed lies outside the Messe. The off-spaces in Munich have multiplied considerably. As Tanel Veenre reminded us in his talk Beauty as a Simulacrum (organised by Art Jewelry Forum), in 2008, there were only seven or eight exhibitions running alongside the fair. Today, there are easily fifty spread across four days. Between talks, openings, book presentations, formal and informal discussions, and exhibitions scattered across the city, it becomes almost impossible to truly take the time to look and understand what one is seeing.

Handwerk Gallery, for example, hosted the exhibition Among Friends while also organising several talks throughout the week. These moments reminded us that this field is not built solely on the relationship between artists, gallerists and collectors, but on an entire ecosystem of practices and discourses that contribute to thinking, archiving and transmitting what contemporary jewellery is. In fact, some visitors could easily spend their time simply moving back and forth between the fair and this gallery, given the richness of the discussions taking place there. But would that mean ignoring everything else? I am not sure what the right approach is.



Fugen / Joints by Suska Mackert at the Bavarian Academy of Fine Arts.



Last year, I noted the accumulation of pieces in many exhibitions. I told myself that perhaps this was also the nature of a festival: showing creation in all its plurality, through a series of pop-up presentations. This year, however, that accumulation often felt more like a succession of pop-up boutiques. The very notions of contemporary jewellery/art jewellery/avant-garde jewellery sometimes became strangely abstract.

Perhaps it is too much to expect from a festival that exhibitions be driven by a clear curatorial stance. Yet previous editions certainly included proposals of that kind. This year, the absence of strong themes, curatorial frameworks or scenographic approaches felt particularly noticeable, at least in the exhibitions I had the chance to see. Shared collective or national affiliations alone do not necessarily provide a sufficient curatorial concept.

Many of the pieces I encountered also felt increasingly accessible: pendants, brooches, variations on existing series I've already seen. This may also reflect a certain urgency to sell in an uncertain economic climate. I am well aware that organising an exhibition, working with a curator, or simply producing this kind of project today represents a considerable financial investment. The economic context is not easy, and discovering contemporary jewellery may not be the priority for many. Still, a certain level of commitment seems necessary. Being present in Munich every year does not automatically strengthen a proposition. Sometimes it may be more meaningful to participate less frequently, but with a project that genuinely deserves to be shown and discussed.
This feeling of déjà vu accompanied me throughout the week. And perhaps that is ultimately the point of this jewellery week: to show the recent collection and keep the market moving. Fair enough. But then why suggest that one must travel to Munich to witness an exciting moment of creative effervescence?

For me, contemporary jewellery is fascinating precisely because it speaks about us. It invokes references, symbols and cultures, sometimes subtly, sometimes ironically, sometimes very personally. It becomes activated and transformed through contact with those who wear it and those who look at it. Jewellery is political, not necessarily in an activist sense, but because it comments on something within our society. It observes, questions and reflects how a society organises and represents itself. It also comments on the history of jewellery itself: each piece enters into dialogue with what precedes it.

And this year, I felt that very few pieces were actually making a comment. Perhaps this is also symptomatic of our time. Formulating a position increasingly seems to carry the risk of being misunderstood. This does not mean that nothing was interesting. Some exhibitions articulated clear positions.

The solo show Fugen / Joints by Suska Mackert at the Bavarian Academy of Fine Arts was one such example. Perhaps because it was a solo presentation, the reading felt clearer. More importantly, the exhibition spoke about jewellery without necessarily producing jewellery, raising the question of what jewellery actually is and how far its field can extend. 

Big highlight for Among Friends at Galerie Handwerk, dedicated to Helen W. Drutt's collection. By presenting more than 70 years of contemporary jewellery by American and German artists, the exhibition reminded us of the importance of viewing historical pieces to better understand and analyse what is being created today, and to place certain works within a broader historical context.

The scenography of Crotla Presents - Hung, initiated by Robert Crotla at Nicole Gnesa Galerie, proposed a reading of jewellery as a conceptual device. Jewellery appeared here as a critical medium. Although it was sometimes difficult to grasp, it nevertheless conveyed a clear intention.

Galerie Door’s selection, centred around the theme of the mirror, offered a coherent and generous presentation. In a neighbouring space, Hartog & Henneman also presented their series Shape, inviting viewers to engage with and assemble wearable forms.

The exhibition Complementing Reality by Mette Saabye and Helen Clara Hemsley offered a sensitive dialogue between the two practices. A sense of intimacy emerged through the display, the objects, and the narrative threads woven between the artists’ works.

BEWAREN, by the Royal Academy of Antwerp, also stood out, presenting selected works by alumni from the last five years that raised interesting reflections with humility and remarkable relevance to the present.

The new works by Jorge Manilla also left me with a lasting impression through their physical presence. Somewhere between weapon, tool, object and amulet, they fully reveal themselves when one stands in front of them. Mari Ishikawa’s pieces carry a comparable intensity. Seeing them in person is quite something. They are remarkably powerful (even when displayed behind glass).



Brooches by Manfred Bischoff​ in Among Friends. American and German Jewelry Artists from the Helen Williams Drutt Collection at the Galerie Handwerk.



Crotla Presents - Hung by Robert Crotla at Nicole Gnesa Galerie. With pieces by Anne Achenbach, Gabi Dziuba, Karl Fritsch, Daniel Kruger, Gerd Rothmann, Maja Stojkovska, Jaeseob Shin, Lisa Walker and Ute Achhammer.



Mirror Mirror by Galerie Door, representing the artists: Violeta Adomaityte, Vanessa Arthur, Volker Atrops, ‘Dot’ Yiftah Avraham, Silvia Bellia, Doris Betz, Alexander Blank, Sigurd Bronger, Klara Brynge, Ildikó Dánfalvi, Paul Derrez, Tatjana Giorgadse, Elena Gorbunova, Hartog & Henneman, Mielle Harvey, Maria Hees, Idiots (Afke Golsteijn, Floris Bakker), Taehee In, Daniel Kruger, Typhaine Le Monnier, Felicia Mülbaier, Jiun You Ou, Barbara Paganin, Ruudt Peters, Darja Popolitova, Sarah Powell, Katja Prins, Philip Sajet, Moniek Schrijer, Elwy Schutten, Danni Schwaag, Dana Seachuga, Bettina Speckner, Coco Sung, Caroline Thomas, Robean Visschers, Kun Zhang.



Complementing Reality by Mette Saabye and Helen Clara Hemsley. Credit photo: Mette Saabye.



Ding Xinyao: III: Nature, Farewell and Beauty at BEWAREN by the Royal Academy of Antwerp.




Neckpiece: Rebirth 1 by Mari Ishikawa, 2016, displayed in One Hundred Views of Japan at Bayerischer Kunstgewerbeverein.


I am not trying to criticise outright, but rather to articulate a set of observations. I firmly believe that initiatives that create spaces and moments where collectors, gallerists, artists, students, enthusiasts and local audiences come together are essential, perhaps even vital, for the circulation of an artistic practice.

To see pieces physically, to understand their volume, to grasp why they work, to hear the words of those who defend contemporary jewellery as an artistic practice, to discover the schools attempting to pass knowledge on to new generations: all of this is invaluable. It shows that something is happening, and that this something exists on a genuinely international scale. And it's important that it continues.
But when everything happens at once, in every possible venue, with everyone constantly rushing from one place to another, do we still take the time to encounter a practice? To pause and exchange ideas around shared projects and intentions?

In any artistic medium, transmission is essential. Oral and physical transmission, and now digital transmission. The challenge is ensuring that these forms coexist in a balanced way.

And perhaps this is also what a professional festival looks like: one arrives full of curiosity and leaves somewhat exhausted, not always entirely sure what one has seen, who one has met, or whether the conversations were truly meaningful. Need to ask myself in two months which memories have actually stayed.
As I am not quite sure how to conclude this text, I would rather share a few questions to open a conversation. Because when intentions and motivations become clear, things often become clearer as well.

Who does the Munich jewellery festival really exist for?

What, today, is the meaning of making what we call contemporary jewellery?

Is Munich a place where one comes to discover pieces, or primarily a moment to meet people?

In a context where images of the works circulate everywhere before exhibitions even open, what still constitutes the irreplaceable experience of travelling to see the pieces in person? And how can the digital presence before, during and after the festival support such events without overshadowing them?

Should one imagine some form of selection, or at least a reduction in the number of events, in order to preserve a certain readability of the festival? And if so, who should be responsible for making these decisions?



Detail of the exhibition display of Giant Small Shapes by Manon van Kouswijk.


>> Explore our Munich Schmuck Fair Week 2026 photo album on Facebook
 

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. 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.

Instagram Cécile Maes: https://www.instagram.com/cilce_maes
Email: cecile@klimt02.net