Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, has once again captured the spotlight—this time with her association with an iconic French jeweler.
Cartier, renowned for its legacy of timeless elegance, now finds itself in the crosshairs of Meghan’s influence. However, rather than basking in the glow of royal endorsement, the brand’s image has been subtly reshaped in a way that raises eyebrows. Meghan’s jewelry collection reads less like a guide to refined, understated luxury and more like a manifesto of opulent excess. Critics argue that her selections often convey an air of trying too hard to fit into a world of grandeur—a curious blend of yachts, high-powered boardrooms, and social aspirations.
Among her most talked-about pieces is the Juste un Clou collar necklace, a bold and undeniably attention-grabbing design. Meghan debuted this striking piece during a televised appearance alongside Prince Harry. Originally intended to embody the rebellious, avant-garde spirit of the 1970s, the necklace, when worn by Meghan, took on a different message. Instead of exuding subtle defiance, it seemed to proclaim frustration with royal traditions. What was once a chic, vintage-inspired creation now felt like a flashy declaration of, “I’m over these royal charades.” This transformation mirrors the broader cultural shifts of the early 2020s, where rebellion and discontent often make louder statements than elegance ever could. How did a piece so rich in history and craftsmanship end up as a misunderstood emblem of luxury?
But Meghan’s foray into Cartier’s collection does not end with the Juste un Clou. Her jewelry box also boasts some of the brand’s most iconic designs, including the famed Love bracelet and the classic Tank watch. The Love bracelet, conceived in the 1970s as a symbol of eternal, understated devotion, has been reinterpreted through Meghan’s lens. Instead of timeless sophistication, it now comes across as, “I’m wearing this because I’m expected to.” Similarly, the Tank watch, once heralded as the very essence of refined taste, now evokes the ubiquity of a pumpkin spice latte in autumn—charming, but hardly unique. Has Cartier, through this lens, become a victim of its own success, where exclusivity is diminished by overexposure?
Even more surprising is Cartier’s recent marketing direction. Imagine my astonishment upon seeing a Cartier commercial on mainstream television during a casual evening binge-watch session. Yes, Cartier—one of the most storied luxury houses—airing ads between reality TV shows. When was the last time you saw Chanel or Louis Vuitton doing the same? By stepping into the world of mass advertising, Cartier seems to be navigating treacherous waters, attempting to be “accessible luxury.” Unfortunately, this shift risks transforming the brand from a beacon of refinement into something perilously close to “Walmart chic.”
Adding another layer of intrigue to this narrative is Meghan’s choice to wear a bracelet gifted by her ex-husband, Trevor Engelson. Whether intentional or not, the choice speaks volumes. Is it a subtle tribute to a past relationship or a thinly veiled warning against sharing secrets? Whatever the case, the message is clear: Meghan Markle has a knack for having the last word.
And what of Cartier’s self-proclaimed “accessible luxury” positioning? With bracelets priced at $5,000 and necklaces nearing $10,000, one might question who truly finds this accessible. Real luxury, after all, resides in pieces imbued with legacy and craftsmanship—the kind of heirloom treasures found in the collection of the Duchess of Windsor, whose jewels tell stories of romance and history. Today’s Cartier, by contrast, risks becoming a high-end version of a chain jeweler, catering to the wealthy who want to appear even wealthier.
Meghan Markle’s connection with Cartier exemplifies what some now refer to as the “Markled Curse”—a phenomenon where brands once synonymous with timeless elegance find themselves ensnared in modern image problems. For Cartier, the question remains: Can it reclaim its place as a symbol of enduring sophistication, or will its legacy continue to be reshaped by this new wave of misunderstood luxury? As for Meghan, her interpretation of glamour and refinement seems to miss the mark, leaving a trail of controversy—and conversation—in her wake.
