The Moons on our Wrists
Hello friends,
The last few weeks have been particularly tough with my family and I as we suffered a personal tragedy close to home. This has been the reason why my communication, social media posts, etc. have been limited so I ask for forgiveness on that front. Gladly, we have dealt with the issue as best we can and, as always, are moving forward.
A few days ago, a collector friend and I were talking at length about two particular watches, each from different brands, each at different price levels and different sorts of complications. After about 30 minutes of back and forth, the result of the conversation was – “to each their own.” For the next few days, I mulled over the details of our conversation and pondered the differing philosophies within our industry, specifically regarding how we collect. Time’s have changed significantly; those that have only been collecting for a few years may also have noticed the changes as they have been recent and quick to set in. The changes may be attributed to evolving perceptions as to why we collect the watches we do - to me, these changes can be broken down into contemplating objective and subjective truths.
The only objective truth within haute-horology would be to perfect accurate time-telling mechanically. As most of us are already aware, we are well passed that as there is no beating atomic time. The sheer nature of friction within a gear train renders our method of time-telling irrelevant, objectively speaking. So, the only relevant, and I would venture out enough to say, applicable, truth is within the subjective aspect of haute-horology. Do you like the particular thing? If you do, collect it. If not, it’s not for you to collect. If we pause to think why the secondary markets are at astronomical highs, part of it may be attributable to external influences on collecting philosophy. It’s not news to state what is occurring in our industry is anything but collecting. This is not to be taken as a criticism for how consumers should collect or buy; rather, it is meant to openly discuss the current state of affairs in the watch collecting world. After all, if not for us, who will audit and make steady the course we’ve embarked upon?!
So, if we subscribe to the notion that the only logical variable in collecting is purely subjective, then we are led to the realization that this is art. I can’t tell you which piece of art to like, the same way you can’t tell me a particular watch is better than another. It is a creative expression of time within a wearable, mechanically phenomenal context. This particular conversation with the collector eventually led him to throwing his arms up saying, “maybe we should just give up on collecting watches!” This was obviously not an option and later, we both scoffed at the notion. This little thing of ours, this magnificent obsession - it should be considered and regarded as a noble commitment. After all, it is the only truly limited resource ALL of us have. For something to carry such weight, to have such a profound effect on our lives, should it not be a completely individualized and subjective philosophy that dictates what we collect? Should a watch collection not reflect the nuances and unique ideals of each respective collector? I choose to believe these diminutive marvels provide a sort of brevity to our human experience. At a minimum, they provide a medium through which we can express our individuality, connect with like-minded individuals, and glance at an instrument, through mathematical precision and genius design, counting down the one thing that connects us all. I thank you for your time in reading this Journal and welcome your thoughts!
P.s. the title of this Journal is meant to provide a hint at what the next Havid Nagan watch will be…
Talk soon,
Aren J BAZERKANIAN