Art? Not so much. But...
Most people don't realise just what an engineering achievement it is to have such accuracy from a mechanical thing, so anyone who can think beyond the name on the dial deserves some respect.
I was at work a few weeks back and someone mistook my submariner homage for the genuine article. Think he was a bit disappointed when I said it wasn't a Rolex but when I said I'd rather have the homage and the £k's in the bank he countered that Rolex / patek etc. are works of art (he mentioned the PP, not me so think one may be on his hit list). That got me thinking, if they are actual works of art then does that mean they are only really worth what someone is willing to pay and the empirical value of the physical object is negligible? I suppose someone could say that they are mechanically superior too but I don't get the impression that there's £10k's worth of extra engineering in a Rolex. Food for thought, probably a whole meal in there somewhere...
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
Art? Not so much. But...
Most people don't realise just what an engineering achievement it is to have such accuracy from a mechanical thing, so anyone who can think beyond the name on the dial deserves some respect.
There are probably more parts in my vacuum cleaner but it's not made in Switzerland....
In my opinion, a mechanical item so small and robust enough that it can be worn on your wrist, wind itself from your movement and keep time accurate to a second a day (as well as have other complications) is a work of art, without question.
That's before we consider waterproofness and a dozen other things.
Does it have to be made by Rolex or PP? No, but they're damned good at making them.
In my experience Rolex do seem to have cornered the market somewhat when it comes to the non-watch collecting public's perception of luxury watches. People seem to see Rolex as the pinnacle, albeit with a couple of stepping stones like tag and omega along the way....
That picture makes me want to have a go at servicing a movement myself but I suppose you need to know where to drop the bits of lube and somewhere dust free to do it
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
I think the term "Design icon" is more fitting.
Copies or 'homages' hold no appeal for me, I'm afraid.
Al
And a Henry has a nice smile
Sent from my SM-G920F using TZ-UK mobile app
the Quality of Rolex isn't in doubt and then add that all pieces are REALLY produced in Switzerland by people regularly paid with swiss salaries...
If you see how many you have to pay for one day of a SAP consultant... Rolex is really cheap for the quality! For a month of such a shitty consultant you can buy a DayDate from AD
.. but ART, don't know really
Last edited by rhjj; 25th June 2017 at 22:04.
Design genius, no doubt. There's a reason why the iconic watches are so coveted. Just like certain cars (e-type, mini etc), watches like the sub, speedy, mm etc are design classics. You'll always get some who cannot see it, but most agree on the appeal.
I think when you are dealing with an object that has a designed shape, texture, decor etc then you can start thinking in artistic terms. Of course watches are about engineering and function too.
Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk
Not sure about art - but certainly worth the purchase price, and the enjoyment in wearing over its useful lifetime, which may be longer than ours.
It's just a matter of time...
Whether it is worth the money? Certainly without a doubt. Great quality and design as well as functionality in there in a Rolex.
As for whether they are works of art, I would not consider so for most of the modern Rolex, which are "mass-produced".
Whether or not they are works of art is subjective. The fact remains that some of their models are selling more than SRP.
I don't want to sound snobbish but I'll never buy a homage. I'll stick to a 007 Seiko if that's what i can afford. But that's only me... peace.
Sent from my SM-N9208 using Tapatalk
Certainly not works of art. By it's nature a work of art is a one off, and unless you count the serial number's uniqueness then art wouldn't apply imho. Iconic yes. Art no. Now if you go to the really exclusive makers with really small numbers made then the waters get murkier. Marie Antoinette's one off Breguet would be one example that IS definitely art in its truest form.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Taken individually maybe not. Taken collectively, all of the millions of Rolex watches and their owners have something in common, driven by a single idea and aesthetic, to a vision that started with one person.
That makes me want one, the idea of a life long companion for my wrist, I'm not sure that I'd be able to wear it without worrying though, I really don't know how people get through the day without accidentally beating up their Rolex the same way I do with my watches (unintentionally of course)
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
+1 and which would apply to the vast majority of watches too. Even Patek make 50,000+ watches a year IIRC. That said, art prints can have production runs of a thousand say and are "mechanically" produced and they would constitute art, so it's not just down to the numbers.
Models like the Rolex Sub, Omega Speedy, PP Calatrava and the like are most certainly design icons. Little doubt about that. High end artisanship? Definitely(though that would IMHO apply more to the smaller run more "hand made" stuff). Art? I'd personally say no. Art might be nailed down as ornament without function*. An expression of the individual or group, beyond the mechanistic. We see examples of this from our earliest days, where 40,000 year old spear throwers carved from mammoth ivory are shaped into animal forms like deer etc, where a non carved one would be just as functional and far easier to make(try carving ivory/bone with flint tools. Not easy). So we could argue hand engraving on a watch plate as art, but not the plate(or the watch) itself.
We might argue that the modern mechanical watch is "art" of a kind in another way. It has long been superseded in function by better technology, so its survival is in many ways "ornament without function".
There's a "whole meal in there somewhere..." alright RD.
*of course it has all sorts of functions. Storytelling, religious, political, cultural, psychological, status, decoration etc.
With regard to the mass production point, there are millions of prints of art adorning the walls of homes and offices. Are these no longer art once duplicated?
Just because an object has a functional purpose and is not unique does not deny an artistic element.
Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk
I kind of agree but it's down to definition really. My thought on objects of art is that it should be a "work" of art. Not a replication of it. Can see both sides of this but in the painting analogy for me the original only warrants the monicker art.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Engineering (even unnecessary over-engineering) is not art! It's far more important than that.
"Art might be nailed down as ornament without function*."
I like that idea, objects with actual uses which could be lived without are maybe on the blurry line in between function / engineering and art. Saying that my Mrs isn't all that functional and I wouldn't call her a work or art either... (I'm kidding of course, she's gestated more kids than I ever will so her function and artfulness both exceed mine by a distance)
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
Art is very difficult to pin down and the concept of "empirical value" for a luxury brand complicated mechanical watch doesn't apply in my opinion.
Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk
Art can be good art can be bad. It can be classical or downright ridiculous (Damian Hurst). So if Rolex is art then this is art
And my tongues planted in my cheek before you all start
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Two things - art is in the eye of a beholder so a piece of crap is art to someone, secondly anything is only worth what someone is prepared to pay hence James Cameron DSSD , BLNR, Ceramic Daytona as examples of stupid prices in the GM !!!!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Like Steinhart, anybody can successfully copy a work of art.
Well Art is subjective, here we have
In August 2016, at an art auction in Milan, one of the tins sold for a new world record of €275,000, including auction fees
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artist%27s_Shit
So does that mean Rolex is as good as a can of shit :-)
Selling things for significantly more than they cost to make is a really good business to be in, still looking for a angle here, was sad to see that someone else beat me with this idea :-(
I think anything can be art really.
hang it on the wall in your home = that's your idea of Art.
I've got a vintage bicycle on the wall at my house. and while many people think it's just a bike, I think it looks nice and it makes me happy. It's Art to me. even if it wasn't its original intended purpose I guess.
Forum posting is an art form in itself. It certainly attracts its fair share of .... artists
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
A point well made.
Fine line between art and design. Mainstream watches are probably best described as design and engineering.
This thread made me think if the various videos that Watchfinder have produced showing watches being serviced. A tedious job by anyone's standards (once the novelty wears off) but a skill and job well done https://youtu.be/wfNOgWGME_c
Not worth the money in my opinion but also better than money in the bank, it's a mad world and life is too short. It's your money but "I'd rather have the money in the bank..." is the worst excuse I can think of for not owning one.
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
I agree with that wholeheartedly but the world's not a fair place and a bit of money in the bank is needed. Because things don't get distributed equally and generally, being desperate means you get a shitty deal, having a bit of bunce allows you to traverse the landscape a bit more easily in my experience.
It's a completely different discussion entirely but, taking up your point somewhat, just imagine how much money is in banks all over the world just so that the owner can feel secure to spend a relative smaller quantity on luxury items OR art or anything else... almost all of us do it I expect.
Eg.
man with £1thousand in the bank buys a £10 bottle of wine but the rest stays in the bank so that he doesn't feel like he spunked everything on some plonk...
man with £1million in the bank buys a £1000 bottle of wine and keeps the rest locked up, but ultimately its probably only his wife or kids who'll get it in the end :-) I do wonder sometimes what % of wealth sits unused as a safety net of sorts....
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
The given "safety net" is to have 3 months net income in an easy access account, just in case. I wonder how many people can maintain that?
Sent from my SM-G920F using TZ-UK mobile app
Rolex is a mass produced luxury item of high quality, with excellent marketing. A PP is a work of art.
It is the G Shock DWG-100 Lungman from the 90s. It was designed for running. They are now quite desirable and collectable.
Often said to be the ugliest G Shock ever made.
I did do a thread about how its design around its functionality could alter your view of its aesthetics.
http://forum.tz-uk.com/showthread.ph...-ugly-duckling
Mitch
"if they are actual works of art then does that mean they are only really worth what someone is willing to pay and the empirical value of the physical object is negligible?"
That's how everything is valued. 'Empirical' or presumably 'intrinsic' value does not exist.
Up until 125 years ago the main theory of value was the labour theory of value. So the value of something depended on how much labour went into producing it. You can see the appeal of this theory to mechanical watches. But this theory was replaced by Carl Menger's 'marginal revolution' which focused on the utility of things at the margin.
The best way to think of value is just to think of demand and supply.
The simple fact is, that if no one cared about mechanical watches and everyone was just as happy with battery powered watches, then mechanical watches would have no value premium over the exact in all other details battery powered watch.
Craft vs Art