« The Watch Deconversion Started Gaining Steam About 5 Months Ago | Main | New Citizen Eco-Drive Endeavor »

February 21, 2013

Comments

jonnybardo

It is always hard to say what is one's own change in tastes and what is going on in the larger fashion world, which I don't really pay attention to (and is less evident in rural New England, except in terms of what my adolescent students are wearing).

I've already sold off most of my XL watches - only a couple to go. If what you say is true, Angelo, I will be pleased - because it increases the chances that Invicta makes a 6903/0507 in a smaller size, which I would buy.

I'm wearing my Orient Revolver today and am just astounded that a few months ago its 44mm bezel would have been way too small for my sensibilities. It fits me perfectly and is, by historical standards, a large watch.

Invicta rode the wave of the "bigger is better" mentality that is not only very American, but not sustainable. I would guess that as Americans have to gradually "tone down" their consumerist ways and live a more sustainable, and less oil-dependent, lifestyle, so too will our fashions reflect something less in your face, less over-the-top.

Angelo

Jonny: But styling-wise, something very interesting about your comment: Think back to mens ties----in the 1970s, the "peace and love" era, those ties were so wide, they looked like lobster bibs----and the colors were flashy, shouting "look at me." Then in the 1980s, an era accused of being America's "Decade of Greed " (as assertion I disagree with) the style changed to skinny "mod" ties, often in darker stripe patterns or even solids----nowhere near as flashy as the bibs from just a few years earlier. And by the '90s, we were in an "in between" mode, that incredibly, seems to have lasted through today. I wonder if with watches----we are going to find a medium "sweet spot" that will stay in vogue for a couple decades?

Bill

Speaking of watches from the 1970s, I think I've said here before that it's the cheap watches that impress me the most. Remembering the watch I had back then gives a good example of why.

It was a Helbros 17-jewel manual-wind model, no day, no date. I still have a faint trace of callus on my right index finger where the winding stem rubbed it when I wound that thing up every morning.

Since I had to wind it every day anyway, the fact that it gained five minutes a day wasn't much of a problem. I would just reset it before I went to school. By the end of the day it was a few minutes fast, but five minutes was actually pretty acceptable accuracy back then.

Its only advertised fancy feature was that it was "waterproof," as they called it back then. It had a plain glass crystal that quickly got scuffed and frosted by wear. It came on a nice-looking metal clasp band. However, the band broke almost at once, so it spent most of its life on a replacement band I got at the five and dime.

Fairly good watch, actually. It ran for many years without servicing, and in the end I gave it away to a friend who had lost everything in a house fire. Maybe he still has it, wherever he is.

This watch cost $35, which in today's dollars is getting pretty close to $200.

The watch I have on as I type this is a Seiko 5 I got on sale for, I think, about $60 a year and a half ago. The lowly Seiko 5, which would be treated with scorn (or at best haughty condescension) by the true Watch Geek!

It is as "waterproof" as the Helbros was, but adds many advanced features for (considering inflation) much less money: A 23 jewel self-winding movement, day and date functions, a hardened crystal that doesn't show a scratch and a sturdy metal band that remains undamaged after over a year, and accuracy within a few seconds a day. It's much more watch, and much more affordable.

At that, I could have bought a discount store quartz watch with more features and far better accuracy for half the money. Or, for about the same money, a decent solar quartz watch that will likely run unattended for the next 20 years, asking only to have the calendar reset for the short months and to be left on the desktop, where sunlight can reach it a few minutes a day, instead of in a dark sock drawer.

Even the cheap watches-- ESPECIALLY the cheap watches-- are marvelous devices these days. I don't think those of you who grew up after quartz watches went mainstream will ever really appreciate how good watches have gotten.

Angelo

Bill: A few months ago, I bought a vintage Timex wind-up watch on E-Bay. I liked the mod styling----and bubble shaped crystal. It has a 36 hour mainspring, so it keeps ticking---well over a day. If you forget to wind it in the morning, it'll still get you through the work day easily. Timex revolutionized inexpensive mainspring watches----simplified the movements and made them more durable/robust than much more expensive watches, without sacrificing much in the way of accuracy. And also----there are cheap digitals today with day/date function----that you don't have to reset on the short months. In fact, you never have to reset the calendar except when the battery is changed.

Angelo

http://www.worldofwatches.com/detail.asp?iq=1&bo_products_id=0&bo_products_variance_id=142283&rid=EML_WOW_130222INVICTA&utm_source=promo&utm_medium=email&utm_content=deal4&utm_campaign=EML_WOW_130222INVICTA&wtID=5v.phlf.6.l7lw

Here you go Jonny and Jeff: Just for you. Believe it or not, I actually like it, though I don't see myself wearing it----maybe if I was 22 again, but not now. One thing that that Invicta does that dumbs them down----the "suggested retail" prices that are simply ridiculous. It's gotten to the point where if you're not saving over 80% on an Invicta (preferably 90%), you're getting ripped off. And that is----for lack of a better word----STOOOPID! Inflating the retail price to make people think they're getting some sort of steal is just too silly----and meant for dumbed down buyers. They're not doing themselves any favors with this anymore.

Jeffrey McMahon

I never liked the camo design. I always thought black was more military than camo.

jonnybardo

Maybe, Angelo, maybe - or I think we can hope so! I also feel that we're moving more and more to a "global" cultural milieu that is inclusive of a wide variety of styles, more of a pick-and-choose your own from the whole plethora of human cutural forms rather than a defined specific and contextual style. If correct then it may be that there is still fluctuation, but that overall "everything is in" - it is just based upon the individual.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Advertisements






  • Advertisements

Advertisements






  • Advertisements

Advertisements






  • Advertisements
My Photo

Advertisements






  • Advertisements

Advertisements






  • Advertisements

Advertisements






  • Advertisements

August 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31          
Blog powered by Typepad

Pages

Companion Website: Breakthrough Writer

My Photo

Become a Fan