There are hundreds, if not thousands, of clickbait-y articles online listing the top ten this or top ten that of watches. Best watches of all time. Must-have watches for every collection. I’m not mad at it. I think these lists are often entertaining and I honestly don’t think people fall for them as much as some critics might insist. If you fancy watches or even if you’re not in the hobby and only mildly interested, a list of the top watches in the world is easy consumption. It might even be aspirational for some. Nothing wrong with having aspirations, I always say.
When I read through these lists I do get some sense of satisfaction when I see watches already in my collection being mentioned, as if I had anything to do with the watch’s perceived accomplishments or place in the pantheon of holy material things. I know it’s dumb but surely I’m not the only one.
Most—if not all—all-time great lists would often include the Reverso, which I own. Granted that my Reverso is a bare bones neo-vintage monoface that’s very basic (or entry level, if you will). I also own a Cartier Tank from the 1970s, which also almost always makes these kinds of lists. I don’t have a Moonwatch, another top lister, but I do own a Speedmaster Automatic Date. That counts, right?
That dopamine hit or pride or maybe both that comes with owning “coveted” pieces is fleeting. And more often than not, that feeling of high will be replaced by a sudden crash. I know—in my heart of hearts—that watches that supposedly matter, at the end of the day, don’t.
The adage that “no one cares about your watch except you” is often espoused by watch enthusiasts as a sort of cold shower reality check to the flashier members of the community. It’s a good umbrella statement to use when you don’t want to pretend to care about someone else’s collection. The pill that you’re supposed to be overjoyed by what’s on someone else’s wrist is sometimes hard to swallow.
That said, I do think we can tweak this saying a bit to reflect a bigger truth about watch collecting. If I may: no one cares about your watch and you shouldn’t either.
Hold on there, you might say. I shouldn’t care about my watches? Hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars spent on small, wearable clocks and you’re telling me I shouldn’t care? Well, yes. That’s what I’m telling you. Because, ultimately watches don’t matter. Even the ones that consistently make it to the top of most lists online.
Lists are designed to sell watches–things we don’t actually need. We know this implicitly and explicitly. Anything a watch can do, our smart phones can do better. A GMT can tell time in two timezones. Well, a smartphone can tell time in ALL the timezones. A quartz can tell time accurately to up to 1 or 2 seconds per month. A smartphone can tell the time accurately all the time any time, no matter the condition, period. A 300 meter dive watch can be used for saturation diving. I don’t even know what saturation diving is but I’ve seen pictures of professional divers wear dive computers on their wrists. Face it, whatever watches can do, other devices can do better. Watches are jewelry with functionalities as useful as rotary phones in 2024.
There are arguments against this type of blasphemy from the watch community, of course.
“It’s easier and faster to look at the wrist than fish out a device from one’s pocket.”
“Watches don’t track your every move, they don’t bother you with notifications.”
“Watches are mechanical marvels that combine science and art, not like the soulless devices that imprison our very lives.”
“I need it for my job. I’m an engineer/firefighter/in the military/doctor/etc.”
All are nice rationalizations to get a watch. But watches don’t matter. One’s collection of watches is no more important or relevant than another person’s collection of Been There mugs from Starbucks. At least the Starbucks mugs commemorate travel, not all watches do this. Instead, what watches are are simply shiny things that we like, no different from any other shiny things other people like. A Speedmaster is no better than a Speedtimer. As such, lists lauding the best of the best don’t mean anything. But they are fun, so go enjoy them.
I already admitted to liking lists and being entertained by them. I also already admitted that I feel good when a watch I own makes such lists, albeit temporarily. So this post is not an indictment against lists or that type of content.
I’ve always been a believer of collections having more meaning if some thought had gone into its execution. I use the term theme to define the parameters of my collection. Other people might use something else. When I collect, I try not to let gluttony get in the way of intentionality. Otherwise, what’s the difference between collecting and hoarding? No one should be able to tell you how to spend your hard-earned cash. Buy whatever you want, burn your cash if that’s what you’re in the mood for. But you can’t call what you have a collection if you’re just buying things left and right indiscriminately.
For every State of the Collection (SOTC) content I consume or look at, I don’t wonder about the cost, I wonder about the level of difficulty and commitment needed to build them. The more intentional and focused a collection is, the more impressive it is for me. See, a watch box full of high-end watches is a meh if the box owner has a net worth of 100 million USD. Praising someone’s Patek Philippe Perpetual Calendar if said person’s annual salary is in the millions is like praising me for the occasional 100 USD dinner out when I’m earning 30,000 USD a year. You don’t get a cookie for low-effort. Whereas, owning hundreds of Casio F91Ws deserves mad respect. Imagine the focus, purposefulness, and dedication needed to curate that collection. Or how about getting only dive watches with specific features and in specific colors only? It’s all relative.
Some may say that variety is the spice of life. Nothing wrong with variety. Be varied. But you can’t call what you have a collection. When I collected comics, I only collected Batman comics. I read other comics, sure. However, I collected specific and purposeful. I knew someone who bought and read everything. He didn’t consider himself a collector. I respect him for that.
So, yes, I have watches that often make it to the top ten watches of all time. These timepieces have historical prestige and earned their rightful places in the horological totem pole of reverence. But they don’t matter. Don’t get me wrong. I love my Reverso. I think it’s the best watch ever made, period. That’s why I was happy to shell out the amount of money I paid for it. But it doesn’t matter. It’s just a watch. All that Reverso signals is that I’m able to afford it, barely. That’s all. Good for me but I don’t deserve a cookie for that. Instead, I want people to pat me on the back for my focused collection. I take pride in being able to stick to the theme of my watch collection. The theme was one watch per decade from the 1920s to the present. I was able to complete that collection last year. Yes, you may shake my hand you mere mortal. I will permit it.
Having finished that theme, I have been refining it. Onwards and upwards, and all that. One must not rest on one’s laurels. Here’s another cliché, find the next big dream. I’m now trying to upgrade the watches in the core collection. For instance, I gave away my 1929 Elgin Legionnaire to a dear friend because I’m replacing it with one of the first Seiko wristwatches to carry the Seiko brand from 1924. I thought the Seiko had more gravitas than the Elgin.
I don’t have it yet. The lugs are so small the strap needed customization. But it’s coming. I’ve also added a 1916 Omega pocket watch in the collection. I’ll keep that until I find something better to represent the 1910s. So on and so forth.
I’m not always so disciplined. I’m not immune to impulse buys. But intentionality must always be at the forefront and I beat myself up every time I give into temptation. However, I also quick to forgive myself. Why? Because watches that don’t matter, in their own way, also matter. They’re the midday snacks in between meals that keep one going. And, yeah, they can be fun. But that’s another topic all together.
The two themes of this post, watches don’t matter so you shouldn’t care about them and being thoughtful of your collection are not contradicting notions. Instead, they complement one another. It shouldn’t matter that your watches aren’t the flashiest or most expensive or critically acclaimed or included in any list on the Internet. But you should be more intentional in what you collect as well. Two things can be true at the same time. Purpose-driven but not self-important. Pick what makes you happy but be definitive in your happiness. I don’t know. I like living in the grays. Nothing is so black and white that you can find the answers in an Aesop tale.
The Escapement Room 