These watches are our armour; theory expansion

[Ethan]

I'm not generally a fan of re-posts; sad, cyclical expressions of momentary originality. I do think that it's worth re-posting topics that are educational (like The Zigmeister's 7750 two-parter), or at the very least thought-provoking. I am re-floating this expanded version of my original theory for three reasons:

1) I'm pleased with it, and having tossed it around at the office, the editing suite, and at dinner with friends over the last couple of weeks I've had the opportunity to add a little more insight.

2) The original post provoked some interesting responses.

3) I wanted to give Clive another opportunity to use the sadly unappreciated, truly British expression, "Claptrap".

So here's the expanded theory:

The replica watches we covet and ultimately collect are an essential part of the armour that we must use to protect ourselves out there in the Big Bad World everyday. We need this armour as protection against a number of specific societal evils; Stereotype, Prejudice, and perhaps worst of all, Assumption of Character. It may seem odd that I would list Assumption of Character as the worst of what I would categorize as Reactionary Devices, but consider it as compared to the other two; concept Stereotype as vague, lazy generalization, and Prejudice as both preconceived and irrational in basis. Assumption of Character, on the other hand, by definition assumes intimate knowledge of the central combination of qualities that distinguish each of us from everyone else; terrible at it's very root. The instant scrutiny to which we all fall is not unlike that which we use to determine our interest in the replica watches we collect. Is that 196 the Asian 7750 or the Swiss 7753? What is the subdial spacing like on the new Daytonas? Is there a gap in the datewheel of Josh's SS Datejust? How obvious is the laser-etched crown? The difference is that we can disassemble the watches we collect to determine their worth (well, at least The Zigmeister can). We can clean them out, and if we desire a higher level of perfection, we can modify them. But if we ourselves do not want to be disassembled and evaluated by the ever-curious, then we need to be well protected. If we want concept Opportunity to remain intact, we need (by logical extension) the Assumption of Character to stop at a cursory glance. In short, we need to be very well protected, and very good replicas* of whatever is most expected and desired at the moment the Reactionary Devices are in play; we need armour.

Armour has always linked protection and status. Since the dawn of armoured combat (yes, I mean armoured, not armed), the most affluent have had access to the finest armour. In the middle ages, while the best the Serf could hope for was thick leather with a few sparse studs, the aristocracy was fitted with custom plate; each piece carefully measured and custom made for the individual wearer. The decorations of heraldic devices (crests) further distinguished the combatants on the battlefield. It was very easy to see the privileged in the throngs of hacking warriors; their colours and armour helped separate them from the masses.

We don't use armour anymore (at least, not in the same sense), but it does play a role in our business and professional environment. To a great extent, we have the same need of those distinguishing markers and devices in the workplace to set us apart from our masses. If you are one of many who work in a suit-and-tie culture, you know what I'm talking about.

If you're in sales, or marketing, or consulting, or finance, or (like me) entertainment, then you will agree that our jobs at their basis consist of asking people to give us money. Whether you're looking for an investment for a new start-up, or securing financing for a television pilot, it's still asking someone to open their wallet and give you money. Of course, who you are, your connexions, your demeanour, and your attitude all play huge roles, but equally (and more to the point, immediately) so does your appearance.

Today, the suit is our armour of choice, but unlike the armour of yesteryear, it's far more affordable. You do the best you can; mine are hand-made in France. But they're available to anyone who wants to walk down to the European store I get them from and pick up a few. Expensive, yes, but not out of reach for anyone who thinks their dress is important; point is, anyone can have them. So what does that leave? That's right: the watch. Nothing in our modern business environment so small can so quickly separate us from our colleagues. The luxury watch is instantly recognizable, and with the same instancy conveys a wealth of likelihoods. You have money. You have (some, at least) taste. You have enough (providing your shoes don't look like total crap) disposable income to spend several thousand on an excellent chronometer. You are (likely) not a complete screw-up. These are complete and total assumptions, yes, but then again, first impressions always are. But very few can afford to have these kinds of status symbols. That's why we buy replicas.

I know that some members here are fans of specific rare watches, but I will bet that most are people with a healthy aesthetic sense, that want the beauty and status associated with luxury timepieces, but who also have the common sense not to spend $65K on a friggin' watch. I will also bet that very few of the members here actually show off their watches to their peers, or outwardly draw attention to them claiming they are the genuine article. That's not why we buy these things. We buy and collect these watches because we are attracted to their beauty. Because we recognise their value as compared to other, similarly priced timepieces. Because they give us a small confidence boost when we wear them. Because they say to the people of position we are trying to interact and do business with, "I am stable. I am secure. I am worth taking a chance on". Because to some small extent they help to reduce the anxiety associated with the insecurity even the most egotistical person must contend with in the modern business environment. Because, in a phrase, they protect us. They are a stop against the aforementioned ever-curious; a check against pursuing disassembly as a means to further information. They serve as part of our guard. They serve as part of our armour.

*Yes, I know you're reading this bit and thinking, "What?!?! I am not a replica of anything. I am original. I am unique. I am not a faceless suit/drone/clone/robot in a sea of other suits/drones/clones/robots." Well of course you are. We're all different. But in the face of generalisations that are initiated during the initial reactionary phase which occurs the first time we as humans do anything, we by our very nature categorise to save time and brain cycles. Herein lies the basis of first impressions. Why do you dress up to go to a job interview? Or to meet new clients? Or to a club with your friends? Because you need, at least for the initial reactionary phase of new human interaction, to replicate at least the general group of people the person or group of people with whom you are interacting has an interest in extending concept Opportunity to. Concept Opportunity is defined (at least for the purpose of this theory) as the most advantageous possible position from which to begin a specific endeavour. So, you want to at least look like the kind of person the potential employer is looking to hire, that the potential client wants to work with, or the hottie in the crop-top wants to get naked with. Now, whether you get the job, the clients, or the girl in the end is where the originality comes into play. But this isn't part of the Reactionary phase, it's part of the Information phase; you look good on the outside, now let's see what's on the inside. Not much different than searching for reps. How many times have you seen a knockout rep, only to find that it's movement is garbage? Didn't you email the dealer, or post on the board, questioning whether the rep was available in a 2836 rather than a 7750? Yes, it's what's inside that counts, but nobody buys reps for the movement alone... You never get to the Information phase if you can't pass the Reactionary phase.

[Chronus]

Can I just say, "Claptrap."

I work in finance, and am the only one there who wears soccer shirts to work... not loud ones, and not ones with sponsors on them but I do it none the less (right now I favour the Italia kappa jerseys). I wear dark sneakers as well. Brown or black ones - never found a pair of shoes that are comfortable for me, and I have tried Gucci and Prada, as well as Timberland and Kickers.

Even for the interview, I went there with Kickers on, trousers, and a collarless shirt (I *hate* ties - an old Victorian [and even older - Cravat] fashion that is well past it's sell-by date). They saw my resume and that I had gone to the best university in the country for the subject I studied and were surprised i even applied there.

Guess it's because it's close to home and I have to look for a job I *really* would want to do.

[Chronus]

Should be saying not everyone is as you describe, and to some extents it is true depending on the situation.

Most people in finance *do* wear suits and it *is* like a uniform. That's why I don't like it!

[Watchmeister]

How about - we want to get laid.

Expensive watch = money to burn = you should sleep with me. How many people can tell the difference between a $1,000 or $3,000 suit? Fancy watch - never missed. Just remember every part of a man's being relates to getting laid. Or if you can't because you are happily married, having that woman in the bar look longingly at you does wonders for the ego. Just remember - Little Ethan always comes first. Not very philosophical but it all goes back to the caveman. Oh, and we do love watches and their little intricacies too.

Just kidding (somewhat).

[Chronus]

How about - we want to get laid.

Expensive watch = money to burn = you should sleep with me. How many people can tell the difference between a $1,000 or $3,000 suit? Fancy watch - never missed. Just remember every part of a man's being relates to getting laid. Or if you can't because you are happily married, having that woman in the bar look longingly at you does wonders for the ego. Just remember - Little Ethan always comes first. Not very philosophical but it all goes back to the caveman. Oh, and we do love watches and their little intricacies too.

Just kidding (somewhat).

Definitely somewhat.

I got a two tone r*l*x submariner ... probably a lot for that... and it has a diamond serti dial

so on some level you are right. I also got some generic quartz brand all "iced out" though I have never worn it... these impulse buys are killing me!

[ryyannon]

Good thinking, good writing, nice reading: A+

You ought to work cars into your analysis: a natural, no?

[Guest Newkirk]

This..I believe is posted over @TRC

Armour? Unless you're aware...Most persons..a false sense of worth!

Edited March 18, 2006 by Newkirk

[ryyannon]

This..I believe is posted over @TRC

Armour? Unless you're aware...Most persons..a false sense of worth!

Hmmm....

Was your name 'Klinkster' in a previous existence?

Edited March 18, 2006 by ryyannon

[Richard Tracy]

I understand the theory of armour perfectly.

Sad fact is that many judge others by the superficial, right or wrong, people are constantly

pressured to make snap decisions, so if the assessed, has not the projecting type

of personality, the next aspect to make judgements upon, is the outer.

Personally, I have always been a communicator, was born that way, so I use

the shell merely as an accessory, at times, but I never have needed anything

but my mind.

The main reason for reps are a way to feel what it is like to wear hundreds of thousands of

dollars worth of watches for merely a couple of thou. and change my watches like I do my socks.

[Ethan]

@kruzer00

Fundamentally, you are correct... Hell, you're correct period.

@ryyannon

Thank you. Hmmm... Cars... Give me a couple of days, and I'll post it in the 'off topic' forum.

@Newkirk

I think there are four syllables missing in the middle of your Haiku:

Unless you're aware

Most persons ___ ___ ___ ___

A false sense of worth!

Keep at it; you'll get there eventually...

[Guest HeWhoIsLikeGod]

Excellent Post, I really think my replicas help to project a certain image of success that is needed to succeed in business. If your buying fancy watches your making money not losing it, that says something.

[Josetann]

Hrm, well I work from home, don't really have anyone to impress. I just like the look of the watch. I also like being able to have several different styles, kinda like women and shoes I suppose. I have some brown touristy shirts (is that a word?), one from Audubon Zoo, one from Honduras, when wearing those I generally wear my Glycine Airman 7. I have a GMT Master II for all-around use. An Explorer for slightly dress-up occassions. And some others, just for fun.

To tell you the truth, I never really paid much attention to other people's watches, and mine were always the fancy digital kind. Either they did "cool" things (had a talking watch in 7th grade) or looked "cool" (when young, I remember a Laser Tag watch, and a Voltron watch...um, and a Lion King watch too but don't tell anyone ok?). It wasn't until we went on a cruise last year in May that I bought my first (and second) non-digital watch (by non-digital, I mean there was no digital read-out anywhere). A plain blue dial Skagen, and an ESQ (made by Movado, or owned by the same parent company, I dunno). Shortly after that I started looking into Movado reps (cause, they'd be more believable than a Rolex, plus the super-duper Swiss grade Rolexes were over $1,000), found this site, and the rest is history.

Guess what I'm saying, is it may matter to a lot of people, or even most, but it doesn't matter to me. I wear a watch cause it looks nice, not cause I want to impress everyone around me. I currently have jeans with the brands Levi, Wrangler, and Member's Mark (Sam's Club brand, exact same as Calvin Klein but different label slapped on, even the stitching's the same). I've had Nike shoes, but recently I have bought New Balance, and some off-brand that looks like New Balance.

I guess if you used the armour analogy, I'd be going into battle with some off-brand chainmail, a nice helmet, and sandals. And a really big stick.

[dcrooz]

That was quite an interesting read. I agree with some of what you say, although some of the watches I have, and can be readily purchased around here wouldn't get recognised 9 out of 10 times (or more). In that case you may strike up a conversation with some one about watches which would certainly be very different than if they were wearing a Rolex.

For example last week we had a big event on at work with lots of clients coming in to visit. I have never seen so many Rolexes on display in my life - I work in Canary Wharf, London and we have some exceptionally wealthy clients. I did try and strike up some watch related conversations but the only one's who really wanted to get involved were one wearing a beautiful 1960's Omega, and anothre guy wearing a Luminor - both gens. The guys with the Rolexes were more just interested in how much theirs cost, and not really interested in the subject of horology.

I was wearing my Blue Omega SMP which drew some derisory glances from the Rolex wearers!! The other Omega wearer and the PAM wearer were interested in what I was wearing, but didn't spot the fake, and didn't ask me so I wasn't compelled to tell them. If they had asked I would have told them, but hey, if you don't ask you don't get!

So my point is that in terms of armour some watches (Rolexes) fall more into that category and are seen as pure status symbols whilst others (PAM's, older pieces) are a sign of some one who has looked deeper into their subject. This related more to gens than reps as we all know that the search for the best sub is not for the feint hearted!!!

[sssurfer]

Very interesting and entertaining point.

So, I am just unable to figure out why I am wearing watches that noone recognises, noone knows about, noone even heard of. That just, when I look at it on my wrist, I happen to think: but how I like this watch!

BTW, I would use the word 'extended' rather than 'expanded', as the theory looks somehow related to Dawkins' extended phenotype idea.

[manuel]

very interesting post, and I agree with you.

thanks for reposting it.

[Watchmeister]

The comment on Rolexes I agree with. Most people who wear them are just wearing them as part of a uniform. It is interesting that when I wear an MBW vintage people who care actually notice. I find that no one is hunting for the Rolex rep. Nobody cares. The one other point I think is that in many circles watches are one of very few forms of male jewelry. It is nice to be able to change the jewelry. So there definitely is a peacock factor. But the getting laid or wanting to be attractive to the other sex still factors in fairly strongly.