The longer the retro-watch kick endures, the longer I have mixed feelings about it.
On the one hand many of the pieces bore me into a comatose like state where all I can think about is how the slathering of modern luxury values on vintage tool-pieces feels wholly unsavory.
On the other hand, there is a sort of freshness, in the revival of classic designs that are good not because they are classic, but because they were so entirely focused on a smooth blending of both form and function at the time.
Rarely do you see a vintage piece with hands which are too short or completely preposterous design features. Purism with a hint of class was the predominant aesthetic choice back a couple of generations ago. In today’s sea of retro-themed watches I see the good and the bad. The high-end and wannabe high-brow.
To be honest I wish there were less of these watches, and that brands would focus more on having fun and making unique watches rather than playing follow-the-leader after they just finished a speech on how they were the first to do everything and overly using the term “audacious.” In fact, my new rule to watch brands (and yes, I am not speaking directly to all the European brands) is stop using the term “audacious” or “audacity.”
I don’t care what you think it means or what the dictionary says, but to us native English speakers, it more or less means “rude.” So stop proudly claiming how you, your watch makers, and your brand’s founders are so unapologetically audacious.
NOW WATCH: Executive Life videos
Business Insider Emails & Alerts
Site highlights each day to your inbox.