Horological Meandering

ThomasM
[PuristS]
14331

• Show profile
• Show other posts

I agree, John, though not quite as harshly. and Rip...

projections are always dangerous, when projecting one's own expectations onto others, and what they write.

Alas, like stereotypes, how else are we to economically and efficiently communicate, short of mind melds and data dumps?

"Perfection" - you seem to conclude that I meant ONLY objective, measurable performance and non-performance "quality" results (straightness of stitching; of perlage and anglage; of Geneva stripes and other cosmetic flourishes; matching of grains, whether they be leather or Geneva stripes from one plate or bridge to another; etc etc etc)

You didn't allow my words the broadness to include things like intention (indeed, how the hell does one seek perfection of intention? design? integrity? and integrity to WHAT?)

I used to write and say, probably in idealistic naivete, that "industrial, commercial brands differ in terms of where they define "good enough" - IWC, Seiko, Patek, Lange.

The difference between "commecial brands" and fanatical, individual craftsmen, was that "for the independent, "good enough" was never good enough, and if one slip of the hands caused "imperfection" on a bridge after 40 hours of work, so be it, throw it out and start over. And that is what justifies the sometimes ABSURD premiums for "Master Independent" work.

Alas, the reality proves otherwise.

And what I find disturbing is that I USED to feel the irresistable need to make such statements, as a counter to the marketing fluff and downright BS put out by the marketing and communications departments of "commercial concerns" -

"one year to make a ..."

"the uncompromising pursuit of perfection..."

"the most complicated/expensive/lightest/thinnest blah blah blah..."

"we care so much about attention to detail that we make sure even the regulator finger is reset to zero, after regulation..." (as one of our in depth reports showed, on ThePuristS, one retail ready sample didn't, despite the marketing idea - a great one! - and marketing and advertising dollars spent, to make this abstract point concrete...Note that I hold this brand IN THE HIGHEST REGARD! and feel their finishing and quality standards are second to none, as a brand and "commercial concern")

Here's the problem, and why I am starting to lose sleep at night (not just starting, actually) - How are the mindless, unrealistic, unempirically grounded bleatings of naive consumers, who want to believe the gospel, want to believe the romance, who make the "willing suspension of disbelief," how are these "civilian" exaltations any more tolerable, any more pure, any more right, than that put out by mar-comm departments?  (mea culpa - I include myself in the previous!!!)

I have seen, held, inspected, and lived with, as many "independents" and "artists/artisans" pieces as probably 99.5% of the population, as well as ultra high end contemporary Pateks, JLC's, Milles, AP, VC; not to mention the truly glorious vintage pieces (sorry, to those that knee jerk against blanket statements about the "good old days") put out by the best of the best - VC's from the 1930's and 40's; enamel work from the 1900's and before; truly incredible work by Potter, even "anonymous" work labelled "Patek, Philippe"

Sadly, I am coming to the realization that ALL who make pieces to sell, to make a living from, have to strike a compromise between "perfection" (whatever that means) and commercial realities - ie, delivery, payment, saleability constrained "realities."  I know of NO individual who is "making a living" at this who can "afford" to do otherwise - not "commercial brand" and not "pure hearted independent."

And statements to the contrary by "civilians" who don't shill for a living, who may or may not know any better; more and more, I'm finding, are no more or less "palatable" or "understandable" than those same over the top glorifications by paid professional shills.

If someone doesn't know it is wrong to kill (or cheat or rape) does that make the act any less heinous?

The law says yes, in terms of legal culpability; what about the conscience?

I also find it interesting (and a possible unintentional insight into psychology) that my "speech" to assembled industry managers and executives, which was, of course, for a very specific, limited context, quoted and dissected over on another forum other than the one it was posted on.

Not good, not bad, and thank goodness both forums are from the same family and completely friendly to each other, but I do find it curious.

As a Purist, I write (and pontificate and navel gaze) - to and for myself, and with friends and others who would listen or read.  I don't feel a need or have an agenda to "proselytize" or "run a crusade" - leave me alone and leave to mutter to myself as a crazy person who hears voices, and I'd still be equally happy (maybe more so; I wouldn't have the hate emails to get me down, emails I didn't ask for and for which I receive no counter balancing compensation to deal with)

I don't care if no one reads my words; if 5 people read it, or 10,000 people read it (or over time, 100,000 or more read it) - I write it for myself, and am very happy to share it with any who would listen or read it, agree or disagree.  If agree, can discuss and develop further; if disagree, so long as respectful, can disagree and maybe fine tune.  (yes, I realize the cynics are sharpening their knives already...)

If I were writing for an audience, or for commercial motives, I would worry about how many, and how much, and how influential, and would allow my feelings, thoughts, and their expression, to be influenced accordingly.

The difference between being a pure Purist and one who has commercial "considerations."

Nothing wrong with either, and the reality is, I doubt there is anything but a theoretical existence to the end points of that spectrum (pure "Purist" and pure "commerce")

If a Purist spoke in the woods, and there was no one else there to hear, was anything said?

To a fellow Purist, yes, no question.

To most everyone else?

"Why the hell even waste time asking this stupid question?"

My take on the "pursuit of excellence, the pursuit of perfection" question is disturbingly, metaphorically similar.

Navel-gazingly yours,

TM