Some of you who are kind enough to bear through the rumblings every week or twice often hold a grudge against Gonzo that he is averse to the use of plastics, circuit boards and batteries! True. If they belong to irresponsible, disposable watches.

Else, he values them for almost the same reasons you value them for. This is not just a fine-art domain. Crude (in its good sense) or brutal art is also a part of it. But it should be well-designed and functional; better, if it’s a tool by itself. Though the mechanical watches are a timeless celebration – if I may be so grandiose – for Gonzo, he’s not blind to a digital/electronic ingenuity that triggers (you read it right; it’s triggers, not tickles) his fancy. All of us here at CW admire the fine mechanisms to capture time by means of gears set against one another and we agree upon it being a remarkable feat never to grow obsolete.

However, unless there were battery-powered watches, picture-perfect precision would have been marginally more accurate. We agree and admire electronic horology too.

Wait! Does that mean spot on accuracy is not attained even by the finest of mechanicals?

A mechanical watch can be 99.999% accurate. The cost of acquiring jumps those many times.

Back to defending Gonzo – okay, you might be thinking “why”? It’s not defending; just that his inclinations to the classic and robust sides of horology were wrongly interpreted by a few (identities not to be disclosed, so please don’t ask) as he is trying to disturb the trends from pushing forward.

Gonzo laughed the allegations away. Responsibilities, too; for the time being! This evening, he goes out for a round in the town. His weekends start bit early. I’m just trying to tally the different sets of logic.

The first one is that low prices affect craftsmanship, durability, design – and needless saying – materials. An ironic counterargument or a reverse version of fine horology that throws the doors ajar for conspicuous consumption for the cheap quartz to become a person’s emblem! That’s to save money? Guess there are better ways to show that humbleness borne out of fiscal responsibility and sensibility. People get way more cheap, fleeting and wasteful through different means.

It’s not to say everyone wearing a one-time-use/throwaway watch is a spendthrift in some other manner. Those who are not and still wearing cheap, plastic toys may be doing so because either fund is insufficient, or knowledge is not up to the mark or just a case of bad taste.

That’s quite a bit of a running around! Also, I got no desire to dabble in the high-minded ethics of the horological world and its economics and a watch-buyer’s rights. I would love to continue this argument, but all that running around makes me aware that I’m feeling a sudden craving for some yogurt and juicy red meat!

Watch(es) mentioned in this post are listed below. Click to see details and buy them: