In the video below, the man above modestly suggests a bifurcated watch collection for men. The Modest Man recommends two watches: a Rolex Datejust and a Hamilton Field Officer Khaki Mechanical. Um, what? Don’t get me wrong: they’re not bad choices . . .
The black Hamilton is as field watch as it gets (save the big question mark on the face). It’s not as prestigious as the Sinn and IWC field watches of the world, but who cares? Most people know almost as much about watch brands as they do about nuclear particle physics.
By the same token, the Rolex Datejust is a wonderful timepiece. MM’s 1984 example is a bit small for modern tastes (36mm) and the only object I know grayer than the U.K. in winter (or just about any other time). Give me a Rolex Oyster Perpetual 39 all day long. Better yet let me keep mine. Anyway, in term of fashion flexing, anyone who sees the Rolex is sure to recognize it as A NICE WATCH™.
My beef: the idea that a watch should complement an outfit is a throwback to the days of Mad Men conformity. When the entire nation watched the same three TV channels. When a suit said you were working for The Man and blue jeans said you weren’t.
You want to wear a SWATCH with a suit? A Rolex with shorts and flip-flops? Why the hell not? It’s a watch, not a HELLO MY NAME IS badge. If you’re that concerned about people tsk-tsk-ing your watch/clothes combo, stop being so “modest” and grow a pair.
Sure, there are still a few places with a dress code: brokerage firms, expensive restaurants, head shops, SWATCH street parties. In those cases, it’s even more important to wear a watch that floats your boat.
Your two-watch collection should consist of whatever two watches you love to wear.
thank you so much for this awful site me and my household admired this content and insight