The luxury watch market has matured significantly over the past decade. The driving force behind this has been the huge boom in luxury sports watches that began around 2015. Following this qualitative expansion, discerning watch enthusiasts are now shifting their interest from fashion to timepieces that will stand the test of time. So what kind of watches could become the horological heritage of the future? Special contributions by renowned journalists and interviews with experts shed light on the qualities of masterpieces that connect the past and the future.
Photographs by Masanori Yoshie, Eiichi Okuyama
Text by Masamasa Hirota
Text by Masayuki Hirota
Edited by Yuto Hosoda (Chronos-Japan), Hiroyuki Suzuki
[Article published in the July 2024 issue of Kronos Japan]
"Watches that will remain in the future" by Masamasa Hirota, editor-in-chief of Chronos Japan
As a pseudo-journalist, I have spent the last 20 years thinking about what makes a masterpiece watch. Of course, the criteria will vary greatly from person to person. The watch chosen will vary greatly depending on the price, the brand, and even more importantly, the buyer's taste. However, I believe there is one common criteria that all watches that can be called masterpieces have: they will last a long time.
A clock that will remain in the future is one that can be read as a "text"
The Patek Philippe Calatrava, Audemars Piguet Royal Oak, Patek Philippe Nautilus, Jaeger-LeCoultre Reverso, Cartier Tank, and even the Rolex Oyster Perpetual—watches like these remain at the forefront even decades after their introduction.
Watch journalist and art soldier. Editor-in-chief of Chronos Japan and webChronos. After working as a salaryman, he became a freelance writer specializing in watches. He has held his current position since 2016. He is also an Academician of the Grand Prix de la Watchmaking de Genève (GPHG).
Of course, they weren't always so popular. When I first became interested in watches in the 1990s, the Calatrava, Royal Oak, and Nautilus were considered clearly outdated. The Reverso, which had reverted to a more complicated watch, was merely a niche watch, the Tank was a fashion watch, and the Oyster Perpetual was a watch for office workers. During that time, I was enthusiastic about youthful-looking sports watches, and I suspect many watch enthusiasts were the same. However, Patek Philippe and Audemars Piguet continued to produce the Calatrava and Royal Oak, and these models eventually became "mythical."
However, the watches that remained in the end met all the criteria for being a watch that would remain. For example, the Patek Philippe Calatrava. This is a watch that many people like and will likely be a good watch. Even if you don't like the Calatrava, there are probably not many people who would say this model is bad.
Wise journalists like me are always trying to talk about what's good and what's bad. Meanwhile, what most people care about is whether they like it or not. The masterpieces mentioned above are likely to be liked by the vast majority of people, and are considered good watches, to varying degrees. If a watch is highly refined and popular, it's likely to be around for a long time. But popularity is fleeting. A certain celebrity can make it a huge hit, or a minor incident can cause it to lose market attention. Manufacturers use influencers to increase exposure on social media, pay advertising fees to media outlets like Chronos Japan, create limited edition models, and hold extravagant events in an effort to attract the attention of many.
To become a lasting masterpiece, a watch must remain a favorite for many. The reason this common sense is rarely mentioned is because it's extremely difficult to achieve. I sometimes wonder if Audemars Piguet had stopped producing the Royal Oak in the 1980s. Seiko quickly abandoned production of the Credor Locomotive, while Audemars Piguet continued. As a result, the Royal Oak became a ubiquitous watch, eventually catching on. Even if it feels strange at first glance, with continued use, our eyes become accustomed to it and it becomes a familiar sight. As Parmigiani Fleurier CEO Guido Terreni has pointed out, a certain scale is required to develop a model into an icon and ensure its legacy as a masterpiece. This applies both in terms of quantity and time.
However, even if a company continues to make good watches for a long time, it does not necessarily become a masterpiece. Isn't it also important that the model be read as a "text"?
I'd like to digress for a moment. The act of looking at a clock is like creating a "theory of a work of art." Who made it? How was it made? What intention is behind it? Whether discussing likes and dislikes, or good and bad, delving into a work of art is a minimum, yet essential, element necessary to confront the subject.
On the other hand, "text theory" allows us to set aside the intentions and thoughts of the creator. What's important is not the creator, but how the viewer feels and interprets the work. Even without specifically mentioning Jackson Pollock or John Cage, we can see that many "masterpieces" leave room for interpretation. Take the Audemars Piguet Royal Oak, for example. While it was merely an attempt to incorporate sporty elements into a thin watch, Gérald Genta's unusually shaped cases and integrated bracelets spawned numerous imitators and followers. The watch industry's assessment is that "it sold, so it was copied." However, this is likely because many manufacturers interpreted the Royal Oak as a "text" and created their own interpretations.
The same can be said of the Cartier Tank. The rectangular case, modeled after a tank, is said to be less versatile than a round case. However, Louis Cartier and his successors considered the Tank's shape a "text" and added various interpretations to it. Normally, bold variations such as the Tank Cintrée and Tank Française would not have been created. However, Cartier found diversity in the Tank's unusual shape, and therefore room for interpretation. This is Cartier's strength, discovered not by others but by themselves.
A "good" watch that can be dissected like a work of art is sure to have an astonishing influence as long as its maker is still around and its buyers are aware of its presence. But what about a watch that is rich in textual magnetism? Interpretation doesn't necessarily require detailed explanation. Such a watch is sure to live on long after its maker has disappeared.
One such current watch is Audemars Piguet's "CODE 11.59 by Audemars Piguet." At the time of its release, a company representative stated, "We understand that this will be a controversial watch." The company also understood that the Royal Oak Offshore, released in 1992, would not be well-received by many. However, its large, three-dimensional design was read as a textbook and sparked the boom in so-called "big, thick watches." In fact, I'm sure I'm not the only one to see the influence of the Offshore in Hublot's Big Bang. If something similar is happening with the CODE 11.59 by Audemars Piguet, this seemingly unconventional basic watch may well become a masterpiece of the future.
A masterpiece of simple watchmaking. The finest craftsmanship from the Micro Artist Studio is embodied in the in-house ceramic dial and hand-finished by Philippe Dufour. Hand-wound Spring Drive (Cal. 7R14). 41 jewels. Approximately 60 hours of power reserve. Platinum case (39mm diameter, 10.3mm thick). Water resistant to 3 bar. (Inquiries) Seiko Watch Customer Service (Credor) Tel. 0120-302-617
Another example would be Credor's Eichi II. While the watches that remain as textbooks all have strong designs (which is why Grand Seiko is becoming an icon), the simple design of the Eichi II makes it less likely to be read as a textbook. Moreover, this model was not produced in large enough numbers to be recognized by many people. It is true that the conditions for it to become a masterpiece are weak.
In an era when thin, simple watches were the norm, this watch would have been completely lost on the public eye. However, in today's world where excessive watches stand out, this extremely streamlined design can be read as a text.
Additionally, this watch is a pioneer in consciously adopting the unique combination of an extremely pared-down design and an elaborate movement. This element may become more of a packaging text than a design element in the future. Although the number of units produced is extremely small, the watch's global reputation can make up for the small number.
I would like to mention one more requirement for a masterpiece: the movement. While not as widespread as the design, an eye-catching movement can complement the design. However, it has only been in the last 30 years that movements have become valued. The trigger was probably Chopard's "LUC 1860" (1997) and, even more so, A. Lange & Söhne's "Datograph" (99).
FP Journe and A. Lange & Söhne have had a major influence on the current watch industry in that they created watches based on design. In particular, the Datograph, released in 1999, had a major impact on the watch industry with its dial that emphasized an equilateral triangle and its intricate movement. It is a masterpiece that kicked off the renaissance of mechanical watches.
Chronoswiss was the pioneer of the technique of making the case back transparent to reveal the movement. Their watches gained popularity by using generic movements but in a skeletonized form. The Opus is a good example. However, it took the appearance of eye-catching in-house movements for the technique of revealing the movement to become widely accepted.
Günter Blümlein, who revived A. Lange & Söhne, initially did not see any value in movements, as evidenced by the fact that all A. Lange & Söhne models released in 94, except for the chain-pull "Pour le Mérite," had solid case backs.
However, perhaps prompted by the success of Jaeger-LeCoultre, A. Lange & Söhne soon began showing movements, the defining feature of which was, of course, the Datograph.
The Datograph's caliber L951 series was, if we may say so, the first mass-produced movement made for display purposes—at least, as far as chronograph movements are concerned, it was undoubtedly a world first.
There had been watches with showy movements before, such as the Albert Potter, the Waltham with its sapphire bridges, the Audemars Piguet skeleton, and the Philippe Dufour Simplicity, but as a mass-produced watch, the L951 was the pioneer.
This is probably the first mass-produced movement designed to be seen on display. While there had been functionally beautiful movements before, the Cal. L951 was designed to emphasize aesthetic beauty. By going against the established rules of chronograph design, such as avoiding overlapping parts as much as possible and avoiding bending levers, it has achieved an extremely unique and multi-layered design.
What's interesting about the L951 is that the movement was designed with design in mind. It features an oversized date at 12 o'clock, a small seconds at 7 o'clock, and a 30-minute counter at 4 o'clock. To accommodate this layout, the L951's chronograph mechanism is located on one side of the movement, resulting in an extremely layered movement. While the standard practice for movement design is to scatter all components throughout, the L951's approach is the complete opposite. The contrast between the intricate chronograph section and the large open space in the barrel section is a far cry from what connoisseurs consider "functional beauty." However, the intricate chronograph section makes the L951 a movement well worth seeing for the average person (including me, of course).
It's not exactly comfortable to wear, and it doesn't have the functional beauty of the Lemania 2310, but this movement alone made the Datograph a masterpiece. To understand how influential this watch (movement) was, look no further than Patek Philippe's subsequent manual-winding chronograph movement, the caliber CH29-535. The numerous eccentric screws and large, curved levers that this movement emphasized were more for aesthetic appeal than practicality.
The technique of displaying a spectacular movement through a transparent case back quickly spread throughout the watch industry. Watchmakers, realizing that ébauches did not look appealing, quickly began to manufacture their movements in-house. Today, we see a wide variety of watches with spectacular movements. However, the habit of enjoying machinery only began with the Datograph.
Finally, I would like to add one more condition for a masterpiece: it must be an object. I mentioned that for a watch to become an icon and be established as a masterpiece, it must be made in a certain number of quantities. However, once the market matures to accept it, the number will no longer be an issue.
While this analogy may not be entirely accurate, Picasso's paintings are known worldwide, at least to a certain extent. Similarly, if a watch were to be considered an object rather than a commodity, it would likely be treated similarly to a Picasso painting. However, for this to happen, the name of the creator must become widely known. While still a niche market, the current frontrunners would likely be François-Paul Journe, followed by Richard Mille.
The watch market is not yet mature enough to talk about watches as objects of art, but perhaps in 20 or 30 years' time, this topic may be at the forefront of discussion.
