The importance or unimportance of history?

I’d be interested in your opinions on this topic.

Shown above is a watch by another company –not IWC. It’s a novel design by a boutique brand, and I would think not something IWC would produce. But I see this watch as symbolic of a shift in collector interest. It is not something that would have been produced 5 years ago --or for the preceding 150 years. To my thinking, there is a significant and growing interest today in design –especially novel design, and a diminished interest in history.

When I first became interested in IWC, in the early to mid-1990s –about 15 years ago—there was a particularly strong emphasis on history as a defining characteristic of mechanical watches. The Mark XII was the successor to the Mark 11; the fliegerchronograph –even its numerals and hands-- was designed on close historical antecedents. The Jubilee Portuguese was based on an earlier design, and told a historical story. In a sense, mechanical watches were considered anachronisms, and reflected historical values and design. They preserved craftsmanship notwithstanding an age of electronics and plastic.

I think that, today, there has been a shift. The craftsmanship is still there –in many ways, more and better than ever. But there has been a shift away from history.

Sure, there is IWC’s Vintage Collection. But the interest today is in design. Most of IWC's designs no longer mimic history –the flight watches have silver dials, hands unlike most their predecessors, missing numerals, etc. That’s not to condemn them –they are good looking. They’re nice watches.

And many of them are fun. They’re colorful; they’re sporty. There also are lots of diving watches. And Portuguese watches have converted to being about a ‘seafaring tradition” and not the pcoket watch tradition. There’s romance associated with adventure.

But this really isn’t about history. It’s about lifestyle and style.

Look at the posts on this page. They’re mostly about models in the current collection. They’re about straps and promotional items. They’re about accuracy and what we’re wearing. There is absolutely nothing wrong with any of this –it’s what we are mostly about, and what IWC is today. And that’s what interests most of us.

But does this minimize the importance of history? And should IWC emphasize even more “design”?

I suggest that there has been a shift. Not a dismissal of traditional values, but a change in emphasis and consumer interest.

Your comments would be welcomed.

Regards,
Michael

I agree with you, but I don't think...

it is for the better. Fashion, style, design... these are all really what is driving watch novelties today. If you look in the fashion section of the New York Times magazine the watches are getting bigger and flashier and more bejeweled. And in my opinion really ugly. But the younger generation loves this stuff. And like it or not that younger group is going to be doing the design work for most new models. The Kurt Klauses of the world are not plentiful anymore. History has its place and will come back at some point. But don't hold your breath.

--------

I think watches have, in the last 5 - 8 years become "fashionable" Watches from fashion houses such as armani, boss etc. have become very popular and expensive which I think has lead to some companies going down that road, trying to create the next style, not necessarily pushing the boundaries of watch making.

The end of history is still distant

The world is changing but come think of it, it always did. IWC is a company devoted to certain principles. Tradition and history are some. Design is very vital too since many buyers are firstly seduced by the looks and maybe never by the heart lying within. Of course sales are a crucial point determining the success of a current model which in turn is closely related to the design. And vice versa.

So even if the end of the history is still very distant Michael I would concur with you that there is indeed a shift away from. How big the shift will be is going to be the variable even so in the name of design or ergonomics. But people who forget their history are truly the ones with no future. I am not that concerned about IWC but I would like to see if this clear case of reverse Darwinism will lead to the survival of the ugliest.

Argiris

bit of both i think...

interesting debating point michael.
i think there has to be a bit of both. if it is all on "design" why not buy a swatch? if it is all on history, why not buy vintage watches all the time?
for me, if i'm spending significant cash on a watch, i need to get a bit of forward thinking design but always with an anchor in history.
having said all that, there are some very "interesting" and very well produced watches coming out today which just don't adhere to history, traditional design or even time legibility.
urwerk is one example. absolutely disgusting watches in my opinion but extremely interesting at the same time and superb craftsmanship.
stephen

A classic is something...

That people admire and lust for in the past, present and future... IWC has some classics in their collection. Only history can tell you if a watch is, or become into, a classic. All these new designers are just trying to do what other people had done in the past: invent a classic. So, I think there are not a dichotomy between history and new designs, there is a clear distinction between a great design that will become a classic and the rest, that’s it.

Just my two cents,
M

PS: the watch of the pic looks really interesting but only time will tell us what will be its place in history. Does this watch can be admired and recognised as a Portuguese with Cal. 5000 based? I don’t know.

The importance of history

Interesting topic!

My opinion is that the importance of history has been a little bit overemphasized in the years you've mentioned, Michael. That's legitimate marketing and it worked very well, so why not? It was important that when you buy a Flieger Chronograph with a Valjoux based movement that IWC has a long Pilots' watch tradition and the numbers looked like those of their antecedents.

But was that really why one bought a Pilots' chrono? Or was it because that thing was just damned good looking under the sleeve of a leather jacket or just with a T-shirt? If one really is honest I think he must confess that it was the latter. At least for me.
But I had - and still have - a good feeling about the history that's inside this timepiece. I'm sure it could be the same quality without that history. But I don't know any other company (with our without Pilots' watch history) that produces a watch like IWC's Fliegerchrono. HIstory sure is used as a big instrument by IWC's marketing. And that's OK. Tradition is not always necessary but sometimes it shows us where our roots are. And that's nothing bad at all.

If there are new good looking watches without history, I would buy one if I'd just like it. History is not really important in every buying decision I make - not even for a watch. But It's no mistake if there is a historic tradition as long as the product reflects the history in quality.

Tilo

A little less history....

I think that the discontinuation of the 3227 Ingenieur Automatic is an example of the shift away from history and the growing emphasis in design.

The 3227 Ingenieur Automatic, introduced in 2005, was designed/based around and influenced by the legendary Ingenieur SL, ref 1832. More modern looking and improved but still a watch where history was clearly reflected in the design/proportion. In my opinion, making the watch more old fashioned/classic in a watch market full of more modern looking watches. To me the history and the somewhat understated design of the 3227 was a great selling point but maybe not to others....

The newer and new models of the Ingenieur family still reflect their traditional values (innovation, strenght, design) but less about history and historical design, "since not everyone works in high-energy environments, surrounded by strong magnet fields, the designers did away with the soft iron inner case....." and instead also added more design including, size, other materials, new movements, reduced height and added comfort.....

Today, if you compare the discontinued 3227 to the newer family members there is a big and clear difference in their "look" emphasizing a different design.

Maybe this shows that history is important and can point the way but maybe a little less "old history" can allow for a more new and interesting one to come along which is reflected in design. If thats not bad for the consumer than it cannot be bad for IWC..

Regards,

dand

History and design must go hand in hand

I can certainly agree with a lot of your analysis. But I guess design has always been important. I wouldn’t have chosen IWC watches just because of their historical heritage. I chose them because I liked the design, the engineering and the history.

Creating a brand is not an easy task. I wonder if it’s possible to create a prestige brand without having a history. There is still an important factor in marketing called storytelling.

Jens-Kristian

Churchill and Santayana had it right >>>

“He who forgets history is doomed to repeat it”, to paraphrase both as they used similar thoughts

I hope IWC never forgets history and in fact continues to repeat it. Keep doing what they have done for 140 years. I am not a fan of watches with lots of bling or way out designs. The new designs may be technical achievement, but without the tug of history and a traditional, simple design they do not have an attraction to me at all.

Today IWC is a perfect blend of great quality watch making, simplicity of design that has an anchor in the past. The appeal of IWC is its craftsmanship, its tradition, and the beautiful and simple watch / dial designs. When a wrist watch becomes nearly impossible to tell the time, it is not a watch for me. For me, I will stick with history, tradition and beautiful IWC watches.

Perhaps there is an evolution to a new world order. Realistically, if the market moves to new designs without the tie to history, then I suppose IWC will adapt to market forces to remain economically viable. Hopefully, they will keep a foot in both camps.

Bill

Novel Designs

There are a lot of interesting watches out there offered by very talented designers, and while they may be interesting design concepts, they are fashion items first and watches second. A Richard Mille, for example, may be fun to look at for a while, but it won't endure beyond the latest crest in the fashion wave. It's not something I would expect to hand down to my daughter.

IWC seems to be trying to split the difference between remaining true to its heritage of producing accurate, interesting and understated watches of the highest quality and remaining competitive in a marketplace that seems to value the look of a watch over its function. The 2009 novelties, for example, represent to me an incremental move in the fashion direction in response to market demands. There's nothing wrong with that; it's a business, after all.

For me, I hope that whatever the future holds, IWC will keep one eye firmly focused on its past and the "classic" watches that we all admire so much while at the same time keeping any eye on the future.

Interesting comment about "storytelling"....

Because I have heard Georges Kern say that about IWC and its product lines. I think modern marketing often says "you have to tell a story" --and that story is about romance/charm/adventure or whatever is appropriate to the product.

And even history might be a part of the storytelling for some products. But ofen that doesn't have the charisma equal to flying high, diving deep, or driving fast.

Regards,
Michael

Interesting comment about "storytelling"....

Thanks Michael. Indeed history can be a very important part of storytelling. I am sure IWC management is aware of that.

Today the consumer has endless choices. Facts, specifications, design and price still matter. The motivation to choose one brand over another is triggered by emotion. It takes stories to connect with customers on an emotional level.

"Tell me a fact and I'll learn. Tell me a truth and I'll believe. But tell me a story and it will live in my heart forever." (Indian Proverb)

Jens-Kristian

I think it boils down to brand attributes...

As far as IWC is concerned, I believe its history/heritage and simplicity of design is an important brand attribute for IWC but not all brands. New manufacturers/brands attempting to establish themselves do not have that attribute. A. Lange & Söhne is an interesting brand that was re-created in the 90s having been dormant for almost 50 years.

Associating IWC with 1868 and 140 years of history reassures consumers that this business is likely to be around for many more years to come (in fact, the financial resource of the Richemont Group gives greater reassurance). Buying a high end watch knowing that there will still be a parts bin in a couple of generations time is reinforced by the brand's history and tradition. Knowing that the Portuguese series, Ingenieurs and Pilots ranges have been around for more than 50 years reinforces that comfort.

I think history is about brand value

If you could split the "motivation to buy" in portions you should assign a percentage to brand history and its reputation. Design has its part too but I think the point is not about design.

We are living in times of terrific changes in watchmaking, a sort of renaissance of movements elaboration. Sometimes this research brings to strange configurations and has an impact on design but as a reflection of the main purpose which is movements innovation.

As a transitional period I think new concepts will have to find their own way to become "classics" having produced just concept watches so far.

I'm talking about maisons seriously engaged on innovations, not considering those who simply try to reproduce the style of innovation, sometimes this happens in the same maison (f.i. richard mille has some very innovative calibres but also modular chrono, both "packed" in a very innovative design).

I think who has history and tradition is in a advantageous position and may put some considerable innovations without "showing" them (f.i. patek philppe Pulsomax, Lange Tourbograph etc.).

My humble opinion - roberto

When I think of IWC, perhaps a better word

than "history" is "tradition". Sure, they have adapted to modern design concepts to some degree, as perhaps any profit seeking enterprise must.

But IWC seems unique in never straying too far from its traditional roots of strong engineering, excellent craftsmanship, and handsome functionality. The ongoing presence of key lines such as Portuguese, Ingenieur, Aquatimer, etc at least appropriately honor the days gone by, even as modern technology and deisgn is introduced.

To me IWC represents the best blend available of modern with tradition!

Fashion is cyclical and design evolves.

However, a conscious tie to one's history gives design credibility and identity. I think there will always be a certain amount of avant garde flair to design evolution, but what is perceived as "classic"...i.e. it endures all the "fashion" convolutions and still has a singular identity...is what I see as the critical factor. IWC seems to maintain the right balance and I think their commitment to who they are (and from where they came) will continue to define their watches as classics....IMHO
Best regards,
Jim

Personnally I am traditionalist

but within these domains there are loads for innovation space available for loads of innovation in terms of technical innovations, design innovations and general innovation. Did I write innovation ?

Each IWC watch has the common denominator of me being able to tell the time at a glance (although some may have difficulties with some skeleton or busy dials).

For me design evolution in its most widest and wildest, creative and innovative sense that still allows me to tell the time at the flick of the wrist will definitely satisfy my requirements of extending history to the future.

Andrew

(wearing a Vintage collection Ingenieur)

The importance or unimportance of history?

I've not posted here in years, but I like this topic, so I'll take the opportunity to weigh in with my two cents.

Since most of my collection tends to focus on vintage IWC's (although I do have a number of current catalog models), to me "historic" means traditional... I feel comfortable wearing this style of watch anywhere. To the office, to the beach, wherever. To me that is the most important part of my hobby. I do wear all my watches. The piece you show above, while very nice and eye catching, I would hesitate to wear it in certain situations. It is perhaps, because I am not that flamboyant of an individual, that I tend to shy away from this type of watch.

I do follow this forum on occasion, and sometimes would like to see more discussion on historic/vintage pieces, but I understand that most people are concerned with what's current, and there is nothing wrong with that.

I would however, encourage those of you who maybe somewhat interested in the vintage side of IWC to try and get a hold of some older catalogs, and to check out those large auctions sites. There really are some beautiful "gems" out there if you fancy a more traditional style of watch.

Kind Regards,

Glen Browley
Hong Kong

Yes. Ok to be inspired by history, but...

Coming into this thread late - but I would submit that IWC's history is very important to the rich substance of their products.

However, IWC should continue to evolve - and take bold risks with designs.

Let's not forget - IWC has taken bold moves, and wide departures in the past - such as the DaVinci with Beta 21. Pretty agressive in its day.

I think the new Aquatimer line, and latest DaVinci's are good examples of this bold evolution - but I hope it is just the start of some aggressive maneuvers .

We'll always have IWC's history - and hopefully, many new chapters.

History

History has to be made at some time with a new line of watches, whether it was the beginning of the pilots, portuguese, ingenieur, etc line. IWC have began new lines that are no longer with us for various reasons, the Porsche Design, the late 1990's SL series and the GST. It would be interesting to speculate on a new series - which niche would it fill? What would it be called? What special attributes would it have?

I think IWC has moved away from its history in some areas, the Ingenieur line was created for its magnetic resistance but now it has little connection to roots.

The watch, Michael you have shown is certainly a bold styling exercise and the watch world has seen bold styling before. I wonder if watches like the one shown will in the future be looked upon as some of the 1970's watches are now. I think we will look back and say "WHAT were they thinking".

Styling can be only stretched so far from the original concept. When the line is stepped over it just becomes a marketing exercise that is less relevant to the history/tradition of the brand. It is at that point a new line/series should be created and perhaps a new tradition will arise.

Cheers from the cellar

If History isn't selling......

If History isn't selling you have to cut back production or you go bust.No matter how much you like nostalgia. And you have to be flexible enough to follow market trends without over investing in lines that won't "go". I gather there is still some "new old stock" left over in Switzerland from the slump in the 1930's. The watch picture MF shows is very stylish, but I doubt it will sell in millions, and in 20 years time will be "oh so last decade".!
Cheers Louis.

The importance or unimportance of history?

Nowadays, a watch is often seen as a fashion statement, as part of the clothing you are wearing. But fashion is a thing that changes all the time.
Instead of being a slave of fashion , you should direct yourselves towards "permanent fashion" . Fashion comes and goes, but style will always be there. In bespoke clothing for exemple, there is a clear trend towards "classic clothing" that never gets out of style.

Choose timeless models, that will be as modern 50 years from now. To be timeless, however is not the same as being vintage. A lot of design that we today consider as timeless was considered avant gard at the time of its creation.