Originality vs. sympathetic restoration: What would you do?

[ckhaing]

it varied/ depends

for some watches i just keep as is

for some watches i enjoy made it shine

some watches i even liked the dial redone

 

[Pianotuna]

It’s been one of the curiosities of my two years-long ‘apprenticeship’ learning about vintage watches, this fascination (some might say fixation) for the perfect all original unpolished bottom-of-the-sock-drawer watch, along with its parallel, the disdain for the restored timepiece.
I say “curiosity” because watch collectors appear to be unique in that regard among admirers of vintage/antique items. For car collectors for instance, the holy grail appears to be the other end of the spectrum. The classic barn find, upholstery in tatters, chrome peeling off the bumpers, rust and mould permeating the scene clearly needs restoring and the car lover fondly embraces the difficulties of the project. Every car show is a testament to the attitude.
Similarly, the collector of fine Louis XV furniture doesn’t really expect the braided original cloth to be up to modern use and might only hope that the polished surface is largely scratch free before replacing the cloth with a period-correct material and typically, having the timber re-French-polished to its original (or what we perceive to be) lustre.

Notice that I use the word ‘perception’. As an example, when I was a high school Art student the text books described Michelangelo’s use of the muted colour tones in the Sistine Chapel as his personal protest against being dragged back to finish the work by the then Pope (among other interpretations of his mood and sub-conscious). In the mid-1980’s the commencement of the Sistine Chapel ceiling began and the full magnitude of the Master’s use of vibrant colour was revealed as the effects of 400 years of oil lamps was (very, very, very carefully) removed. Thus rendering nearly all 19th and 20th Century commentary on the Chapel, and Michelangelo’s intentions not only obsolete but completely and utterly incorrect.

Speaking professionally, as a piano tuner and restorer, watch collectors would be aghast at what my industry does. But, we recognise that the piano is a working instrument. It is, like the wristwatch, a mechanical device and if it is used, it wears out. These things need replacing and/or significant servicing. Unlike the motorcar however, programmed obsolescence does not apply to neither the piano nor watch industries which for the most part are designed and built with a certain level of integrity. There are simply, cheap, middle class and expensive ranges of product which might reasonably define the lifespan, serviceability and dare I say, restorability of any one item (Patek/Steinway, Seiko 5/Daewoo)

Speaking personally I’ve learnt to appreciate with watches the value of originality and it is obvious that, as with the car, the original dial, hands, crown, bracelet (matching engine/chassis numbers?) are preferred. We like knowing it hasn’t been messed with. I have a very nice Seiko Bullhead 6138 Speedtimer. Totally original and obviously I like the watch. It wouldn’t look the same if someone had machine polished the case and removed the chamfered edges which are one of the stylistic features of the watch, or installed a yellow sweephand during a service because he was too lazy to find a red one).

On the flip side the best watch I own, by miles, is a Rolex I had fully restored a few years ago. The crown was replaced as it was o/s but the case, dial and hands remain original. The gold plated case was polished but the nicks in the lugs from the crap bracelets my father insisted on using remain. All OEM parts, I consider it properly restored.

I suspect the path is littered with subtle degrees of interpretation and personal standpoint.

To the OP, my apologies if this is too long winded but my counsel is that you do with your watch and bracelet as feels best. The bracelet is not a fixture of the watch. I think it looks best polished because the watch has been polished. And if selling, flog it with an Uncle Seiko. The new owner will change it anyway!

cheers

 

[eugeneandresson]

The ‘restoration’ thread…

 

[nkhandekar]

M'Bob

And aren’t million dollar paintings and expensive furniture restored all the time?

Yes they are. Cleaning a painting is one of the few irreversible treatments we do, and we think carefully before doing it. Its its just dirt on the surface, it comes off. If the varnish is original, then we really think carefully, sometimes leaving it, sometimes reducing its thickness, sometimes removing it altogether. And then there is the issue of maintaining the patina. Patina changes with fashion and taste, but its generally seen as the good changes that happen over time with ageing and wear. Restoration is used to remove the bad changes that happen. How you slice it up is dependent on all sorts of factors...I am pretty sure you know what those factors are.

 

[M'Bob]

nkhandekar

Yes they are. Cleaning a painting is one of the few irreversible treatments we do, and we think carefully before doing it. Its its just dirt on the surface, it comes off. If the varnish is original, then we really think carefully, sometimes leaving it, sometimes reducing its thickness, sometimes removing it altogether. And then there is the issue of maintaining the patina. Patina changes with fashion and taste, but its generally seen as the good changes that happen over time with ageing and wear. Restoration is used to remove the bad changes that happen. How you slice it up is dependent on all sorts of factors...I am pretty sure you know what those factors are.

How would you, then, resolve this restoration dilemma: a painting that has partial patina, and other areas in good condition. Would you bring the patinated areas up to the standard of the better condition parts, or vice versa? I read somewhere years ago a restoration credo that one should to do what was necessary to an object to bring it to a level of potential maximized enjoyment.

 

[nkhandekar]

M'Bob

How would you, then, resolve this restoration dilemma: a painting that has partial patina, and other areas in good condition. Would you bring the patinated areas up to the standard of the better condition parts, or vice versa? I read somewhere years ago a restoration credo that one should to do what was necessary to an object to bring it to a level of potential maximized enjoyment.

With paintings there is no one right way to resolve this issue you brought up and I don't think you need to hear me blather on about picture restoration....but let's get back to watches which are quite different. If your watch and bracelet were in my department, they would be cleaned of any accretions (dust, skin detritus etc) and the original material would be preserved in its current condition for as long as is feasibly possible, of course they would never be worn, kept in climate controlled storage, in the dark. If the wacth an bracelet went on display the wall label would explain the difference in condition to the museum visitor and also why they are displayed together. In a different scenario, where there was a watch and the curator had a new bracelet made, then getting the bracelet to match the watch is totally feasible...back to the picture analogy, it would be like ageing a new frame to match the current condition of the picture.

 

[aggie]

Apparently, you wouldn't be pleased with the unpolished bracelet. .. It is neither a piece of art nor a listed building. Just a watch you paid 500 $. Doesn't worth the dilemna. Do what you like, and enjoy it!

 

[Whatwatch]

M'Bob

Over the past bunch of years, the premium on “unmolested, original, unpolished, untouched” has dramatically increased. Years ago, watchmakers would routinely polish cases, for instance (some with a heavier had than others), and the practice was not really frowned upon.

So this watch falls into that category: this picture isn’t great, and the watch is in fairly original shape, but the case has been refinished, including a very high polish to the lugs tops. One thing I won’t do it to try and faux distress them - that would be a disaster.




So, I’ve been looking to fit a nice 7912 flat-link and I have this one. As you can see, completely unpolished, unmolested, blah, blah.



The problem is, when combined, the aesthetics won’t match. So herein lies the dilemma: would you join them as is, and leave it like that…or sympathetically polish the bracelet to make it go better with the case, knowingly devaluing its esteem and value? How about this on the left - does this look overdone in terms of restoration?



When do we get to the point where original clashes with visually pleasing?

 

[Whatwatch]

If your intention is to hold long term and not sell the watch, then the decision is really what do you prefer to look at. If you do plan to sell then unfortunately other peoples opinion comes into play. I suppose you could polish the bracelet and make it match and if you do sell, through in a suitable leather strap.

 

[aggie]

....except I surely made a mistake.... You can't have had it that cheap (500$ or it would have been a veeery good deal, apparently ! ) In spite my mistake and my stupidity, I do think you should do what your heart commands, not your bank account.... ( and keep the proper untouched bracelet for the day you would like to sell it, just in case.... I am not a complete idiot hehe! )

Edited: Nov 11, 2021