Posts

2018 Santos de Cartier WSSA0029

Image
The first rule of writing a watch review   anything is: know your audience. What does the reader want to know? What does he or she care about, what will keep them reading, and why will they keep reading? What are you providing for them? The great thing about having a site that nobody reads (to be fair to myself, it's -- at least partly -- because it doesn't exist yet) is that the audience is only one's self. And so one can concentrate on what you think you'd like to read (hard to separate that out from what you want to write sometimes) and then, not only will you like to read what's written here (so you'll at least have one returning customer), but if people ever do find this site and like what they read, then we'll have some people with some good taste all together :D. Today, hopefully, you want to know about the Santos de Cartier. There are plenty of articles and reviews from the usual suspects (and shout out to Stephen Pulvirent over at Hodinkee whose A ...

Welcome!

The big question to be answered in the inaugural Unironic Watch Reviews article is whether the name of the site itself is un- or just ironic. Meaning: by naming the site Unironic Watch Reviews, does that actually mean that the reviews are meant to be layered in irony? By specifically calling out that the site consists of something explicitly unironic, one could sensibly make the connection that its use in the name is sarcastic; by calling this site Unironic Watch Reviews, one can get a chuckle out of how insincere the reviews themselves actually are. Alternatively, by explicitly saying that the site is made up of un -ironic watch reviews, the editors could be appealing to their readers a priori: these are not jokes; this is sincere. Arguably (and anything is arguable, even though not everything is debatable-with-a-straight-face), the worst situation would be an ambiguous one. As David Foster Wallace argues in his 1993 essay "E Unibus Pluram: Television and U.S. Fiction", iron...