Watches - jewellery or accessory

[Sparkster]

We talk about the weirdest things at work and today we were discussing watches and whether they are considered jewellery or an accessory item.

The decision here is about 50/50. I''ve always considered watches to be an accessory item but one colleague mentioned that some are adorned with so many diamonds, that it would be insulting to call it an accessory lol.

 

[musey]

Hmm, well, I consider all jewelry to be "accessories" anyway, so I don''t think I''d bring much clarification! I get what your friend is saying. You could argue that if it''s sold in a jewelry store (and it''s wearable, pens don''t count), then it''s jewelry.

 

[WorkingHardforSmallRewards]

well, I believe that technically jewellery is defined as an accesory, however not all accessories are defined as jewelery. In particular, to be defined as jewellery it must *adorn* the wearer. that means that it must be used as an ornament that enhances beauty or appearance

.I think that your collegue hit the nail on the head. It really depends on what your watch is like and what the function of your watch is. If your watch is one that is intended for one purpose only--that of telling time--and in no way compliments your wardrobe or enhances your overall beauty, then going by technical definition it could not be classified as jewellery (though here a matter of taste comes into play, as some people may find something to be very beautiful, that another does not). At anyrate, in that case is there for a function, not to enhance appearance.

But then other watches, as your collegue described, serve multiple functions--one of which to tell time, and the other is to enhance your overall appearance, complete your outfit, and by definition to act as a piece of jewellery, especially those having on it actual precious gems or metals or having the appearance of such precious items. In that case it woudl then technically fit under the definitions of both jewellery and acessories.

Some definitions can be found here

jewellery

adornment

accessory

 

[risingsun]

This is my new Omega...it happens to tell time

 

[risingsun]

Meant to post this pic...sorry....With the diamond bezel, MOP face and bracelet design, it's a fine watch that is also a beautiful piece of jewelry. It's definitely not an accessory

 

[WorkingHardforSmallRewards]

well it is def. an accessory, but it is also def a piece of jewelery

a fabulous one at that.

 

[lizardofaz]

Date: 8/16/2007 9:12:45 AM
Author: risingsun
Meant to post this pic...sorry....With the diamond bezel, MOP face and bracelet design, it''s a fine watch that is also a beautiful piece of jewelry. It''s definitely not an accessory

oh mama like!!!

 

[Sparkster]

Date: 8/16/2007 9:12:45 AM
Author: risingsun
Meant to post this pic...sorry....With the diamond bezel, MOP face and bracelet design, it''s a fine watch that is also a beautiful piece of jewelry. It''s definitely not an accessory

I wouldn''t call your Omega a watch, nor would I call it jewellery.....instead I''d just call it...."holy cow"

Now that''s what I call a watch!

I just upgraded my watch to a Cartier Tank watch (just plain old stainless steel). After looking at your one, it makes me wish I had got the one with diamonds.

 

[Stone Hunter]

The Omega is just FAB and has it's own thread as it should!!!!!

How about that new Tank watch? It needs a thread too.

Edited to answer the thread question: I don't usually think of watches as jewelry.

 

[risingsun]

Thanks WorkingHard, lizardofaz, Sparkster, and Stone Hunter! This thread gave me another opportunity to shamelessly brag about my new Omega Constellation

 

[Sparkster]

Date: 8/16/2007 6:53:31 PM
Author: Stone Hunter
The Omega is just FAB and has it''s own thread as it should!!!!!

How about that new Tank watch? It needs a thread too.

Edited to answer the thread question: I don''t usually think of watches as jewelry.

I had been admiring the Tank watch for a while. I never purchased one because they are sooooo expensive in Australia (retail AUD$4,400). I just came back from a holiday in Hong Kong where it sells for AUD$2,900. I hadn''t intended to buy it but with the $1,500 price difference, I couldn''t walk away from it. Well, actually, I could walk away, I just chose not to

.

I remember FI''s comment......"$2,900? It''s not even an automatic watch!" That was because he paid approx the same amount of money in Australia for an Omega Seamaster (automatic).

 

[crown1]

i personally have never thought of them as either. i prefer to just classify them as watches or timepieces. there are so many different styles of watches that i think they deserve a category of their own. if you look at all of the different types of watches since their beginning it is amazing. thus, i just think of them as watches.

on the other hand, department stores generally group them with jewelry rather than other types of accessories and they are sold in jewelry stores. when i think of accessories i envision scarves, belts, small leather goods and the like. heaven forbid handbags not have their own category either.

 

[diamondfan]

I really think they are both. They serve a function, so they are not just ornamental. But they can be so elaborate and blingy so they are also jewlery too.

 

[omieluv]

I say if it is so blingy that you cannot easily read the numbers, it falls into the jewlery category!

 

[JulieN]

business instrument. a man shouldn't be checking his watch when he's out with me.