ciaca
156
The modernity and coolness of meaningless
I think the modernity lays on the fact that Patek is trying something new. If I compare this novelty with my calatrava 5127 there are many differences. The classic look of the 5127 is lovely and gorgeous but...very understated. It is not a big conversion piece and for modern I simply mean something new, unexpected and surprising.
Uhm...so...every ugly strange fuzzy thing they eventually could do will be "modern" just because it's "unexpected and surprising".
If i go mad and start running out naked in the streets i could be considered a modern guy! 
Or we could consider as "modern" Snoop Dog wearing a golden tube and smoking.
True that the lines are a bit retro but we have a modern movement and a modern complication. The fact that this is also a calatrava is very intriguing and innovative for the line. I am not sure if the model is really related to the 20-30's as it bears no similarity to the previous patek pilot watch. I think it is a modern re-interpretation. We don't have a manual movement and the dual time zone is certainly not something you would see in a vintage watch.
Taking apart the fact in this "pilot" watch there is just the name of a Calatrava (and pilot watch too) and nothing more, taking apart the fact there is no other Patek pilot watch with the exception of a prototype stored somewhere in their museum, taking apart the fact that you wouldn't see the same complication on a vintage pilot (a truly one) because it is completely useless and meaningless (on a true military pilot watch), "reinterpretation" of what? What are you writing about? This is just a copy of a Zenith pilot watch with the same "complication" and aesthetic, which is "modern" just for the lack in value, the meaningless use of precious metal where should be robust steel, the meaningless use of a certain complication on a kind of watch nothing has to share with it, and the insane price. Which are things pretty common in the "modern" watch production of many companies, so "modern" by definition.
This is certainly new and fresh.
New for Patek, not for the world of horology at all from any point of view.
Fresh, maybe, still depends on the outside temperature....specially if you take the arm outside of your WWI stucka while "piloting" it.
Patek is or tries to be forever and is not really interested in fashion models yet it received a lot of critics for trying something new.
Patek receives critics when it does ugly things, not "new" ones (which they don't, less or more, since 70 yrs ago). And they're very interested in fashion and trends, as shows for instance the general enlargement of their cases, the new sporty and casual variations of traditional and classy reference or new lines of product, and many other details.
I can do a long list of examples if you want.
Why are pilot watches so interesting to some? Well I think it has all to do with buying into a lifestyle/dream than anything else. Dive watches are similar. How many owners of a diving watch would ever venture outside their swimming pool ?
Yes, but i have some kind of doubt thinking about a Patek "purist" interested in pilot watches made by Patek, maybe i'm wrong, but i know a lot of pilot watches collectors and i'm sure the last brand they were interested for such kind of watches is the Patek Philippe one, even less in white gold with a dual time function (as a Panerai or Rolex purist is not interested in complications of any kind, for instance).
I guess This watch is not intended for someone interested in "pilot" watches but for who simply is looking for a PP with a different, less traditional and less classic look, whatever is the result but just the brand on the dial (and the theoretical potential overvaluation in the future as the first of a kind).
The 5224G combines classic lines with the cool factor.
If the "cool factor" was related to the brand even the ugliest watches from this company should have "combine" this, we know that hasn't happened and there are a lot of classic PP's which are not considered "cool" at all.
On the other hand, if it is not the brand which does the miracle of "cooling" such a ugly thing, but the look of the watch itself, the zenith too should be considered "cool", but we know nobody consider it so, and many neither know it.
I don't know if this watch will like to many or few, who will ever like it, if it will be "cool" or "cold", what i know is that it's not new, modern, original or whatever you want to define it, it's just another controversial Patek Philippe like many others of this age.
The point here (again) is not if you or me or any other likes this watch or not (who cares?), the point is you often confuse your personal taste (which is out of discussion) with objective reality and then you are inclined to "explain" it with debatable arguments passing off them as factual datas where they are, at least, your personal belief you use to "explain" your tastes.
Tastes are tastes and cannot be explained, facts are facts and cannot be distorted to explain our own tastes.
I don't want to appear rude or unkind, neither i want to transform a light discussion about watches in a sort of perpetual fight between me and you, i'm just trying (maybe resulting unpleasant or annoying, i beg your pardon in that case...) to make you understand that talking about horology is not the same thing as talking about jewellery or any other vague argument like fresh, cool, statement, and so on, and that talking about these vague stuff trying to "force" arguments which have not any basis or any relationship with horology it's completely pointless if not a commercial spot on what we like.
If i want read official printed marketing stuff and related hypes i don't come on an horology forum, i go straight forward to the institutional sites of the companies.
I believe the value of a forum is in the knowledge of "how" and "what", so if you write debatable assertion it's pretty obvious you will have replies and not just "yeah" and "right"
Peace, love and Regards
More posts:
