Category: Lifestyle

What Joe Said

Good Stuff, Lifestyle, Old Fartism

My admiration for Joe Walsh knows few bounds, and especially so for his seminal work, Analog Man.

“I’m just an analog man in a digital world”

If anyone sees similarity between Joe’s lyrics and the occasional rant on this website, let me assure you that this similarity is profound, not accidental.  And the more I think about it, the more that concept applies to just about everything I enjoy doing in life.  Before I launch into the exposition thereof, let me say at the outset that I’m not being a dick about this concept;  a good example is that while I generally prefer to shoot revolvers over semi-automatic pistols, I carry a 1911 because of the obvious reasons:  more boolets, quicker rate of fire, etc. etc.  There would be times when the above features might well be a lifesaver, and I’m not that stupid as to eschew those reasons just for philosophical purity.

So let me list those things which give me pleasure (guns will come last).  Be warned:  this is going to be a long read (it’s the weekend!), so you may first want to get a fresh cuppa, empty the bladder and make sure you’re comfortable.

1. Watches.  If I had the money, I’d like to collect watches because I love the engineering thereof.  Like the revolver/pistol example above, I am fully aware that Casio digital watches are more accurate timekeepers than, say, the average mechanical watch.  Unlike with guns, however, knowledge of the precise time is not a life-critical issue in my life — hell, I can easily do without a second hand, come to think of it;  minutes and hours are all I need, and a minute’s difference one way or the other is, generally speaking, of little importance.  My lifestyle does not involve granular time-critical activity, and seldom ever has.

So when I’ve disappeared into Dreamland and thought about what kinds of watch I’d like to collect, it should come as no surprise to learn that (absent duplicates), I’d struggle to come up with as much as two dozen.  This is largely because of the rules I impose on myself:

  • No watch should cost more than $40,000.  Honestly, once you’ve got to an acceptable level of accuracy / performance, the cost:quality curve becomes flatter than Kate Moss’s chest, and the only added costs are jewellery or artificial constraints (scarcity, provenance or marketing) — which do absolutely nothing for a watch’s efficacy.  And if there was some kind of cost constraint, I could easily do with watches costing less than $20,000 (with only a few wistful regrets).
  • Manual-wind operation only;  no automatics or quartz movements.  I know that having to wind one’s watch every so often can be irritating (I wind mine every morning, or before I put it on to go out — I don’t wear a watch inside the house because I’m surrounded by clocks).  And don’t get me started on having to replace batteries when the stupid things suddenly cease to work.
  • No metal bracelets or rubber straps;  leather straps only.  I have hairy arms, so the metal joints pinch my hair constantly.  And yes I know:  leather wears out more quickly than metal or synthetic material, but this just gives me an opportunity to get a new strap every couple of years, perhaps even in a different color.
  • A clear, easily-read watch face, uncluttered by multiple functions / complications.  These new watches which allow one to see the inner workings of the thing through the face are ridiculous.  When I want to know the time, that needs to be almost instantaneous — I don’t want to spend time playing “hunt the hands” amidst a jungle of background moving parts.
  • Decent typefaces for the hours’ numbers.  I like plain (but not too plain), art deco (but not too much so) and Roman numerals (because of my classical education, I can read Roman numerals as quickly as any other form, especially on a watch face).  I can also live with no numerals at all, just indicators, but I find numbers more accommodating.  Lastly:
  • I don’t much care for “yellow” gold watches, unless the watch has a very thin casing.  Steel is preferable, “white” gold a distant second.  Don’t even think about plastic.

So let me show y’all just a few examples of the watches that would appear on Ye Olde Bucquette Lystte, with some non-starters underneath.  All fall into the criteria as set above.

Longines Master Collection ($1,200)

Jaeger-LeCoulte Reverso ($8,500)

Eberhard & Co “8 Jours” ($4,500)

(this one’s a tad cluttered, but I kinda like the “powermeter” function)

Vacheron Constantin “Fifty Six” ($15,000)

Patek Philippe Calatrava ($25,000)

No decent watch collection should be without at least one Patek Philippe and a Vacheron.

Not being a pilot, race car timekeeper or deep-sea diver, I don’t have much need for a “function” watch;  but I still like the look of this one:

Omega Speedmaster “Moon” ($6,500)

And it went to the Moon back in the late 1960s, so there’s that.  Oh, and that foul canvas strap would be gone before I walked out the shop’s door.

Now for the Rogues Gallery (no prices, because they’re pretty much all ridiculous, even in Budget-Free World).

   

They are, left to right:  Richard Mille, Ulysse Nardin and Rolex Submariner

I have an aversion to most Rolex watches, not least because they’re generally mounted on a steel bracelet.  But they’re also clunky and ugly, not too mention overloaded with functions.  Yes, they have brilliant actions — accurate, reliable and well-made — but they’re “statement” watches, a creation of Marketing, and because they make jillions of the things every year, not especially exclusive either.

Here’s one last favorite of mine, just to help you mindscrape the ugliness of the above:

Seiko Grand Elegance ($4,800)

Even the watch snobs acknowledge this one’s value… although I personally prefer the Omega Tresor ($6,000):

Okay, that’s enough about watches.  I think you get the point.

2. Books.  I’ve written before that I prefer paper books over e-books, not only because I find operation of the ebook to be tiresome, but also because I like the feel of ordinary bound books in the hand.  I know that e-books are more convenient — fresh content can be summoned up while, say, traveling, taking away the weight and hassle of carrying multiple books in one’s suitcase.  But I also know that the content can be blocked or pulled at any time by whoever is distributing or storing the content, whereas once a real book is purchased, it’s yours forever, should you choose to keep it.

As to which books, I don’t think I have to go there.  Now for another perennial favorite:

3. Cars.  At the risk of being massively repetitive (because I’ve opined on the topic ad nauseam before), let me just list the criteria:

  • Stick shift (okay, manual transmission as used in actual driving) over automatic (steering).
  • No electronic control through software.  Note the similarities between books and cars:  in the old days, once you bought a car, you owned everything sold with it;  with modern cars, there are few functions that can’t be “switched off” unless you pay more for the privilege of use.  I’m not even going to talk about “self-drive” cars.
  • No digital snooping.  A warning light:  good.  Law enforcement or insurance companies tracking your speed, noting your acceleration patterns or logging your destinations:  not only bad, but unspeakably bad.
  • Must be beautiful.  Things designed by names like Pinanfarina, William Heynes, Bertone and David Brown (to name but some) will always win over Wally Wind-Tunnel Designs, Inc.

So on to a brief sample of the Automotive Bucket List:

Late 60s Fiat Dino


Same engine as the Ferrari Dino — in fact, the little 2.0 (later 2.4)-liter V6 was developed by Fiat for Ferrari — but as fully-restored Ferrari Dinos now command stratospheric prices (over $500,000) compared to a similarly-restored Fiat’s ~$150,000, the Fiat gets the nod.  I know that some may balk at Fiat’s legendary unreliability, but in this regard they were no worse than the Ferraris of the same era.

1957 Jaguar XK140


Oh, by all means compare this snarling beast to the whisper-quiet new JLR all-electric cars.  (No pic of the latter because ugh.)

And let’s get more modern:

2001 BMW Z8


Of course I’d prefer its predecessor, the 1957 BMW 507, but not for ten times the Z8’s $200,000.  Let’s not be stupid, here.

Okay, let’s go Murkin:

1965 Ford Mustang Mk 1

…and costing less than a third of the old Euro cars above, for good measure.

And finally, the topic I’ve covered so much that even I’m somewhat tired of it…

4. Guns.   My preferences and prejudices are well known to all:

  • 1911 over Glock
  • wood over plastic
  • metal over plastic
  • revolvers over semi-autos
  • bolt-actions over semi-autos
  • side-by-side instead of over-and-under shotgun barrels
  • double trigger sets over single triggers
  • …and so on.

And just a couple of examples should suffice:

CSMC A.H. Fox 20ga

I like the engraving, but I could do without it, to save costs — such as with the CZ Bobwhite in the same chambering, and at a third of the Fox’s price:



Note that both guns share similar characteristics:  splinter fore-end (to save weight), straight English stock (my preference over a pistol-grip stock), side-by-side barrels and a double trigger.  In terms of utility and reliability, they’re functionally identical.  But that Fox is just gorgeous.

Now don’t get me wrong when it comes to shotgun actions:  I have nothing against pump action (self- and home defense) or semi-auto (goose hunting);  but given my druthers, I’d be at the clay pigeon range every day of the week, if I could — so I prefer double-barrel break-open shotguns.

Similarly with rifles:

Mauser M98 Standard Expert

Now:  the Standard Expert retails for just over $13,000 new.  But I could “downgrade” to the Model 12 (which I’ve owned before, and it’s excellent) at a quarter of that price, or even, at a pinch, a WWII-era K98k (in decent condition).


…of which I’ve owned several.  In fact, give me any Mauser 98 (or Swedish 96) and I’m good to go.  But that Expert is seriously pretty… and then we come to the rimfire rifles.

Now here I don’t mind going with a semi-auto like the Ruger 10-22 or Winchester 63 type, because rifle plinking is just more fun when you don’t have to work the bolt between each shot.  (Ditto pistols, by the way.)

And don’t get me started on pump-action rimfires.  In fact, I much prefer shooting pump-action over bolt-action and even semi-auto rimfire rifles;  because I prefer to operate the machinery, and the pump-action is quicker and easier to operate than the bolt-actions, is why the pumps get my nod.

Let’s talk about handguns for a moment.

Pre-1990 Colt Python (.357 Mag, 6″ barrel)

They’re still filthy expensive, even though the new-generation Pythons are functionally a little better and about half the price of the older ones.  But that Royal Blue finish… have mercy.

But here’s the thing.  Other than non-rimfire revolvers with the “Bisley”-style grip (which I find tiresome to shoot because they’re uncontrollable), I like shooting almost any revolver.

Give me a Ruger GP-100, Smith Model 65 or 68, Colt Officer’s Target — hell, any of them will keep me banging away for hours.

Of course, I’m capable of banging away for hours with a semi-auto pistol too:

…and especially of the rimfire variety:

But if I want to do a little rimfire target shooting — a more deliberate activity than plinking — then I reach for a revolver, every time.

 

Summary (and good grief, there needs to be one):

When it comes to activities, I prefer to operate whatever it is, whether a car’s stick shift, a paper book, winding a watch or shooting a gun.

I know that it’s generally more time-consuming and less convenient to do all that — some might even say less efficient — but I don’t care.  These are all things I enjoy doing, and the enjoyment comes as much from the work involved as from the control of the activity.  In cars, it’s driving as opposed to steering;  in watches it’s not being reliant on a battery or even movement of the hand to keep the thing going;  in books, there are few greater pleasure than holding the author’s written word in hand — hell, I’d read a paper newspaper over an online website of the same newspaper any day of the week;  and finally, with guns, it’s all about feeling the machinery of the gun working in your hands, under your control.

Maybe it’s a function of my age, having grown up when a lot of what passes for convenience didn’t exist at the time.  On reflection, though, even that’s not true:  I learned to shoot with a single-shot pellet rifle, followed by a semi-auto .22 rifle long before I ever fired a bolt-action rifle.  But the minute I first fired that Mauser K98k, worked its bolt and fired again, I was hopelessly hooked.  Ditto driving cars:  my first cars all had stick shifts;  and when I finally did get one with an automatic transmission, I enjoyed the convenience… right up until I needed to get into a lower gear in a rain-slick corner, and felt helpless as the car just carried on.  (I didn’t crash, but it was sure as hell close.)

And to this day, when I get bored with the Internet — and that happens much sooner than it used to — out comes a good book off the shelf, and away I go into another world, needing only a little light to keep it going.

At that moment, I’m back where I belong, in an analog world;  and good grief, how I love it.

Scaling Down

Lifestyle

This is an interesting development:

Fewer booze buyers are reaching for the top shelf.

Americans aren’t thirsting for for the high-end tequila that once flowed freely, spirits companies said, as demand for $100 spirits has dropped off. Consumers appear to be trading down—or selecting less expensive versions of their preferred beverage—said Lawson Whiting, CEO of Brown-Forman (BF.A, BF.B), on Thursday, as sales of more affordable bottles fell less.

“We are seeing some weakening, for the first time, in terms of trade down,” Whiting said on a conference call, according to a transcript made available by AlphaSense. “When you look at $100 and above or $50-to-$100 [segments], those price points have weakened considerably.”

Industrywide, the number of $100-plus bottles sold has fallen 18% in the past three months, according to the market research firm NielsenIQ.

I’m not surprised.  All that high-end stuff, at the end of the day, delivers not much more in terms of taste and shall we say “knockdown power”, for a premium price.  And that would be okay, in isolation.

But when you have to spend $120,000 for an “economy” car — think I’m joking?  see how much you end up paying in total when you finance $45,000 over seven or ten years — and the cost of even the cheapest meal for two in a non-fast food restaurant will set you back well over $60, and your grocery bill rockets from $30 per week to $140… it doesn’t take a Nostradamus to predict that things are going to change when it comes to spending your money on what is after all an indulgence.

And the change can come with reduced consumption (as above) or simply learning to live with cheaper merchandise.

In earlier, less fucked-up times, I would now have been on my second or maybe even third car after the Tiguan;  instead, I now know that barring some kind of miracle, the Tiggy is going to be my lifetime vehicle.

I can’t remember the last time I bought a bottle of single-malt — years, I suspect — and it doesn’t matter because I seldom drink the stuff unless friends show up for dins, and a single after-dinner cocktail is called for.

It’s not just me, either:  the Son&Heir drinks maybe 10% of what he used to drink, booze-wise, and even my rowdy friends have cut back.

But spare me the sob stories of what this means for the manufacturers of high-end bling.  If ever there’s a case study in ripping people off for the “status” of using their products, vendors like Louis Vuitton, Glenfiddich, Porsche and Swarovski are headed for bleak times;  and I care not a fig for their predicament.

A Question Of Time

Conservatism, Lifestyle, Traditions

Longtime Reader preussenotto writes:

Thanks for maintaining the last interesting thing on the internet.

You are probably 20 years older than I am give or take, but I have a question for you.

We hear a lot of nonsense now about “Someone born in the wrong body” but do you ever feel like you were born in the wrong time? That your preferences, tastes, attitudes always seem about 40 years out of step with what is happening now?

It isn’t just a “getting old” thing, I always felt it even when I was a callow yoot. I would read about Victorian England, or Coolidge America, and think… I would fit perfectly into that time, where in the hell did it go? Keep in mind I have no desire to live without electricity, or painless dentistry, but I always mentally fit better into a bygone (often imagined, I grant you) era, and it has never gone away, fifty plus years on. Dunno if there are others of my ilk out there.

Maybe its just inevitable nostalgia, or “O Tempora, O Mores”?

 Let me address the primary issue up front.

When presussenotto writes:  “Keep in mind I have no desire to live without electricity, or painless dentistry…”

Whenever I talk about preferring to live in another time, some smartass always comes up with “So you want to live in a time before [penicillin, automatic transmissions, antibiotics, take your pick]?”  Of course I don’t, and neither does preussenotto.

When we think of earlier times, we speak of the culture of the time, the mood of the time, the manners of the time and the social constructs that were in place then, but are not now.

Using cars as an example of the technology, for instance:  I like having the excellent brakes, better wiring, better suspension and such of today;  what I don’t like is stupid shit like On*Star, nanny warnings about seatbelts, electronic rather than mechanical handbrakes and all those things that have supposedly improved the driving experience but have really served only to drive the price of cars upwards, for little real or lasting benefit.

What we are talking about is a time when you could leave your car unlocked in the parking lot at the supermarket, or your house unlocked during the day, or talk to people without worrying about triggering their ultra-sensitive emotional antennae, or visit decent public libraries with thousands of worthwhile books to take out.

When politicians didn’t try to “improve” or “safeguard” your life, and didn’t take over a third of your salary in taxes.

When the next generation would come along with at least a decent chance of living a better life than their parents.

When capitalism was the way to a better future, and Communism was actually illegal or at least frowned upon.

When you could work at a company for a long time, maybe for life, and wouldn’t be fired just because some accountant thought he could find someone else who could do the same job for less, with fewer benefits.

When your kid could take his air rifle or .22 to school and just leave it in his locker so he could go shooting in the woods with his buddies, unsupervised, at the end of the school day.

When raising a family was seen as the primary duty of a married couple, with the man earning the salary and the woman staying at home to look after the kids and the household — and she wasn’t forced into the workplace because even a modest house had suddenly become unaffordable on only one salary.

When a family outing was a picnic in the park, and not a trip to Disneyland that costs thousands of dollars.

When girls showed modesty in their attitude, their behavior and their clothing, and boys embraced their masculinity while understanding the duties of citizenship and responsibility.

When people could still be shocked by bad language in public.

To return to the question:  “Do you ever feel like you were born in the wrong time? That your preferences, tastes, attitudes always seem about 40 years out of step with what is happening now?”

I feel that way every single day.  And it’s not just nostalgia, where your memory saves only the good parts and never the bad parts.  The fact of the matter is that I do remember the bad parts, but in almost every case the good parts back then were far better than the best of times now — and the bad parts back then were not even close to the horrors of everyday life today.

I try to live my life today as close as I can to the way people lived their lives a long time ago — and at every turn I’m laughed at, patronized and dismissed as just some old fart living in the past.

Well, guess what?  I want to live in the past.  I don’t care which time, particularly:  it could even be a mixture of some parts of the 1910s all the way to the early 1960s.  I wasn’t alive back before 1954, but even without having lived back then, I feel far closer to those earlier decades than I do to the bloody shambles of our so-called “civilization” of today.  The people of, say, 1960 lived lives with a philosophy far closer to the civilization of 1900 than the people of today do compared to the people of 1965.

When I say despairingly, as I often do, that I don’t want to live in this world anymore, I’m not being suicidal:  I just feel so damn hopeless. because everything that was once so wonderful has disappeared completely, leaving no joy behind.

And so does Reader preussenotto, and so, I suspect, do many of my Readers.

The tempora  have changed, and not for the better;  and the mores  have disappeared completely.

Update:  Here’s what I mean:

And here’s the thing:  I know that not all men today dress like the the loon on the RHS, and that some men still dress today like the one on the LHS.

However, back in 1950, not a single man dressed like the RHS twerp.

Now ask me the question again…

Say Wut?

Lifestyle, Real Estate

Seems as though a few areas in the U.S. have seen large growth in real estate values since the Covid thing.  Mostly, it should be said, this is because property in the area was relatively inexpensive — i.e. the growth is off a low base.  Some of the towns, though, are inexplicable.

Top 10 cities and how much the value of their homes has increased since 2019:

  1. Knoxville, TN – +86% — I’d live there
  2. Fayetteville, AR – +84.5% — low base
  3. Charleston, SC – +81.3% — I’d live there
  4. Scranton, PA – +78.4% — inexplicable;  shit hole
  5. Syracuse, NY – +77.6% — inexplicable;  shit hole
  6. Portland, ME – +75.7% — I’d live there
  7. Rochester, NY – +75.2% — inexplicable;  shit hole
  8. New Haven, CT – +73.8% — expensive became more expensive
  9. Charlotte, NC – +73.1% — sorry, nope
  10. Chattanooga, TN – +72.9% — low base, but I’d live there.

See any on the list where you’d care to live?  Your comments are welcome.