|
> Buying the watch is not the hobby, wearing it is. I'm not sure I see the distinction between "wearing it" and merely "owning it", as they both seem somewhat passive activities (if you'll pardon the oxymoron). In other words, I'm asking, is the hobby one of collecting (as with stamps or coins), or is there something involved in the wearing that is the fundamentally interesting/engaging part of the hobby? Perhaps what most commenters (including me) are skeptical of is that hobbies have also been known as "pastimes" and are, presumably enjoyable, ways to pass the time. I suspect that most here would agree that for "expensive" hobbies, such as high-end computer gaming, automotive racing, or aviation, they would still participate in it and call the hobby by the same name if they didn't personally own the equipment necessary to engage in their chosen activity (and merely had unrestricted, or even shared/restricted, access to it). I'm not so sure this is the case, however, for something like art collecting. If that person doesn't get to keep the art, isn't that really just an art buyer, not a collector? |