Clock hands are (generally) mainly practical and also only secondarily stylistic or artistic. However, clock hands can be so elegant and also endowed with such tourist attraction that they become the focal point, an end in itself that supersedes capability. We look not so much to tell the moment as to behold a wrist watch that is gorgeous or striking. Onlookers consider clock hands very first anyway, since that's just how they tell the time. They have learned to select the placement of the hour hand and also the position of the minute hand more or less as quickly as feasible. That's practically all they require from the chronometer to get the wanted information. To puts it simply, the clock dial isn't as crucial as the hands. The numbers or placeholders along the border of the dial are reference points that function as a support of the information already amassed. You don't need to function as difficult to identify the time when the dial is conveniently readable, but you can grasp it absent the clock face if you needed to. So much for the function of time telling; what about its form? Is it at best pure fluff, and at worst something that gets in the way, interfering with the main function? We address this concern with the observation that disturbance with capability is clearly to be avoided, however purposefully giving up the chance of the looker-on creating a psychological link with watches is a shame.