Thanks for this link. I saw the video first and had pretty much convinced myself that all the doodling was just digitally added, until I saw this link.
Thanks for this link. I saw the video first and had pretty much convinced myself that all the doodling was just digitally added, until I saw this link.
Spooky... good potential hook for a Junji Ito and Bradbury collab, The Illustrating Man. Is there some term like "uncanny valley" for using something innocent or childish as a contrast for some...
Dedicating your life to doodling isn’t all smooth-sailing, though. In February 2020, Cox got the flu and began having doodle-related hallucinations, which landed him six weeks in a psychiatric ward, he tells the Sunday Times. “It’s a scary feeling to think you are losing your mind and not know what’s real,” he says. “I’m glad I have a grasp on reality again and I now make sure to go on walks and step outside of doodle world now and then.”
Spooky... good potential hook for a Junji Ito and Bradbury collab, The Illustrating Man.
Is there some term like "uncanny valley" for using something innocent or childish as a contrast for some unsettling or horrific thing it becomes? Like Sanderson's Rithmatist was 98% YA book and 2% hordes of evil chalk drawings climbing inside children.
Even though I had never heard of him before now, he's also apparently one of the most successful new artists in recent years, with one of his pieces from 2020 selling for $1M at auction. So for...
Even though I had never heard of him before now, he's also apparently one of the most successful new artists in recent years, with one of his pieces from 2020 selling for $1M at auction. So for him it's not even just a hobby... it's also a very lucrative career, which also helps too.
I saw this a few days back and while he doodled a house and I'm willing to believe it is his house, I find it incredibly hard to believe that he actually lives in that house on a day to day basis....
I saw this a few days back and while he doodled a house and I'm willing to believe it is his house, I find it incredibly hard to believe that he actually lives in that house on a day to day basis. And I find the attention this has received to be disingenuous/purposefully misleading based on that highly likely aspect.
"I doodled my house" ...reads... "I doodled the house I live in" ...not... "I made a house unlivable as an art project." If I told you I burned my house down, would you read that as I burned down...
"I doodled my house"
...reads...
"I doodled the house I live in"
...not...
"I made a house unlivable as an art project."
If I told you I burned my house down, would you read that as I burned down one of the properties I own or I burned down the house I live in?
Words have meanings and a solid portion of this publicity is from people who thinks he lives there.
I doubt anyone is thinking back that far based on the comments I've seen. Just the belief that "I doodled my house" means "I doodled the house I live in."
I doubt anyone is thinking back that far based on the comments I've seen. Just the belief that "I doodled my house" means "I doodled the house I live in."
Being that 97% of the people in the UK that own a house only own one, I'm curious how so many here seem to have gone straight to the conclusion that "I doodled my home" translates to "I doodled...
Being that 97% of the people in the UK that own a house only own one, I'm curious how so many here seem to have gone straight to the conclusion that "I doodled my home" translates to "I doodled one of my spare houses."
If the title had been "I doodled a house that I bought" that would have been technically more accurate if your assumptions about him and this house are true, but what evidence do you have that he...
If the title had been "I doodled a house that I bought" that would have been technically more accurate if your assumptions about him and this house are true, but what evidence do you have that he doesn't actually live there?
He's said in interviews that he and his wife have lived there while working on the project over the last 2 years, the reason he purchased that particular house is so he could be close to his parents during lockdown since they only live a few minutes away, and that he has also no intention of selling it anytime soon, or even giving tours to the public, so it's not like he's putting it up for auction or profiting directly from it like he does with all his other artwork.
He's also a very obsessive, strange guy, by all accounts, so it honestly wouldn't surprise me if he was telling the truth, he did live there for the last 2 years, and he fully intended to continue living there for the foreseeable future. He wouldn't be the first artist to live in their bizarre art project of a house. Salvadore Dali lived in his Portlligat house (which is now a museum) from the 1930s all the way into the 1980s. And Atlas Obscura lists dozens of similar eccentric, odd, and outsider arthictecture homes that various people have built and lived in over the years.
And also keep in mind that just because the house was shown as a totally blank white canvas in the video doesn't mean it's always like that. Outside of filming it could be a somewhat normal looking place, with lots of ordinary looking furniture, rugs, drapes, artwork, personal possessions, and knicknacks in every room. And there is also nothing stopping him or his wife from simply painting, wallpapering, or carpeting over the doodles in some of the rooms if they get sick of them either.
But honestly, I personally don't give a crap even if he never did live there, and never will. It's a fucking cool art project, clearly took a ton of dedication, and even if he doesn't actually live there, IMO him calling it "my house" in the tweet is not nearly as "disingenuous/purposefully misleading" as you're making it out to be, regardless of how few people in the UK own second homes. Something I own is still "my" thing, even if I have never actually used for its intended purpose.
That reads as "I doodled a house I own". Nothing more, nothing less. If you want to read more into it, have at it, but it's crass to give the guy crap over a headline that's lacking terms of...
"I doodled my house"
That reads as "I doodled a house I own". Nothing more, nothing less. If you want to read more into it, have at it, but it's crass to give the guy crap over a headline that's lacking terms of service level clarification over the semantics of whether he lived there or not. Especially since it absolutely does not matter whether he lived in it, any more than whether the Mona Lisa model's hair color is natural or not.
Or it reads as a different thing to different people as evidenced by comments across the internet where this has appeared. The only crassness here is your apparent unwillingness to accept that...
Or it reads as a different thing to different people as evidenced by comments across the internet where this has appeared. The only crassness here is your apparent unwillingness to accept that your view isn't the only one. Have a good day Adys.
Article from SmithsonianMag about the project, and the artist behind it:
This Artist Spent Two Years Covering His Mansion in Doodles
Thanks for this link. I saw the video first and had pretty much convinced myself that all the doodling was just digitally added, until I saw this link.
There was also a short BBC news video about this a couple of weeks ago. It made my head spin!
Well I guess now I guess that's a new variety of nightmares I'll be experiencing every night.
Spooky... good potential hook for a Junji Ito and Bradbury collab, The Illustrating Man.
Is there some term like "uncanny valley" for using something innocent or childish as a contrast for some unsettling or horrific thing it becomes? Like Sanderson's Rithmatist was 98% YA book and 2% hordes of evil chalk drawings climbing inside children.
i have just one question: how do you get the time to do something like this
The pandemic was great for focusing on hobbies you can do at home.
Even though I had never heard of him before now, he's also apparently one of the most successful new artists in recent years, with one of his pieces from 2020 selling for $1M at auction. So for him it's not even just a hobby... it's also a very lucrative career, which also helps too.
His work reminds me of Lauren Asta and her doodle art murals.
I saw this a few days back and while he doodled a house and I'm willing to believe it is his house, I find it incredibly hard to believe that he actually lives in that house on a day to day basis. And I find the attention this has received to be disingenuous/purposefully misleading based on that highly likely aspect.
Why does it matter whether he lives in it?
"I doodled my house"
...reads...
"I doodled the house I live in"
...not...
"I made a house unlivable as an art project."
If I told you I burned my house down, would you read that as I burned down one of the properties I own or I burned down the house I live in?
Words have meanings and a solid portion of this publicity is from people who thinks he lives there.
I doubt anyone is thinking back that far based on the comments I've seen. Just the belief that "I doodled my house" means "I doodled the house I live in."
To me, I guess "I doodled my home" would have that connotation. "My house" implies ownership, but I don't think it says anything about occupation.
Being that 97% of the people in the UK that own a house only own one, I'm curious how so many here seem to have gone straight to the conclusion that "I doodled my home" translates to "I doodled one of my spare houses."
If the title had been "I doodled a house that I bought" that would have been technically more accurate if your assumptions about him and this house are true, but what evidence do you have that he doesn't actually live there?
He's said in interviews that he and his wife have lived there while working on the project over the last 2 years, the reason he purchased that particular house is so he could be close to his parents during lockdown since they only live a few minutes away, and that he has also no intention of selling it anytime soon, or even giving tours to the public, so it's not like he's putting it up for auction or profiting directly from it like he does with all his other artwork.
He's also a very obsessive, strange guy, by all accounts, so it honestly wouldn't surprise me if he was telling the truth, he did live there for the last 2 years, and he fully intended to continue living there for the foreseeable future. He wouldn't be the first artist to live in their bizarre art project of a house. Salvadore Dali lived in his Portlligat house (which is now a museum) from the 1930s all the way into the 1980s. And Atlas Obscura lists dozens of similar eccentric, odd, and outsider arthictecture homes that various people have built and lived in over the years.
And also keep in mind that just because the house was shown as a totally blank white canvas in the video doesn't mean it's always like that. Outside of filming it could be a somewhat normal looking place, with lots of ordinary looking furniture, rugs, drapes, artwork, personal possessions, and knicknacks in every room. And there is also nothing stopping him or his wife from simply painting, wallpapering, or carpeting over the doodles in some of the rooms if they get sick of them either.
But honestly, I personally don't give a crap even if he never did live there, and never will. It's a fucking cool art project, clearly took a ton of dedication, and even if he doesn't actually live there, IMO him calling it "my house" in the tweet is not nearly as "disingenuous/purposefully misleading" as you're making it out to be, regardless of how few people in the UK own second homes. Something I own is still "my" thing, even if I have never actually used for its intended purpose.
That reads as "I doodled a house I own". Nothing more, nothing less. If you want to read more into it, have at it, but it's crass to give the guy crap over a headline that's lacking terms of service level clarification over the semantics of whether he lived there or not. Especially since it absolutely does not matter whether he lived in it, any more than whether the Mona Lisa model's hair color is natural or not.
Or it reads as a different thing to different people as evidenced by comments across the internet where this has appeared. The only crassness here is your apparent unwillingness to accept that your view isn't the only one. Have a good day Adys.