There it is (above)...Paris Hilton's $320,000 dog house. My impression when I first saw it was, "Is that all there is? $320,000 only buys you that!?" But what the heck, it's a nice little house, it fits the alcove perfectly, and the iron fence sets it off nicely.
I imagine the door is so big because these pricey doghouses are actually meant for heavy use by human beings. They're kind of playhouses for humans where the owner gets to hang out with his dog on it's own turf. Maybe they watch TV together.
Here's (above) the interior of the house. It has a second floor mezzanine which I doubt will be used often, except by visiting kids.
I used to think that expensive doghouses were outrageous given that so many real people all over the world sleep in alleyways and sidewalks. Now I'm not so sure. It's too much money to spend on a dog -- no doubt about that -- but as a clubhouse for adults and kids who want to play with their dog...well, mmmmm, I can see it, if you have money to burn.
As I said, most luxury doghouses deliberately resemble human houses, but there are exceptions, like the dog house above. Ugly, isn't it? Well. at least the owner tried to see things from the dog's point of view.
What really interests me about these dog-centered houses is the opportunity they afford for thinking about habitation in the abstract. Dogs are other-wordly, alien creatures. To build for dogs you have to think like a dog. It's a chance to think of the idea of housing without pre-conceptions or cultural assumptions. Who knows? Maybe some of the ideas we come up with would work for humans, too.
Try free-associating on the subject of a money-is-no-object, dog-centered house and see what you come up with. Don't attempt to be logical, and don't censor yourself. Just see what happens.
Me, I like the idea that dogs love to stick their heads out of the windows of moving cars. Maybe the ideal chair for a dog would be one that moved on tracks all over the property interiors and exteriors whenever it was sat on. Naw, that's dumb. Well then how about a doggie window where the dog can watch you take a shower or cook a meal? My dogs used to love that. Naw, that's dumb, too. Well how about a glass tunnel where cats can run through the dog house? Naw...well, anyway, you see what I mean about conceptual blockbusting on the subject of habitats.
I can't resist showing this upscale-doghouse (above). This time the door is low.
Look what the inside (above) looks like! What's in that green urn?
It's hard to imagine that animals (above) who've been coddled in expensive digs will ever be able to survive on their own if they have to.
Could these goldfish ever survive in a real river?
And what about birds who've lived in high-end birdhouses (above)?
Can a bird who's lived in digs like this (above)...
...ever feel comfortable in the company of a bird who's lived in a house like this (above)? Maybe we're introducing human notions of class into the avian world.
Will worms raised in luxury worm high-rises (above) ever feel at ease in plain old dirt? Are we creating a worm aristocracy? You see the magnitude of the problem.
13 comments:
Dogs are dogs. They roll around in dead animals and eat their own poop. They're not human and don't think or feel like us but people, especially rich ones, seem to think that they are. So they build them huge houses and force them into clothes, neglecting that fact that all the dog really wants is a belly rub and a game of throw the stick. I actually feel bad for rich people's dogs, they're probably not getting what they want at all.
By the way Eddie, have you seen the indoor doggie pee mat that's advertised in Skymall?
Quite the conundrum we have here.
Your idea of the dog hanging its head from the portal of a moving vehicle is great. A circular track would keep expenses down while revealing the rote endeavor as a metaphor for the human rat race. You should have been an architect!
Wow... some dogs/fishes/birds have nicer houses then I do :(
Those images show another aspect of "mondo cane",anyway there is the coin's 2 faces,because someone have to be very dog to spend money that way,a money which is a need of many people living in poverty.
Yea that's weird, those numbers don't add up for me. Even 30Gs seems a lot for that. It's not like she had to buy any property for that. Even if it was custom designed for her, it isn't a very elaborate design. I couldn't imagine it has it's own water and electricity independent from the actual human home. I'm just curious now why the price is so high, who knows, there could be a legitimate reason. I don't want to be one of those ignorant types that thinks full length animated films can me made for a grand.
Also, I don't really care how a rich person wants to spend their money, more money into the economy I say.
When people (pet owners) do stuff like this, ( I saw a TV commercial for a "Snuggie" for your dog) they create a confusing analogy between themselves, and their dog, between human and canine. Whether this is the purpose or an inadverent outome, I can't tell... Daawwwg.....Gonnittt!!!
One disappointment... none of the doggie mansions have a painting of dogs playing cards. Maybe too proletarian. Dogs playing golf, anyone? ... polo?
A dog to be happy only needs fresh air,space,food and liberty
"Will worms raised in luxury worm high-rises (above) ever feel at ease in plain old dirt? Are we creating a worm aristocracy? You see the magnitude of the problem."
Eddie, I think you may be suffering from worm paranoia.
I'd like to think these extravagant homes would appeal to my artistic sense of fun but instead they are just stupid. Dogs don't care. We over coddle pets to a fault, who knows why. Maybe because we don't know how to take care of children or have proper relationships anymore. It's far easier to dress your poodle up like a baby, give it manicures and play house with it. Creepy.
Cynthia
i don't worry about thoughts of aristocracy among animals.
frankly I find even my slightly pampered cats total push overs out in the real world. in the animal world, experience and muscle power is the thing.
Anon: The comment you just sent will likely appear in a post that was put up two or more years ago, and no one will see it there. For that reason I duped it and put it here, in the most recent post. It's out of context here, but what the heck, at least it'll be seen. It'll still appear in the old post. Here's your comment:
"I just re-read the Manipulated Man, and quite frankly I agree with everything she says. Women control men, they control society, and are beyond reproach. If you want to challenge that you will be isolated and harassed. You don't have to look very hard to see that society is, by and large, set up for women. The economy is driven by women. And "child-rearing" is essentially brainwashing into this cult. First of all, a mother inculcates a child into the gender roles she believes in. This is essentially "chivalrism" for boys and "domineerism" for girls. Then the kids are shuffled off to a public school system where more women will continue the daily assault. As a result, male achievement has plummetted as they have internalized the feminist programming that all men are potential rapists and degenerate, and all women can do everything better than men and that men have always persecuted and suppressed them.
Vilar's philosophy is vilified because we have all been indoctrinated into thinking ourselves capable of "critical thinking" when in fact most people take this to mean that the point is to find something to criticize. In reality, the ideals we hold to be true are projected onto reality more often than not. And these ideas are impressed upon us when we are most vulnerable; i.e., as children. That the whole process of socialization is unconscious does not mean that women aren't skilled manipulators of men. It just means that they appear to believe what they are saying when they deny it.
Society is organized around very big lies. Lies so transparent they are simply seen as reality. And if a man is so well-socialized that he is able to believe without reservation that he is incapable of reason, ignoble, or stupid, then he will continue in his enslavement.
We are destroying the planet, so far as I can tell, so that women can have the children, SUVs, patent leather boots, and new trendy clothes every year. None of these women care about much except their own self-fulfillment. The men who go to war (or work) and bring home the bacon are their slaves. They do so because they are the victims of blackmail. As such its hard to have sympathy for the victim, given that his enslavement is so obviously self-induced. But when you factor in the reality that the process begins with the inculcation of these values in children, it becomes a serious tragedy."
(Anonymous)
If anonymous is playing a character again........I don't know whether I want to kill him or give him an award.
Post a Comment