Queerty is better as a member
He can give me that hot bod….
@babybabybaby: I think he has to a great many people. Not s!ut shaming just saying. Maybe if he applied himself more to his work he’d have more money? I don’t know just thinking out loud.
I have a feeling someone might want to offer him free room and board. Just till he gets back on his feet, you know.
Being evicted and giving away all of your possessions that you have amassed in the last ten yrs except one. And it’s for a new life art project? Sounds like he’s depressed and going through a life crisis due to being evicted.
@babybabybaby: Had the pleasure of attending and grabbing more than a few things. Sadly his body wasn’t up for grabs, but handshakes and hugs were up for the taking. He was such a kind and generous sweetie pie. Hope the road treats him well.
Why is Queerty obsessed with this effeminate ‘weird without a beard’ hobo ?!?
He is a HOBO both lookwise and literally :D
Getting rid of all your posessions in combination of being evicted? That doesn’t sound good. What happened to all the money he made or makes with gay porn?
I hope this wasn’t inspired by a reading of “Into the Wild”.
@ robirob They still make money in gay porn? That’s a surprise with all the free stuff floating around online.
Kolby is one among the small stable of hot fourty-something porn models. Hope he continues his career.
“Obfuscation captures greater intensity”? The fashionable nonsense of radical chic.
Obfuscation doesn’t help a writer capture greater intensity at all – that’s exactly the opposite of what the word means, i.e., to render something unclear and unintelligible. What obfuscation does do, however, is allow someone so clearly devoid of inspiration and creativity to masquerade not only as an artist, but a poet too.
He’s adorable, but I wonder if he’s a little mentally ill.
I would give him a home and lots of tenderness if he came to live with me here in Brazil.
Colby: If you need a place to crash, please contact me. Anytime. Really. I’m not kidding. Sigh.
@All the judgemental B!tches: WTF business of yours is it for Colby to do whatever he likes? For some reason, I can’t quite picture him living under a bridge, or anything like that.
He is so sexy. He should have been well paid. It is a shame.
He’s pulling a joaquin phoenix.
Love the hairdo Dena Jones …
Jeesh- why do y’all think he’s crazy just because he doesn’t want stuff? Does your stuff really make your life better? Unlikely. Stuff is fun because the hunt is neat. The gather is kinda cool. Hoarding things just for the sake of having it- not so sexy. Good for him. Have less, very likely, smile more.
Take it from personal experience , the less stuff you have the less headaches you have. And I’m saying this as a person who has a pretty decent chunk of change.
@robirob: This doesn’t sound like a money issue, eviction aside (gentrification can price out even those with a modest amount in the bank)… He didn’t SELL all of his stuff. He gave it all away, as a creative experiment and in the name of letting go of material possessions.
@jwrappaport: I think he knows that and that was his point. What he seems to have meant was “obfuscation creates the impression of greater intensity” and it’s one of the unwritten rules he’s trying to break.
@frankpoor: I don’t think that’s what he means. I think what he means is that the accessibility of art and the clarity of its creator’s message are two unwritten rules of aesthetics that ought to be broken. He uses the phrase about obfuscation as a premise to argue that there can indeed be great art that breaks those rules by being unintelligible.
He’s right to imply that there’s plenty of great art that isn’t accessible and that requires more than simply passive engagement, but the bit about obfuscation, once again, is not so much wrong as it is nonsensical. Clarity isn’t a “rule” or subjective aesthetic preference, but rather a natural product of our cognitive faculties. We can’t derive any meaning from something that is unintelligible – that’s what unintelligible means. The reason art is exciting to us and the reason we react to it is because it plays with our expectations or, what we think of as “breaking the rules.” Aesthetics is about the play of forms – you can’t have aesthetics without forms to manipulate and at least a common frame of reference that the observer can understand. It’s the same reason you can’t have poetry without an intelligible language. E. E. Cummings and Lewis Carroll are great examples of this: their work is full of deliberately misused punctuation, typographical and formatting inconsistencies, and even made-up words – yet there is no question that their work, unconventional as it is, is intelligible to any English speaker as poetry.
What he seems to be getting at is the idea that to confuse and perplex observers is somehow a virtue in the arts and some key to deeper meaning or power. This literally doesn’t make sense. It’s not an aesthetic debate, but a definitional one that seems pretty clear. To obfuscate is not to make more complex or texturally rich (say, in music). It means to deliberately make something unclear and unintelligible so that it’s harder for people to make sense of.
From the interviews he’s given, he seems a genuinely nice guy, totally at ease with himself, and enjoying his porn career. I wish him well. As for his attractiveness, well, don’t get me started…………
Need an account? Register It's free and easy.
Meet The Adorable Boyfriend Duo That Dresses CFDA Icon Of The Year Rihanna
PHOTOS: Vintage Fashion Ads From The 1980s
PHOTOS: Uptown, Downtown and Upside Down at the New York Boylesque Festival
PHOTOS: Gay Cowboys Lasso The American West
PHOTOS: Idina Menzel Back on Broadway in If/Then