Update to the The New Yorker's Eustace Tilley contest

Picture 3-88

Chelsie Gosk says

The New Yorker has selected the winners of the Eustace Tilley design contest. Winners have been notified via FlickrMail on their Flickr accounts, so if you entered, please check your Flickr account as soon as possible, and if you know someone who entered, please spread the word. Thank you.



  1. OMG!

    There’s a submission from ApeLad!

    APE LAD!


    Why has this not been reported by BB? I mean, I rely upon you to inform me every single time he changes socks! Or thinks about it!

    You guys are slipping in your unabashed fanpersondom.

  2. My friend Lee Moyer was put off by the contest’s submission agreement and did a couple of provocative covers in protest of it:


    Here’s what Lee said to me in an email:

    As you know, I was sorely tempted to have a little fun with The New Yorker Contest that you found on Boing Boing.

    But before I got started, I read the fine print – and it happens that this is a well-disguised Conde Nastygram.
    They believe it’s really their art – we just make it for free – and for their largely unknown and unseen website into the bargain.
    And credit – forget it!

    “8. OWNERSHIP AND LICENSE. All entry materials become the property of the Sponsor and will not be acknowledged or returned. Entrant agrees that the submission shall be a work-made-for-hire within the meaning of the Copyright Act, and that Condé Nast Publications shall own all rights, including copyright, therein throughout the world. In the event any submission is deemed not to be work-made-for-hire for any reason, Entrant hereby transfers and assigns the entire copyright (for the full term of copyright including any extensions thereto) throughout the world, in any and all media and forms of publication, reproduction, transmission, distribution, performance, adaptation, enhancement or display now in existence or hereafter developed in such Submission to Condé Nast Publications. Entry into this Promotion constitutes entrant’s irrevocable and perpetual permission and consent, without further compensation or attribution.”

    I admire the new Yorker’s history, erudition and long-time support of the best the arts has to offer. But they have become a cog in a very wicked machine. So rather than send them some loving covers, I thought I’d send these to you instead. Please share them with your fellow New Yorkers.

  3. I entered the contest. (And did not win.)

    I’m a professional freelance artist, it’s how I make my living. I like to be paid for my work.

    Entering a fun silly contest that plays with one of America’s classic (if not culturally popular) icons was enjoyable, and was a diversion well worth the hour my entry took.

    Conde Nast can have the rights to my entry, I made it just for them, featuring their mascot.

    I respect the whole copyfight movement, but equating this with fascism or Burgess-esque dystopianism is really stretching the issue.

    Sometimes a fun no-prize havin’ contest is just a fun no-prize havin’ contest. I think you’ll find most everyone who entered, win or lose, had fun drawing and got a kick out of being in the Flickr group.

    Standing outside all of it fuming and raging with indignance at the terms of entering may be righteously indignant, but I bet it’s not much fun.

    Besides, I have plenty of actual injustice to be indignant about.

  4. As a contest participant I was happy for two reasons.

    1) It was an art contest on hosted through Flickr. Two years ago we were struggling to emerge from the NIPSA cloud. I think it’s come a long way in accepting artists into the fold. With Deviant Art being really the only comparable alternative (and a clunky, niche one at that) I think this contest was a big step.

    2) It really brought a lot of people together. I’ve seen quite a few artists whose work I’ll continue to enjoy as long as they post. Whoever wins or doesn’t, there was a lot of talented people I’d have never known about if not for this. That makes me happy.

  5. Did they announce who the winners are, or do we not know?

    The official announcement (seen here as a Flickr pool discussion topic) says the entries will be posted Monday, February 4, on the New Yorker’s website.

    I’m sure that I’ll find the Flickr pool itself more compelling than the actual winners, since I liked looking all the interpretations, good or meh.

Comments are closed.