I’m working on a book we’re copublishing with an English publisher. It has flocked art, and since we were afraid not everyone would know what “flocked” means, we wanted to described the art as “fuzzy” on the cover. But our English colleagues say that in England “fuzzy” does not mean “soft.” Is this true? The two words are certainly not synonyms in the US, but I would say “fuzzy” implies “soft.” Peaches are fuzzy–horsehair isn’t.
Even in the US fuzzy doesn’t only, or mostly, mean soft. It also means indistinct or not sharp and is used synonymously with blurry, as evidenced by the term ‘fuzzy logic’. I would have said that, like the English, Americans use the term more to mean blurry and lacking hard edges than to mean soft. A peach is fuzzy, but it’s not necessarily soft. A politician’s recollection of an embrassing event is always fuzzy, but it isn’t associated with softness.
If you use the term fuzzy when referring to art, the first impression I get is of out-of-focus photoraphy or a very staticky TV picture.
I agree with Blake. It’s not that the word fuzzy doesn’t mean soft-textured here, but that people would typically assume it meant blurry instead.
Many people this side of the water will be familiar with this toy, which does use the word in the sense you mean, but I’d be tempted to use an alternative. What about “textured” or “tactile”?
Most English people know what flocked wallpaper is though. It’s the stuff on the walls of an Indian restaurant.
I think most people would understand ‘fuzzy’, even though it is still somewhat foreign. ‘fluffy’ is a possibility, but might not be a precise alternative, as it might imply a deeper pile.
Thesaurus.com also suggests downy, but again thsi might not be quite right.
How about Velvety - whatever term you choose, you may only need to use it in the introduction.
Actually, what we end up saying on the cover isn’t up to me (I think they settled on “soft and fuzzy art”). I was just curious as to whether there really is a difference in meaning between US fuzzy and UK fuzzy. Judging fromeverton’s link, I’d guess that it’s no more ambiguous in one country than in the other.
Thanks all.
All English children of my age know what fuzzy is. We played with Fuzzy Felt.
Fuzzy means Fuzzy.
Fuzzy-visual means indistinct, blurry, as des fuzzy-conceptual.
Fuzzy-tactile means, well, sort of furry. Like Fuzzy Felt. Or a peach. Etc.
The problem with an art book cover is one assumes that “fuzzy” will mean fuzzy-visual.
Fuzzy Felt is exactly what I thought of when I saw the word fuzzy in the title. I then wondered quickly if you might be thinking of “the fuzz”. There is also “fuzzy wuzzy was a bear, fuzzy wuzzy had no hair” which is slightly counterintuitive, but hey.
- stream of semi-conciousness by Iteki
Fuzzy wuzzy wasn’t very fuzzy, was he?
Sorry, couldn’t resist.
Many years back wasn’t “Fuzzy” used as a derogetory term for one of the colonial native groups? Perhaps similar to “WOG”?
Yes, “fuzzy wuzzy” used to be a derogatory term for various groups, particularly people in Sudan during Britain’s wars there in the C19[sup]th[/sup].
Australian veterans still talk of the “Fuzzy Wuzzy angels”.
According to my dictionary “fuzzy wuzzy angels” were people from Papua New Guinea who acted as stretcher-bearers during WWII.
I thought I remembered that. Apparently it’s no longer considered as such and needs to be avoided.
Thanks for the confirmation of my memory.
Being from england, i would say that fuzzy means “out of focus” or blurry. rather than soft.
So the title of your book is something like “Fuzzy Art”. Have the words printed on felt, or letters stamped out of felt. No chance of misunderstanding.
Yeah, I know, it won’t help on Amazon…