Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Tuck_Lion]

For the same reason we have an Anime thread?

Well in the anime thread you can talk about anime.  Here you can talk about one minor aspect of character design I guess

Difference? I see none. You said the same thing twice.

[Leafsnail]

That was pretty forced even by your standards.

[Tuck_Lion]

That was pretty forced even by your standards.

What was "forced"? And I don't believe we have been acquainted long enough for you to be aware of my standards.

[Lysabild]

Oh wow, ptw.

[Scoops Novel]

Well, it is a *insert definition*, which includes sexuality. The latter has limited utility, but it is a recognizable cultural grouping, particularly given how countless others have formed similar cultural constructs based around their sexuality. Given that we wouldn't be complaining about such a thread based around those groups, i see little reason to do so here. As for the specifics of the message mentioned in the earlier thread, i don't mind, i simply want to pick your brain in this regard.

[GlyphGryph]

Personally I think it was high quality anime films being taken seriously by respected critics and the like that helped anime fandom go mainstream. If the likes of Ebert are taking it seriously more people will give it a go. The problem I see with furries going mainstream by the same route as anime fandom is that there isn't any media specifically associated with furries (unless I am mistaken). While anything anime in style influences people's opinions of anime fandom things with anthropomorphic animals aren't automatically going to influence people's opinion of furries.

There's quite a lot of high quality and critically acclaimed furry media, but it doesn't embrace the label the way the anime industry did. Anime had the benefit of being tied quite closely with a very particular industry that had an incentive to hang together and work on their image. Furry has Maus and Digger, Watership Down and Redwall, TMNT and Swat Cats, Loony Toons and Darkwing Duck. It's got a strong, historic tradition with both critical and mainstream appeal, but it doesn't have an industry dedicated to it, unless you count the kids animation industry, who've no interest in associating with those other, more adult and critically-oriented elements. Anime, both trash and high concept, is still anime, and you're still part of the industry, but in the world of furry you're very much on your own. I mean, yeah, you have that strong cultural backdrop to build on, but there's no "furry industry", or at least no industry willing to take on the label, despite many studios and authors and illustrators putting out work that builds on the anthropomorphic traditions in our culture that are far, far from niche.

[Scoops Novel]

Does Watership Down come under it? That's an example of Xenofiction, and I'm less then certain that comes under Furriedom's remit.

[GlyphGryph]

How are anthropomorphic rabbits more xenofiction than furry? I mean, obviously, there's plenty of overlap, and Watership Down would clearly be both, but it would be hard to argue it's not furry.

Now, there are plenty of examples of xenofiction that AREN'T furry, but we're talking style (things like furry and anime) versus genre (things like xenofiction or fantasy).

[Scoops Novel]

Well, there's clearly present examples of anthropomorphism, i grant you, but that comes back to how furriedom operates when it comes to envisioning animals as they are as opposed to an ideal. Redwall is the latter, Watership Down takes great lengths to emulate the former.

[GlyphGryph]

They are certainly very different, I'll give you that.

Man, xenofiction is great, though, furry or not. I love that stuff so much. Eccho the Dolphin is still one of my favorite games, the old Wolf game was incredibly fun, I'm really looking forward to playing Tokyo Jungle, and even games like Natural Selection 2 are just so damned enjoyable.

[Sirus]

Here's a question:

Would Disney's The Aristocats (not Aristocrats) be considered furry or xenofiction? Going from what I'm reading, it seems to be a blending of both. The cats act like cats most of the time, but most of the other animals tend to take on more human traits (like the mouse character undoing a combination lock).

[penguinofhonor]

I thought sentient animals and furries were different things.

[GlyphGryph]

The general consensus for xenofiction tends to be that the animals being animals (or at least non-human) is an integral and core element to the story - that telling that story would be effectively impossible with human characters.

Dinsey's Oliver Twist, obviously enough, fails to count as xenofiction, and I suspect the Aristocats might fall under the same umbrella. But I forget some of the details, so maybe not. I'd say it's probably an edge case.

I thought sentient animals and furries were different things.

It can be - it usually isn't. Furry is essentially "humans with animal traits" or, less commonly, "animals with human traits" - anthropomorphism. It is possible to have sentient animals that are not furries - The creatures in the Uplift War series would largely qualify, here, as would Ecco the Dolphin. Xenomorphs would be an edge case - few would consider the animals they change into to be furries, despite having clearly human intelligences. But that's generally more rare than the alternative.

"Furry" is generally the addition of human characteristics, so cases like The Lion King would be pretty clear-cut. Not only do the animals have human intelligence, they have human expressions, human-esque social structures, and human behaviour. Other cases are significantly less so - it's hard to draw a hard line between "intelligent animal" and "anthopormorphic animal".

[Sirus]

It is possible to have sentient animals that are not furries - The creatures in the Uplift War series would probably qualify, here. But that's generally more rare than the alternative.

Would the characters from The Fox and the Hound count as this?

[GlyphGryph]

The original would definitely be xenofiction, but non-furry. I... don't actually remember anything about the Disney version, hah. Generally, though, Disney does furry, not xenofiction (see: Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, Finding Nemo, Lion King, etc. and so on), so my bet would be that they strongly anthropormophize the characters. But I honestly don't remember.