# Trends in Anthro Stories



## Chanticleer (Mar 29, 2008)

Hi,

I've noticed there are a few trends which keep on showing up in anthro stories and I was wondering if anyone else had noticed them.

I couldn't possibly list all of them so I suppose I'll just put down the one that struck me the most, the complete and utter despisal of the human race. For some reason I can't look through 3 stories without stumbling upon one where A: humans are incredibly weak in comparison to the glorious anthro master races, or B: humans are evil little #$%^s who will kill on a whim and treat everyone else like something they scraped off of their shoes.

So what other trends have you noticed in anthro stories?


----------



## Adelio Altomar (Mar 29, 2008)

I've noticed that the humans are sometimes called 'a myth'.


----------



## Grimfang (Mar 29, 2008)

I don't recall reading through and stories that used the word 'yiff', haha.. probably for the better.


----------



## Adelio Altomar (Mar 29, 2008)

Hmm...
I've also noticed that anthro stories are full of animals...
Hmm... 


_Note the sarcasm there_


----------



## Merriss (Mar 29, 2008)

[/removed]


----------



## Lucid (Mar 29, 2008)

Merriss said:
			
		

> One trend... is how whenever a character is trapped in a situation where they're being raped or kept as a slave, they _always_, by the end of the story, become completely careless about their own life and suddenly all they want to do is have sex with or "belong to" the bastard that did all of these horrible things to them.


That happens with like every pornish story that involves rape, it is quite annoying XD

I haven't really read all that many stories but trends I just see a ton of meaningless sex and people getting picked up at bars.


----------



## Adelio Altomar (Mar 30, 2008)

Too bad I'm still sixteen, otherwise I'd probably know what you're talking about in yiff stories. 

And isn't meaningless sex the point of yiff stories? Sure would seem like it...


----------



## Chanticleer (Mar 30, 2008)

Adelio Altomar said:
			
		

> I've noticed that the humans are sometimes called 'a myth'.



really?
sorry, I just never read one like that.


----------



## kitreshawn (Mar 30, 2008)

Lots of porn being written, but then again that is also what seems to be read most so it is hardly surprising.  Most people are going to write porn if they can spend 3 days writing something smutty and get 30 comments in 24 hours while making something better written receives no response at all.

There is also a surprising number of works about being the oppressed gay person (either by parents or society or whatever).  Again, given the way gays are viewed that is hardly surprising.  I just wish it wasn't written with cliches.

Lots of stories have furries be either aliens of some sort or genetically engineered.  Surprisingly I have not managed to find many where they are demons (or something similar).

Main settings tend to be some sort of medieval type time period or space faring societies.  Not saying there isn't anything in a contemporary setting, because there is quite a bit, just the bulk seems to fall into the other two settings from what I have seen.


----------



## Grimfang (Mar 30, 2008)

Adelio Altomar said:
			
		

> Too bad I'm still sixteen, otherwise I'd probably know what you're talking about in yiff stories.
> 
> And isn't meaningless sex the point of yiff stories? Sure would seem like it...



Well.. the word itself is just a pet peeve to probably 62% of the fandom.

I just don't recall them actually using the word 'yiff'. I think they may mention sex, or something that seems natural.. just anthros, instead of homo sapiens :]


----------



## Sangiin (Mar 30, 2008)

What I can't stand about most anthro stories is that there seem to be descriptors about how the characters are furries in EVERY LAST SENTENCE.  Don't get me wrong, it's good to include details, but sometimes I'll read a story and it'll go something like...

"Hey, so, these characters are furries.  You know, half animal, half human.  They have fur on 'em.  Oh, and their ears are different.  Don't forget about the ears.  Hey, look, they took a step with feet that are animalistic in appearance and it made their tails move.  Yeah, that's right, they have tails because they YADDA YADDA YADDA YAAAAAADDA"

Maybe it's just me, but I seem to stumble across this more times than I care to.  It's like they're afraid the reader will forget the main character is a six foot tall, bipedal talking deer if they don't talk about their antlers at least three times per paragraph.


----------



## M. LeRenard (Mar 30, 2008)

Extremely evident pride in one's creation.  By this, I mean the kinds of stories that start with a long LONG introduction explaining the history, culture, religion, economy, biology, technology, geology, ecology, astronomy, physics, and specific quantum interactions of their invented race/people/whatever.  It's like, that's very exciting that you've thought so hard and researched so much, but no one actually cares.  Just tell your damn story.
That said, I'm guilty of a few of the things mentioned in this thread.  So it is.


----------



## Kindar (Mar 30, 2008)

kitreshawn said:
			
		

> Lots of porn being written, but then again that is also what seems to be read most so it is hardly surprising.  Most people are going to write porn if they can spend 3 days writing something smutty and get 30 comments in 24 hours while making something better written receives no response at all.



I wouldn't really call those going that writers, just attention seeker.


----------



## eternal_flare (Mar 30, 2008)

Grimfang said:
			
		

> Adelio Altomar said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I just wonder where you got this unlikely-approximate number from.
I wonder if you really work on this in statistic.


----------



## Vore Writer (Mar 30, 2008)

M. Le Renard said:
			
		

> That said, I'm guilty of a few of the things mentioned in this thread.  So it is.



I think it's safe to say we all are. I know I am.


----------



## balt-lightning (Mar 30, 2008)

I like porn when it badly wrote. its very funny c:


----------



## Chanticleer (Mar 30, 2008)

M. Le Renard said:
			
		

> Extremely evident pride in one's creation.  By this, I mean the kinds of stories that start with a long LONG introduction explaining the history, culture, religion, economy, biology, technology, geology, ecology, astronomy, physics, and specific quantum interactions of their invented race/people/whatever.  It's like, that's very exciting that you've thought so hard and researched so much, but no one actually cares.  Just tell your damn story.
> That said, I'm guilty of a few of the things mentioned in this thread.  So it is.



See this is a bit more of general trend in stories, but I really don't think it's a pride thing. Stuff like this is merely a result of the need for big block exposition to explain why things are happening. Working information into the story is difficult for a lot of writers and personally I prefer a story with a big lump of exposition in the beginning to a story where I have no idea what's going on.

That said I always prefer a story where the exposition is integrated into the narrative, but I recognize that that is a very difficult thing to write so usually I'm willing to let a little block of exposition slide.


----------



## Stratelier (Mar 30, 2008)

M. Le Renard said:
			
		

> Extremely evident pride in one's creation. By this, I mean the kinds of stories that start with a long LONG introduction explaining the history, culture, religion, economy, biology, technology, geology, ecology, astronomy, physics, and specific quantum interactions of their invented race/people/whatever. It's like, that's very exciting that you've thought so hard and researched so much, but no one actually cares. Just tell your damn story.


One word:  APPENDIX.  The opening has to grab, to 'hook' the reader; it has to preview and 'sell' the whole story.  All that interesting errata which isn't specifically essential for the plot can be stuffed in the back where only those truly interested in it need take the time to read it.


----------



## ADF (Mar 30, 2008)

Rather than self righteousness; some of the ones I have read completely devalue human life, societies were treating people worse than animals, despite the population being human, are a social norm.

For instance one I read was near future nano tech; were humans worthless to the world were transformed into farm animals to be eaten, because despite real animal farming being banned people still wanted â€˜meat that was lived inâ€™. The idea that the animal farming industry was banned but the society was perfectly happy to eat transformed people, says a few things regarding the writers perspective on human value. You could tell they got something out of the idea of humans taking the degrading roles we subject animals to on a daily basis.

Being Furries it is to be expected that there will be those that hold animals to a higher opinion than humans, especially after witnessing what we continue to do to the world with little thought on the consequences. They picture animals as somehow doing a better job than us, even though if put in the same position they will probably use and abuse their environment just like us.


----------



## M. LeRenard (Mar 30, 2008)

The irony of that is, the people who write such things are still 'anthropomorphizing' animals, aka making them more human.  It's about vengeance, which isn't something most other animals are likely to understand.  So even if these folks claim to 'despise' humanity, what shows up in their works is clearly something very human.
But anyway, I think this kind of subject is treated a lot by most of the newer members of the fandom, who get into it as a rebellion sort of thing.  Sometimes they grow out of it, sometimes they join GreenPeace and picket lumber companies.



> One word: APPENDIX.


That's what I was thinking.  If you really can't fit it into the story, but you just MUST let people know, put it in the back or in a separate document.  When I sit down to read fiction, I don't want to have to skim through an encyclopedia first.  It's just a question of style, really.  Not everyone who read the Lord of the Rings read the Silmarillion, too.


----------



## Poetigress (Mar 30, 2008)

I find it interesting that most of the "trends" that have been mentioned in this thread are negative ones, cliches, or pet peeves.

Any positive trends -- things that are being done well in anthro stories?


----------



## Adelio Altomar (Mar 30, 2008)

A happy ending, perhaps?


----------



## Grimfang (Mar 30, 2008)

eternal_flare said:
			
		

> I just wonder where you got this unlikely-approximate number from.
> I wonder if you really work on this in statistic.



Um.. no. There was no formulaic process behind this:



			
				Grimfang said:
			
		

> Well.. the word itself is just a pet peeve to probably 62% of the fandom.



I did pull the number out of my ass. But it is a pet peeve of many fandom-goers. Have you ever seen a thread that discussed the word "yiff", or discussions of relevant topics? Definitely more thumbs down than up.


----------



## M. LeRenard (Mar 31, 2008)

> Any positive trends -- things that are being done well in anthro stories?


I'd say yes, but since 'good' anthro stories make up only about 2% of all anthro fiction on the net and elsewhere, I hesitate to call anything a 'trend'.  I guess all the good stuff I've read has anthros that are more than just humans with animal features pasted on them.  But, unfortunately, the general trend (even in my own work, I'm afraid) seems to be anthros for the sake of anthros.
Let me get back to you on that one....


----------



## kitreshawn (Mar 31, 2008)

I have seen some good trends.

There are a growing number of good writers for furry stuff out there.  Granted this is likely a side effect of the large numbers of new writers so that some of them have to be good (and yes, the vast majority are not) but I believe there are many more good furry writers then there were when I first got into the fandom.

I have also noticed a very slight increase in the demand for furry writing.  Not much but it is there and it makes me glad.  One thing I have pointed out before is that the fandom is largely based around art (as in pictures) rather than writing.  I think that the change is good because while I have nothing against artists it is kinda depressing when they seem to get all the attention.

Readers also seem more appreciative of well written stuff.  It is rare that I get into a smut mood and write stuff to post on yiffstar, but it comes as a pleasant surprise when I do and get a comment along the lines of "thank you for having a plot beyond the sex."  I suppose you can take that as a negative where there is a lot of stories out there with sex just to have sex, but on the plus side it means that if you make the extra effort people do notice and do appreciate it.  That is never a bad thing.

One final thing I will say is that I have seen not so many emo furry stories lately, another good thing.  This might be in part because of the places I tend to visit, but meh.


----------



## Stratelier (Mar 31, 2008)

M. Le Renard said:
			
		

> > Any positive trends -- things that are being done well in anthro stories?
> 
> 
> I'd say yes, but since 'good' anthro stories make up only about 2% of all anthro fiction on the net and elsewhere, I hesitate to call anything a 'trend'.


2% is a *very* generous number when the Internet is involved.


----------



## Vore Writer (Mar 31, 2008)

The one trend I'm trying to break is having the majority of my main and secondary characters gay. It might be okay within the furry fandom, but I don't think it'll appeal to everybody else.


----------



## lobosabio (Mar 31, 2008)

Interesting to see that most of the complaints here could be applied to 99% of the stories out there.  

That said, the complaints:

-Sex for the sake of sex
-Overly long descriptions
-Writers who seem to believe they are writing a Pitchfork Media review
-Not enough variation in the species used
-Cliched settings
-Cliched character traits
-Cliched plot lines
-Not enough variation in sentence structure

I'm sure there's more but I can't come up with them right now.


----------



## Xipoid (Apr 1, 2008)

Sometimes I see something I like to call "Writer's nepotism". Generally, it involves one particular character who is either the author themself injected into a story or simply a character the author is very attached to; however...

this character usually has innumerable good qualities, continual serendipitous windfalls, a purely virtuous sense of morality, and is undefeatable in every manner. Regardless of the consequences, this individual will sacrifice themselves to save friends or family which will somehow bring about their downfall and shortly thereafter their subsequent resurrection.

-or-

this character is the utmost vile, villainous, and despicable evil-doer who would just a likely throw their own mother into harm's way if it was to benefit them even in the smallest manner. Their power is unyielding and unstoppable yet some strange plot device prevents their absolute dominance and even provides them with enough of a challenge to provide the reader with a rather odd and quirky story.


In either case, this character can never really die though that does not stop them from numerous close calls that would have anyone of less constitution and fortitude in a hospital's ICU in a permanent coma and paralyzed from the neck down.


Also, the Anthros > Human concept as well. Humans (should they appear) are usually portrayed in a very negative light and are generally seen as weak and ill-bodied compared to their animal counterparts (though that can be expected if you going to give a creature the best of both worlds).





I don't really know of any good trends as those seem more like compliments or at least something above average, which would imply they are atypical and thus not a trend.


----------



## M. LeRenard (Apr 1, 2008)

> Sometimes I see something I like to call "Writer's nepotism". Generally, it involves one particular character who is either the author themself injected into a story or simply a character the author is very attached to; however...
> 
> this character usually has innumerable good qualities, continual serendipitous windfalls, a purely virtuous sense of morality, and is undefeatable in every manner. Regardless of the consequences, this individual will sacrifice themselves to save friends or family which will somehow bring about their downfall and shortly thereafter their subsequent resurrection.


I believe the technical term for this is 'Mary-Sueism'.

...


----------



## kitreshawn (Apr 1, 2008)

Correct.  That is basically the definition of a Mary-Sue.  Very common in novice writing actually, enough so that it has its own wikipedia entry.


----------



## Xipoid (Apr 1, 2008)

I hate the word Mary-sue. It reminds me too much of the movie "Sordid Lives".


----------



## M. LeRenard (Apr 1, 2008)

Well... I was actually sort of joking.  I'm pretty sure that's not really the 'technical' term for it.  I think 'writer nepotism' is better, actually.  I should start using that myself.  Unless you have it copyrighted or something.


----------



## Xipoid (Apr 1, 2008)

Actually, I would wager "Mary-sue" is the true technical term or at least the colloquial slag if not otherwise. However, feel free to use "Writer's Nepotism" as I have no copyrights or any such things on it.


Fortunately though, many writers seem to shake this off after a while (but alas, not all).


----------



## Damaratus (Apr 1, 2008)

lobosabio said:
			
		

> Interesting to see that most of the complaints here could be applied to 99% of the stories out there.
> 
> That said, the complaints:
> 
> ...



That's a rather interesting complaint.  I mean the rest of them I can see, but often when writing a story I've found that I'd rather stick to a single set or subset of species, just to not bog myself down in descriptors.


----------



## M. LeRenard (Apr 2, 2008)

I wonder if it's not a general thing, though.  Because, as is the case in the entirety of the fandom, wolves and foxes are the most popular animals in writing as well.  You can't find too many stories featuring mongooses (mongeese?) for instance.


----------



## Poetigress (Apr 2, 2008)

I still find it interesting that -- with the exception of the "furries good, humans evil" cliche -- most of the complaints seem to be more about bad writing than about how the anthropomorphic components of the story are handled.


----------



## Xipoid (Apr 2, 2008)

Unless I'm misinterpreting your words, I find it hard to make a judgment since anthropomorphic animals are not real . I am unsure just what "quirks" a real walking, talking wolf would have. For instance, assuming they were integrated into society (or already part of), just how animal would they act and conversely how human could they be? (e.g. would a wolf-person still have its pack nature or would that quality be shed once they become part of a more complex society, aka: bigger pack)


That seems to be at the discretion of the writer which runs a rather broad gamut all the way from animals simply given human intelligence and the ability to walk upright to humans given a few animal features like tails, fur, and claws.


----------



## Anubis16 (Apr 2, 2008)

Are people basing these trends just on what they've seen on FA.  This is not a major writing/critiquing site, so obviously you're not going to get a lot of high-caliber writing here.  So is it really fair to base trends in "anthro-writing" on a single site that isn't even focused on writing to begin with?  As poetigress said, most of the issues people have is about the quality of the writing, not how they incorporate anthropomorphism into their writing.


----------



## lobosabio (Apr 2, 2008)

Damaratus said:
			
		

> lobosabio said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It's more a matter of stories in general.  I keep seeing the same species used.  Foxes and wolves and cats.  Those sorts of critters.  I mean, what's keeping you from using a weasel or an otter?  Hell, if you want to use a fox, go for it, but at least try and use something other than a red fox.  Why not employ a gray one or a fennec or just go completely off the wall and go for a bat-eared fox.


----------



## Grimfang (Apr 2, 2008)

Anubis16 said:
			
		

> Are people basing these trends just on what they've seen on FA.  This is not a major writing/critiquing site, so obviously you're not going to get a lot of high-caliber writing here.  So is it really fair to base trends in "anthro-writing" on a single site that isn't even focused on writing to begin with?  As poetigress said, most of the issues people have is about the quality of the writing, not how they incorporate anthropomorphism into their writing.



I don't see how authors on FA should achieve immunity from any critique, simply because it isn't a community solely dedicated to writing. An author would (or _should_) want critique. Other than reading other works, and writing your own, the only other gateway for improvement is the advice of others.

The majority of my submissions on FA are poetry. Occasionally, I peruse through poems on FA, and I know I've come across some exceptional pieces of work.

Actually, Xipoid probably has the best work I've seen on FA, as far as written art is concerned.

Also, writers are free to consult any external source of feedback or input in their daily life. They aren't exclusively publishing for FA. If someone has a true interest in what they pursue, they probably would be inclined to read and write outside of FA as well.


----------



## Anubis16 (Apr 2, 2008)

Grimfang said:
			
		

> I don't see how authors on FA should achieve immunity from any critique, simply because it isn't a community solely dedicated to writing. An author would (or _should_) want critique. Other than reading other works, and writing your own, the only other gateway for improvement is the advice of others.
> 
> The majority of my submissions on FA are poetry. Occasionally, I peruse through poems on FA, and I know I've come across some exceptional pieces of work.
> 
> ...



I'm not suggesting that we should give writers on FA a free pass just because it's not a writing focused site.  But this thread is talking about patterns in anthro writing, and I'm just saying that we shouldn't solely base it on what's on FA.  Also, although there are many serious writers here they are far outnumbered by those who aren't interested in getting critique or producing really high caliber writing.  Most of the material I've come across is people just trying to get something off of their chest, and I personally don't think we should be looking at that stuff if we want to see the trends in anthro writing.


----------



## Grimfang (Apr 2, 2008)

Anubis16 said:
			
		

> I'm not suggesting that we should give writers on FA a free pass just because it's not a writing focused site.  But this thread is talking about patterns in anthro writing, and I'm just saying that we shouldn't solely base it on what's on FA.  Also, although there are many serious writers here they are far outnumbered by those who aren't interested in getting critique or producing really high caliber writing.  Most of the material I've come across is people just trying to get something off of their chest, and I personally don't think we should be looking at that stuff if we want to see the trends in anthro writing.



Very true. The accomplished will always be outnumbered by the aspiring.

And I meant no negativity towards furry writings at all. I should just put it in my signature since I state it so frequently: I love my furry porns. And that does not exclude written smut. There is a lot of good writing out there.

You will see a lot of sub-par writing though because.. well..



			
				Grimfang said:
			
		

> The accomplished will always be outnumbered by the aspiring.


----------



## Xipoid (Apr 2, 2008)

Anubis16 said:
			
		

> Are people basing these trends just on what they've seen on FA.  This is not a major writing/critiquing site, so obviously you're not going to get a lot of high-caliber writing here.  So is it really fair to base trends in "anthro-writing" on a single site that isn't even focused on writing to begin with?  As poetigress said, most of the issues people have is about the quality of the writing, not how they incorporate anthropomorphism into their writing.



Statistically speaking:
Given that there are quite a few writers on here (definitely more than 100) it is permissible to use the entire body as an unbiased sample regarding anthropomorphic writing as a whole. The trends drawn are likely to be realistically representative of the entire population; however, there always remains a chance it is not, but since the FA writing community has no indications of being an outlier or skewed we can ignore this fact as long as the sample is large enough. Even though FA is not intended as a writing site, it still harbors a number of writers. The data you can deduce from it may not be a pertinent as taking from a purely anthropomorphic writing site but is still valid.


----------



## M. LeRenard (Apr 3, 2008)

Or, to put it more bluntly, the original topic didn't specify 'good' furry writing.  And, as has been pointed out, the norm is not 'good'.


----------



## Stratelier (Apr 3, 2008)

Indeed.  To parody an adage, crap floats to the top.


----------



## Chanticleer (Apr 3, 2008)

Might I add that I've certainly seen a lot of anthro school stories, (some of which are excellent and some of which are awful, but that's true of anything.)


----------



## Grimfang (Apr 3, 2008)

Very true. Some high school, some college/dorm life... but LOTS of high school stories. This probably reflects the greater portion of the age range. Some of them are good though.


----------



## lobosabio (Apr 3, 2008)

Chanticleer said:
			
		

> Might I add that I've certainly seen a lot of anthro school stories, (some of which are excellent and some of which are awful, but that's true of anything.)



Well, as I've been told many times before:  "Write what you know."  And seeing as there are many high school/college aged individuals floating around, I'd guess that's what they write about.


----------



## TakeWalker (Apr 3, 2008)

Though admittedly, they know a few more things just what being a college student is like.

And writing what you know only gets you so far anyway. If you wanna write outside your comfort zone, all it takes is a little research, or asking of people who do things you want to put in your stories.


----------



## Regist (Apr 3, 2008)

Merriss said:
			
		

> One trend... is how whenever a character is trapped in a situation where they're being raped or kept as a slave, they _always_, by the end of the story, become completely careless about their own life and suddenly all they want to do is have sex with or "belong to" the bastard that did all of these horrible things to them.



... holy shit a brick! This person is politcally correct!

.... who wants a cookie?


----------



## Toonces (Apr 4, 2008)

"Why hello I have a TREMENDOUSLY LARGE COCK"

"Aw, neat, why don't you shove that into my ass without any kind of preparation beforehand?"

"Can do!"


----------



## Kimmerset (Apr 4, 2008)

I know I've been more than guilty than a few of these trends, though I notice an extreme lack of fluid writing in many stories.  Though I can't say I have much of that anymore, as I've not written in many months.

EDIT: I'm also in agreement to the comment above, where the characters either have to be so loose and used up that they can fit someone's cock the size of a genetically enhanced cucumber with no lube, or they are somehow extremely self-sufficient in the lubing process, precum or not.


----------



## lobosabio (Apr 4, 2008)

Oh god, yes!  Flow!  Flow is so under emphasized in writing.  I wish some people would realize that their stories need flow, not just in plot but from sentence to sentence.


----------



## Adelio Altomar (Apr 4, 2008)

Lobosabio:
Flow? What do you mean by that?

And I remember this one time a few years back that I read through this story. One thing I noticed was that it had sparse, if any, character and plot development. It started out with this young boy watching this other hot studly guy from afar behind a corner, while contemplating him his crush. Then they end up running into eachother and the crush ends asking the main character on a date and then the main character has a date for friday. Then fridays comes and with it, the movie part where they hold hands and such. Then the guy takes the boy to his house and then...

All I can say is that I was thirteen at the time and it was really shocking what I had found. It kept me up for days! But now that I think about it, it's pretty hilarious now.  But it seems pretty much a bland story that led to yiff with one guy being the girl. :-o


----------



## lobosabio (Apr 5, 2008)

Adelio Altomar said:
			
		

> Lobosabio:
> Flow? What do you mean by that?



Flow...as in how the story moves.  It's kind of hard to explain but it's like how the sentences logically travel into one another.  There are no jarring jumps or awkward phrases and how everything go nicely together.  It's how things sort of flow together.


----------



## Lanceleoghauni (Apr 5, 2008)

I've noticed that the society in Fur stories is similar (sometimes overly cliche'd) to our own, rather then trying to fit into the demographics of the fandom (not saying this is good or bad). Also, Genetic experimentation is pretty common, but with what are essentially human-animal hybrids it makes sense, especially as Sci-fi is common as well. Fur oppression is there alot too (alot of this I'm pulling from my story).


----------



## Makaze (Apr 29, 2008)

lobosabio said:


> Interesting to see that most of the complaints here could be applied to 99% of the stories out there.
> 
> That said, the complaints:
> 
> ...



Let's not forget the over powered nonsensical characters, who seem to have the ability to blow up city blocks, or are god mode on a stick just because they're furry, or the protagonist, but not for any valid, logical story driven, believable reason


----------



## M. LeRenard (Apr 29, 2008)

> Flow? What do you mean by that?


This might be a good topic to expand on.  Don't know if I'd be up for it, though, because I can't remember anything I've read about flow.  And I don't think my stories flow very well most of the time, because I barely know how to handle that issue.

In any case, I thought of another (in what I've read, anyway).  So far as sci-fi goes, you see a lot of robots/cyborgs in furry stories, as well (whether it be Gundam type stuff or just regular ol' robos).


----------



## Vore Writer (Apr 30, 2008)

Some of the things listed don't really sound like trends, but more like habits some writers have. Some of it which can be bad and others can be good.


----------



## kitreshawn (May 2, 2008)

lobosabio said:


> It's more a matter of stories in general.  I keep seeing the same species used.  Foxes and wolves and cats.  Those sorts of critters.  I mean, what's keeping you from using a weasel or an otter?



There is a simple reason this happens, although I will admit that it is not a particularly good reason.

Foxes, Wolves, Cats, and Dogs are what one of my friends has called "the pretties."  What he means isn't so much that other anthro characters are ugly but rather that those four groups are the ones that the vast majority of the fandom feel the strongest affinity toward.

This is especially pronounced in yiffy writing (or pretty much anything smutty for that matter).  Again it isn't because other species can't be sexy (Chester, Ashley, and so forth) but because most of the fandom has an affinity for the 4 "pretties".

Its something I don't see much sense in fighting because there really is no way to fight against it.  Rather than try and work against it you might as well try to find ways to make it work for you.  One suggestion that you made was use some of the less common subspecies which is one really good way to go about it.

Another that I am trying out in one of my stories is to have your typical wolves, but class is determined by fur color.  Black furred wolves are commoners (for the most part) while silver fur is the ruling class.

Finally you can try to make another species one of the "pretties" in the eyes of the readers.  This is easier for some species than others.  People like wolves, foxes, cats, and dogs because of the traits that we inherently give them without realizing it and we do the same thing for other species as well.  Thus it would be easier to convince the reader that a horse is a pretty (they tend to be associated with strength, endurance, virility) than a cow (which is a dumb animal we eat).

One thing I think I should also mention is that if you notice every one of the four pretties is a predator.  I am not 100% sure but I think this has quite a bit to do with their prominence as well.


----------



## lobosabio (May 7, 2008)

kitreshawn said:


> There is a simple reason this happens, although I will admit that it is not a particularly good reason.
> 
> Foxes, Wolves, Cats, and Dogs are what one of my friends has called "the pretties."  What he means isn't so much that other anthro characters are ugly but rather that those four groups are the ones that the vast majority of the fandom feel the strongest affinity toward.



Yes, and that's what annoys me.  I would at least expect someone to have the creativity to at least try something different instead of reusing the same species over and over again.  I mean, there are dozens of great species out there that get little if any use.  



> Its something I don't see much sense in fighting because there really is no way to fight against it.  Rather than try and work against it you might as well try to find ways to make it work for you.  One suggestion that you made was use some of the less common subspecies which is one really good way to go about it.



Yeah, like I've seen dozens of red foxes but only a handful of gray ones.  And whenever somebody creates a wolf character it's always a gray wolf.  Whatever happened to the red wolf?



> Another that I am trying out in one of my stories is to have your typical wolves, but class is determined by fur color.  Black furred wolves are commoners (for the most part) while silver fur is the ruling class.[/quotes]
> 
> Let me guess:  white ones are considered legendary?
> 
> ...



It probably has to do with masculinity or something.


----------



## RedSavage (May 7, 2008)

I've noticed alot of stories where Humans are the bad guys and the Furs are always being hated on.
Not all of the stories are like this, but enough to be noticed.


P.S.

Every third damn transformation story about a canine has something to with the dude getting horny and playing with his knob.


----------



## kitreshawn (May 7, 2008)

lobosabio said:


> Let me guess: white ones are considered legendary?



No, white furred wolves don't exist at all and never have and never will.

Silver fur makes up the ruling class because according the the wolven church silver fur did not exist until the son of god was born on earth (as a wolf of course).  Back then all wolves had black fur, but the son of god had silver fur.  That's how they knew he was the son of god.  ;P

Anyway as a result wolves with silver fur are considered the direct descendants of the son of god and thus have the right to rule.


----------



## M. LeRenard (May 7, 2008)

I've got a comic in the works, actually (conceptually: I'm putting off drawing it until I get myself a tablet, some time in the far future), in which the characters are as follows (so far):
Fox (because, dammit, I can draw them)
Horned Lizard
Vulture
Box-Turtle
Yak
Zebra
Sea Anemone (mwa ha ha)
Alligator

It's actually quite fun to branch out.
That reminds me... another trend I can see is worlds that are entirely populated by only one or two races (generally some kind of dog and some kind of cat, or maybe dragons).


----------



## Chanticleer (May 7, 2008)

I'd like to add the trend with all of the people who like nothing but raw meat.

(Always bothered me, parasites are not fun and uncooked meat is harder to digest.)


----------



## Roose Hurro (May 7, 2008)

Kitreshawn's last post reminds me of a dream I had, many years ago.  A dream about a civilization of rats, in which fur coloration was a marker of status... Black Rats were the leaders, Brown Rats were the technical minds, and the Gray Rats were common labor.  There was also a size difference... Black Rats the largest and strongest, Brown Rats the smallest and weakest, with Gray Rats in the middle of the size and strength range.  I was a gray rat in this dream, a military pilot, a survivor of a nasty civil war (only member of my flight sqaud to make it through).  Very vivid, and very detailed.  Someday, I'll be able to develop it into a complete story, from beginning to end, all the dream-blanks filled in.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


----------



## Nequ (May 16, 2008)

lobosabio said:


> It probably has to do with masculinity or something.


Probably. That would also explain why so many male fursonae carry around large, phallic weapons. One I recall seeing was an _axe_ with a _chaingun_ on it.



M. Le Renard said:


> That reminds me... another trend I can see is worlds that are entirely populated by only one or two races (generally some kind of dog and some kind of cat, or maybe dragons).


Funny thing; I'm working on a sciFi story where the planets are roughly analogous to countries. The bulk of the action takes place on or near "France", meaning that the primary species are poodles and other dogs, with a few humans. Complete with jokes about how the "French" have a lot of sex. Well, one joke. But it's a good one.


----------



## M. LeRenard (May 16, 2008)

Hey man.  I haven't seen one poodle since I've been here.  Not even in Paris.
The French do love their dogs, though.  And probably their sex...


----------



## makmakmob (May 16, 2008)

In the Dordogne where I used to live their only interest is eating everything that moves and/or has a liver. That and 'eau de vie'. They're pretty nice people though. We lived not far from Limoges, but in the middle of nowhere.

Does anyone have a hypothesis as to why furries are so often hated on in stories? Do the authors just wish to denounce mankind, despite being part of it? I mean sure, this is the 'furry' fandom but Humans are still pretty good at at stuff besides being evil. I'd hate to think what would happen if you tried to fill central Leeds with wolves. At that sort of population density?


----------



## M. LeRenard (May 16, 2008)

> In the Dordogne where I used to live their only interest is eating everything that moves and/or has a liver.


Gotta' have your saucisses and your andouille.  As for 'eau de vie'... I wasn't a huge fan when I tried some.  Tasted like cough syrup.



> Does anyone have a hypothesis as to why furries are so often hated on in stories?


Probably spawns from the constant mistreatment of animals by humans in real life.  People who write such things figure that man, being the stuck-up violent fellow he is, would look down upon a creature that's half-animal, simply because he has no respect for animals in general.
Of course... this isn't always true.  Only people of certain religions/cultures think this way.  But there you have it.


----------



## Nequ (May 16, 2008)

M. Le Renard said:


> Probably spawns from the constant mistreatment of animals by humans in real life.  People who write such things figure that man, being the stuck-up violent fellow he is, would look down upon a creature that's half-animal, simply because he has no respect for animals in general.
> Of course... this isn't always true.  Only people of certain religions/cultures think this way.  But there you have it.


I figured it was a cheap version of the have/have not dichotomy so common in...oh...every genre of literature ever. Since furries are "persecuted" anyway-for good reason; we're _weird_*-it's convenient for an authour to include themselves in the group of poor unfortunate souls.

Of course, it could simply be the authour's own IRL alienation issues projecting into the story, their feeling of disconnection from popular culture and humanity in general. Which reminds me, I have to go watch a movie I hate and pretend to like it for the purposes of social propriety. I think "Pretty Woman" is on.

*And the sooner everyone accepts that, the sooner we can get back to drawing Renamon prons.


----------



## Le_DÃ©mon_Sans_Visage (May 17, 2008)

M. Le Renard said:


> Probably spawns from the constant mistreatment of animals by humans in real life.



More likely the natural hatred between different human groups, whether defined by religion, language, looks, etc.


----------



## M. LeRenard (May 17, 2008)

Or... the old cop-out answer, a combination of all three of these.


----------



## Project_X (May 20, 2008)

Adelio Altomar said:


> I've noticed that the humans are sometimes called 'a myth'.



lol. Mine is like that...


----------



## dietrc70 (May 25, 2008)

ADF said:


> Rather than self righteousness; some of the ones I have read completely devalue human life, societies were treating people worse than animals, despite the population being human, are a social norm.
> 
> For instance one I read was near future nano tech; were humans worthless to the world were transformed into farm animals to be eaten, because despite real animal farming being banned people still wanted â€˜meat that was lived inâ€™. The idea that the animal farming industry was banned but the society was perfectly happy to eat transformed people, says a few things regarding the writers perspective on human value. You could tell they got something out of the idea of humans taking the degrading roles we subject animals to on a daily basis.
> 
> Being Furries it is to be expected that there will be those that hold animals to a higher opinion than humans, especially after witnessing what we continue to do to the world with little thought on the consequences. They picture animals as somehow doing a better job than us, even though if put in the same position they will probably use and abuse their environment just like us.


 
Very insightful point.  I particularly like "Planet of the Apes" because it showed the Apes trying to form an organized, modern society, and ultimately becoming just like us in the process.


----------



## MauEvig (Jun 26, 2008)

Just a question...are we talking about works that have been officially published? Or things that people have written in the forums here. (not of course, that you havn't been officially published...but I'm just wondering here.)
I'm working on writing a novel based in an entire world of Anthros...and humans aren't even heard of in that world. If they are then, well...they're probably just considered a myth. It's not that humans don't exist (because they do right here, right now lol) but they aren't native born to this world, and chances are they have never seen the world. (Of course, later on, it's possible humans could visit the world of Zaerth, as I have called it.)
My main character in that story is a Jaguarundi. I wanted to use a cat, but not one that was highly heard of. I fear using a cat would be considered a cliche...which is why I wanted to use a type of cat that isn't well heard of, and maybe shed some light on rarer species of cat.
I don't see that many cat stories, and especially not ones where cats are viewed as the heros.
In fact, there's a book at the store I work at that puts a focus on cats and dogs. The cats are the villians...the dogs are kind of like the detectives. No offense to people who are big dog people, but I'd like to see feline heros, rather than villians.
I don't want my character to be perfect, but rather to learn her destiny later on, and stumble through her journey as it goes.
Beginings are difficult for me though. I havn't really read many anthro stories. Just people/human stories and stories about animals. 
However, I have been a fan of the Sonic the hedgehog fandom since I was 9 years old. The entire idea behind Dr Robotnik/Eggman seems to pose an idea that humans are evil and controlling to me, especially in the SatAm series. Of course, we only see Robotnik and Snively in that series. We don't know about any other humans. In archie, they refer to them as overlanders...at least until they added the bunch of plotholes with trying to tie in the comic series with the games. This made it all more confusing...making the overlanders simply mutated humans.
Suppose the furries were the villians? Of course, with werewolf type movies the werewolves are portrayed as villians...though not entirely the case in the Howling III with the Marsupial werewolves.
I'd also find it interested to see more werecats...there is ONE werecat in Eragon and I quite enjoyed his character. One of the reasons I don't want to see the movie is because they excluded the Werecat. I would've loved to have seen a werecat in a movie. But all they seem to show are werewolves. >>;


----------



## fruitcake (Jul 2, 2008)

CoyoteCaliente said:


> I've noticed alot of stories where Humans are the bad guys and the Furs are always being hated on.


I find it strange to mix furs and humans in the same universe.

... that's why, with my stories (none of which I've ever posted anywhere... they're kind of 'meh', but I do enjoy writing them!) I've gone the _Circles_ route and basically convinced myself that the characters are "human" but they're just being viewed through a "furry lens." ;P


----------



## Zinzoline Velvetpelt (Jul 4, 2008)

MauEvig said:


> Just a question...are we talking about works that have been officially published? Or things that people have written in the forums here. (not of course, that you havn't been officially published...but I'm just wondering here.)


I do believe, dear, after having read all the previous pages, that the discussion was in fact indeed about the not "officially" published works of writing such as here on FA and one sites like Yiffstar and what other sites have you =~.^=



MauEvig said:


> I'm working on writing a novel based in an entire world of Anthros...and humans aren't even heard of in that world. If they are then, well...they're probably just considered a myth. It's not that humans don't exist (because they do right here, right now lol) but they aren't native born to this world, and chances are they have never seen the world. (Of course, later on, it's possible humans could visit the world of Zaerth, as I have called it.)


A very good concept! And it can work very well, too. Might I suggest having a look at the "Chanur" novels by sci-fi writer C. J. Cherrey? This is the only sci-fi that has managed to capture my personal interest, and it works with just that concept as you just now mentioned; the humans that appear in these stories are in fact the "aliens" coming into the world and society of an established race of a feline-like species. It works amazingly well when done properly =~.^=



MauEvig said:


> My main character in that story is a Jaguarundi. I wanted to use a cat, but not one that was highly heard of. I fear using a cat would be considered a cliche...which is why I wanted to use a type of cat that isn't well heard of, and maybe shed some light on rarer species of cat.
> I don't see that many cat stories, and especially not ones where cats are viewed as the heros.
> In fact, there's a book at the store I work at that puts a focus on cats and dogs. The cats are the villians...the dogs are kind of like the detectives. No offense to people who are big dog people, but I'd like to see feline heros, rather than villians.


I know what you mean here, and I very much agree. And that is not because I love cats so deeply; it's because I have found it to be a "trend" in its own that in whatever story or cartoon or what have you that features animal-like characters, the felines are usually the "bad guys" (Tom&Jerry, Tweety&Sylvester, to name two popular old cartoons for instance; Cats & Dogs to name a really quite funny film even though the cats are portrayed as totaly evil villains; and look at some other movies or cartoons that only have humans; when the villain character has a pet, what kind of pet is it? Right.) Now I know that this may probably have a lot to do with the fact cats are naturally more "suitable" to be portrayed as villains because of the traits they have as animals, but also without meaning offense to people who prefer dogs or other animals, I very much agree with Mau here and I would certainly like to see some stories where the cats for a chance are the good guys (and I'm trying to inspire that by writing such stories myself^^).



MauEvig said:


> I don't want my character to be perfect, but rather to learn her destiny later on, and stumble through her journey as it goes.
> Beginings are difficult for me though. I havn't really read many anthro stories. Just people/human stories and stories about animals.


 
Very commendable. I have found myself guilty of making my lead characters utterly perfect from the very beginning on and having more positive traits and amazing capabilities than is believably possible. A character, no matter how much of a hero s/he is, cannot be absolutely perfect. There need to be some flaws to bring a bit of balance into the character, and to make it more interesting. From what you describe about the story you're working on, Mau, I can tell for myself it will be a very interesting story and will be keeping the reader involved in the story as it unfurls.
I know what you mean about the beginning, though. I have a big problem with writing openings for any of my stories as well. And there is indeed not very much on anthro stories, officially pulished ones, that is, to go by yet. Most of the books that feature animal characters have the animals being just that; animals (Watership Down as the obligatory example, but also by Richard Adams; "The Plague Dogs". Or Tad Williams's "Tailchaser's Song"; GabriÃ«l King's "The Wild Road"and its sequel "The Golden Cat"; Joy Smith Aiken's "Solo's Journey"; Michael Peak's "Cat House" (Mau, as a fellow cat lover, I _highly_ recommend those last five books I mentioned for you to read; you'll probably love them! =~.^=). Those books all have animals as the main characters, but the aren't anthros; they're animals like all animals in the real world around us). Again, as I mentioned earlier, a good read would be the "Shanur" novels, because while it's a sci-fi story-series about other races and species in outer space, the main characters are anthropomorphic (and as a little plus, the clan Chanur comes from is a feline species, too, _and_ they are the good guys^^).

With all that said; there is a little thing I seemed to have noticed which is more in line with the original topic of this thread; in a lot of the anthro stories I have read, regardless of what species are used, the characters very often (not always, I admit, but most of the times) are overly beautiful, overly well-endowed, and overly capable in their endeavors. I have to admit that I am guilty of doing this very same thing myself... which is why one of my most recent stories that I actually finished and posted featured a very non-special, plain, everyday woman. Yes, a cat, by the way =^.^=


----------



## psion (Jul 5, 2008)

Yeah, I'm late to this party, I just felt like starting from the top and don't feel like reading through six pages right now.


Chanticleer said:


> Hi,
> 
> I've noticed there are a few trends which keep on showing up in anthro stories and I was wondering if anyone else had noticed them.
> 
> ...



Oh sweet gawd, does that give me a few bad flashbacks from trying to mix anthros and humans together.  Having rules about them not existing is fine, but treating them like baby-eating thugs to kill by the hundreds when there's no sign they're meant to be a "bad" race?  Oh gawd, the memories that are coming back have me torn between laughing and crying.
I think the reason for this trend is because most furries hate people on instinct and like to vent that fact in art a little too much.
However, one official work that mixes humans and anthros together in a rather interesting way is Shawntae Howard's Extinctioners.  Granted, without a doubt the main villian is a human and is a very bad dude but there are a number of other twists to keep the story fresh.  Two of the anthro leaders introduced so far are pretty much scumbags or have questionable morals and it is suggested that a couple of Mahn's human henchmen may be capable of having second thoughts about the anthros on Alden.  In short, the Extinctioners may have not turned the trend on it's head but it has come pretty close to doing that.

One trend I noticed in some furry fiction is the creation of "Ãœbermensch" characters that have no physical weakness.  I try to avoid it or at least scale the badguys so they're at least put up a convincing fight for the hero, but many writers just don't bother.  It's sad because otherwise these people aren't half-bad when it comes to the written word.  I suppose one of the reasons why I'm so hard on myself is because I try to be so careful not to break this rule of mine given how often other writers leave me shaking my head in disgust.

Another thing I noticed in furry writing is sometimes they'd get VERY contrived.  One particular example is a vore story (yeah vore, moving on) where a character was supposed to get eaten by a enormous vixen who was the main character.  She was clearly a throw away character, having no visible redeeming characteristics and even doing something that was rather stupid in real life (the main character was the throwaway's supervisor in a bank, you don't be a constant pain in the ass to your boss if you like your job.)  The entire story was a fairly unsatisfying read, both the characters and the deed itself, because it had no flow, no real purpose.


----------



## lobosabio (Jul 6, 2008)

psion said:


> Another thing I noticed in furry writing is sometimes they'd get VERY contrived. .



Yeah, but that can hold true in almost any kind of fiction.  It isn't really an exclusive thing.  Then again, I noticed that your example was from a porno and, in my experience, pornos will use damn near any excuse to have a sex scene (or that particular fetish's equivalent).


----------



## Furthlingam (Jul 7, 2008)

About the way humans in stories involving anthropomorphics are despised, my assumption/theory has always been this:

A whole lot of personal ideas about anthropomorphic settings are developed on-the-fly or otherwise haphazardly, in the context of online roleplay. That roleplay is usually freeform, open, mixed, etc-- that is, you run into people who want to play anthropomorphic figures, and others who don't get the appeal but are interested in participating in RP as something else more familiar to them.

Which results in people ret-conning a personal dislike of humans into their anthropomorphic characters as a way of avoiding mixed RP scenarios like that. It's a RP-specific way that OOC ideas influence things IC, and really accomplishes nothing good.

Anyhow. I think there's a legitimate reason to want narrowly anthropomorphic settings-- it may lead to all kinds of other complications, but on some level, asking a reader to swallow just one "what if" -- in this case, what if all sentient beings were anthropomorphic (but nonhuman) animals, is a lot easier. Even if it's huge in impact, keeping the what-if simple and comprehensive makes for an easier suspension of disbelief. Whereas science-fictioney scenarios have to rely on all sorts of Startrek-speak and feel like they need comPLETEly rational explanations for everything. In "strong" anthro fiction, you can just say "But that's the whole gag-- everyone's an nonhuman."

Plus, it's distracting as the dickens to have speaking, tool-using, bipedal hominids, AND speaking, tool-using, bipedal NON-hominids AND nonspeaking, quadrupedal non-hominids, all back-to-back. Almost as bad as if Walt Disney, Goofy, and Pluto, all appeared in the same cartoon.  Since the item in the middle is the one we have to ask everybody to suspend disbelief over, the less obvious its contrast with other possibilities, the better.


----------



## Fat Foxcoon (Jul 7, 2008)

In all but 1 of my finished story's I never mention humans. I think I did in my D&D story only because I wanted to make sure I had some so those who don't play furrys and know about d&d stuff (unlike me who knows nothing) can relate or something. 

I rare use yiff but I may have in a few story's. I don't make naughty story's, pg or pg 13 is as far as I will go. I will be suggestive but never go into detail.

the only story's I have made with characters making out is when they where art trades for someone else using there characters. Usually I don't mention humans t all. I prefur a world with just animals.  don't need or care to explain how it happened it just is =}


----------



## PinkPikachu (Jul 7, 2008)

I never personally liked the idea of humans as inferior or as evil (Though I do like the story ideas that can come from humans being thought as such, since misconception can bring many opportunities for plot design). However, the reason in my mind, is also based on one of the many reasons I believe people become furries (this is my oppinion, not a fact nor something to challenge your beliefs, please do not call me stupid or anything of such).

I believe that for many, one of the reasons for becoming a furry is because of ostracization from mainstream society. So instead, a person would fall into the realm of imagination, and try to distance themselves from the humanity that ostracized them. That can be done through changing ones self-image. Additionally, such people get drawn towards the idea of community and family that is presented by the furry clique.

The idea of humans thus becomes negative, representing hate, disdain, as well as the source of loneliness and pain. Therefore it seems like it would be a natural response for a person to find it distasteful to mingle humans (The perceived degenerating force) with furries (The perceived Positive force).


----------



## SlushPuppy (Jul 7, 2008)

It may have been mentioned by now- but I'll make a quick post anyhow.

Apparently she's not well liked, but whatever! The bit that I found really neat about Robin Hobb's Assassin (Farseer trilogy) books is her little blurp at the beginning of each chapter. It would introduce a little bit of the culture, history, or whatever quickly. More often than not it allowed me to get a little more understanding of why some things are felt, reacted to, done, whatever in the following chapter or later.

I've incorporated that into my own. Mine isn't from a first person perspective though, more of a scholarly way. Which I guess would make mine more like what's complained about XD


----------



## johnothano (Jul 8, 2008)

I am guilty of most if not all of the things listed here...


----------



## Mavu-chan (Jul 8, 2008)

You see, the problem with this sort of thing is the use of the word 'cliched', considering JUST HOW MUCH shit has been written, there are virtually NO character traits or storylines, or whatever that have NOT been used, and for an amateur writer to write furry stories, it's enough of an accomplishment just to make the characters believeable. I'm sorry that my opinion is not that of what most of you share, but I thought it'd just be nice to show that not everyone really minds that some writers can't come up with absolutely awesome and original things, as long as the stories are told well. 

And, yes, I do understand where you all are coming from, but I'd just like to say, count your blessings that they ALL aren't mindless sex for sex sake or just badly described anthros hating on humans or whatever it is your pet peeves are.


----------



## kalibration ltd (Jul 8, 2008)

i noticed a trend
they all suck




kiddin'


----------



## psion (Jul 8, 2008)

lobosabio said:


> Yeah, but that can hold true in almost any kind of fiction.  It isn't really an exclusive thing.  Then again, I noticed that your example was from a porno and, in my experience, pornos will use damn near any excuse to have a sex scene (or that particular fetish's equivalent).



True, but... *tries to figure out how to best word this*
I guess the best way to put it is that good writers can at least make some kind of sense (or at least keep the reader entertained enough that he doesn't wonder why things are the way they are.)


----------



## thebeast76 (Jul 9, 2008)

I've noticed lots of shock and surprise, but not very much fear or anxiety...


----------



## ScottyDM (Jul 14, 2008)

Chanticleer said:


> ... the complete and utter despisal of the human race. For some reason I can't look through 3 stories without stumbling upon one where A: humans are incredibly weak in comparison to the glorious anthro master races, or B: humans are evil little #$%^s who will kill on a whim and treat everyone else like something they scraped off of their shoes.


This is a reaction to the "us versus them" mentality that seems to be inborn into humans. If we know something we know if it's safe or not, but if something is a mystery to us it's better to back off than risk death or injury. In the real world this "us versus them" thing comes up between races and between species all the time. It's not the same thing as racism, which is taught. However, it can be the trigger that starts racism. When someone stays ignorant of that new family that moved in to the neighborhood, they can start to imagine all kinds of wacky stuff about them, and those imagined things can lead to biases.

When a new group tries to integrate itself into an existing group they go through a progression: 1st, a novelty to be embraced for those few lucky enough to know one; 2nd, as they start to grow in numbers they are seen as interlopers and job stealers, contaminants in society; 3rd, their numbers grow to the point they cannot be avoided, people learn they are actually okay and they are accepted. If a newer new group should come along, they become the new "them" and "us" is redefined to include the former new group.

This progression can be modified if "them" is seen from the outset as subhuman. This happened in the U.S. with black Africans prior to the 1860s and that's why it's taken black Americans so long to become accepted in society (which is still not complete). With other races in the U.S. or in some other countries the process has been a lot shorter.

I think authors are just reacting to what they see around them, even if they don't understand it. 





Nequ said:


> Of course, it could simply be the authour's own IRL alienation issues projecting into the story, their feeling of disconnection from popular culture and humanity in general.


Yea, there's that too.

Scotty


----------



## ScottyDM (Jul 14, 2008)

Adelio Altomar said:


> I've noticed that the humans are sometimes called 'a myth'.


Uh oh. Dang, I'm about to finish the 1st draft of a story where this is the case--my 1st story where I've chosen this sort of backstory.... About 15,000 years ago humans had been genetically uplifting many species--well over 100. Then a cataclysmic event (I favor an asteroid) wiped out civilization and threw everyone back into the bronze age. The most populated areas were hit the hardest and so humans were suffered greatly and some uplifted species where annihilated. In the 1st few centuries of struggle for survival that followed, more uplifted species were lost including humans. Then it was a long, slow process of rebuilding populations and civilizations--along with struggles between species that directly competed for resources. The result was more extinctions until only a handful of uplifted species remain.

This is a perfectly valid way to create a storyworld. Anthros had to come from somewhere, right? 





Lanceleoghauni said:


> Genetic experimentation is pretty common, but with what are essentially human-animal hybrids it makes sense, especially as Sci-fi is common as well.


The way I see it you have only a few possible realistic sources for anthros, and what's appropriate is further reduced by the style of anthropomorphization you do.
*Naturally evolved (or created by God):* Generally an alternate earth, or could be aliens which resemble animals. Can be used for almost any type of story.
*Natural source, but living in a parallel world:* Good for magical races, fantasy stories, and fairy tales. E.g. pooka, dragons, kitsune, selkies, and many more. Often the story is triggered when our world intersects with this magical dimension.
*Genetically uplifted from nonhuman sources:* Normally cannot interbreed; distinct species. Often used when you want nonmagical anthros interacting with humans, but backstory could be that humans have gone extinct.
*Genetically manipulated humans:* Can interbreed; shameful throwback could be hairless form. Can be used in same way as above.
*They're among us, but we see them as animals although they have a rich language, society, mythos, etc:* Stories such as Adams' _Watership Down_ or Bach's _Johnathan Livingston Seagull_. Note, works such as London's _Call of the Wild_ do not qualify because he did not anthropomorphize his animals.
*No reason given, they just are:* Far too many furry stories, although I have 1 of these too... as a parody of this type of story. 

Scotty


----------



## ScottyDM (Jul 14, 2008)

M. Le Renard said:


> Extremely evident pride in one's creation.  By this, I mean the kinds of stories that start with a long LONG introduction explaining the history, culture, religion, economy, biology, technology, geology, ecology, astronomy, physics, and specific quantum interactions of their invented race/people/whatever.  It's like, that's very exciting that you've thought so hard and researched so much, but no one actually cares.  Just tell your damn story.


As others have pointed out, that's just plain poor writing and has nothing to do with genre.

They say that a beginning writer should throw out the first scene of his short story and jump right into the action. Write it, but during editing toss it out. Likewise with the first chapter of a novel, or the first book of a series. I'd just like to point out that it is the artist who is supposed to suffer for his art, not the public.



Vore Writer said:


> The one trend I'm trying to break is having the majority of my main and secondary characters gay. It might be okay within the furry fandom, but I don't think it'll appeal to everybody else.


Why is it okay within the fandom? Or just as valid, why would it be bad outside the fandom? Write what you want to read. Your work will find its audience.



ADF said:


> For instance one I read was near future nano tech; were humans worthless to the world were transformed into farm animals to be eaten, because despite real animal farming being banned people still wanted â€˜meat that was lived inâ€™. The idea that the animal farming industry was banned but the society was perfectly happy to eat transformed people, says a few things regarding the writers perspective on human value. You could tell they got something out of the idea of humans taking the degrading roles we subject animals to on a daily basis.


Probably written by a member of PeTA.



Xipoid said:


> However, feel free to use "Writer's Nepotism" as I have no copyrights or any such things on it.


It is not possible to enforce a copyright on a 2-word phrase. Not directed at you, Xipoid, but there are some who think it's possible.

Scotty


----------



## ScottyDM (Jul 14, 2008)

M. Le Renard said:


> I guess all the good stuff I've read has anthros that are more than just humans with animal features pasted on them.  But, unfortunately, the general trend (even in my own work, I'm afraid) seems to be anthros for the sake of anthros.





Xipoid said:


> I find it hard to make a judgment since anthropomorphic animals are not real. I am unsure just what "quirks" a real walking, talking wolf would have. For instance, assuming they were integrated into society (or already part of), just how animal would they act and conversely how human could they be? (e.g. would a wolf-person still have its pack nature or would that quality be shed once they become part of a more complex society, aka: bigger pack)
> 
> That seems to be at the discretion of the writer which runs a rather broad gamut all the way from animals simply given human intelligence and the ability to walk upright to humans given a few animal features like tails, fur, and claws.


We cannot know how a real anthropomorphic wolf might behave, or how it might try to live in human society or if it'd prefer to live at the fringes of human society--so we imagine.

We don't need to get it right, but we do need to get the illusion right.

I run a little anthrofiction contest from a website I call Anthrofiction Network (anthrofiction.net). Throughout the history of the contest I have read plenty of stories by authors who seem to have put no effort forth to try to create a sense that their nonhuman characters where nonhuman. They might say that a character was a ferret, and even slip in a line or two about fur color, but other than that, nothing. It's not a fatal flaw, but I do prefer my anthros to be anthros and not humans in fur coats. Also, the contest has started to attract the attention of authors outside the fandom.

So this quarter (started July 10th) the theme is Under the Skin, which is not so much a theme as it is a set of techniques. For those who like a bit more explanation I've created a little 30-page essay on the subject, which you can download from the theme page. The essay has one major failing--for examples it uses only excerpts from my own work. But I was in a rush so I used what I had at hand.

To view past stories from spring 2008, enter a story, or view stories and vote in September you'll need to set up a free account on the site.

Scotty


----------



## thebeast76 (Jul 15, 2008)

ScottyDM said:


> So this quarter (started July 10th) the theme is Under the Skin, which is not so much a theme as it is a set of techniques.
> Scotty



What exactly is the theme/concept of "Under the Skin"? Are you trying to find ways to somehow "explain" the psyche, the way the being thinks and acts as not so much as a "person in a fur coat" as you say, but as an "anthro". A thing that acts in a way that still stays true to the animal side of it, and delicately intertwines with the human attributes such as walking or perhaps speaking? I am utterly intrigued by this concept, and would love to know more, but as I have little space left on my computer, I can't download the 30 page document to read. Please elaborate!


----------



## ScottyDM (Jul 15, 2008)

thebeast76 said:


> What exactly is the theme/concept of "Under the Skin"?


The concept is for the author to create the illusion that the character really is a _whatever_. The reader should come away feeling that they know a little something about the characters--not only as individuals, but as distinct species as well.

*I can best illustrate this by example* (all in HTML so no downloading):

*Last quarter there were two very well written stories. Both fantastic, but one did almost no species characterization and the other was so into the species the story required the characters at least be in the deer family.* _The Toast_ by Whyte YotÃ© and _In the Greenwood_ by Poetigress. Note, you'll need a free account on the site to view these stories.

*Over at Steve Abbott's site Anthrofiction.com there are two stories posted that further illustrate the difference*--although they are not as well written as the above examples. _As Long As You Love Me_ by Kashmir and _A Fox's Diary_ by The White Wolf. This second example is tough sledding because the author doesn't seem to understand paragraphs, and the formatting is crap because there's nothing to distinguish the paragraphs he does have. However, when you read it, one thing stands out--his fox has a sense of smell... the story hinges on the fact that a fox has a sense of smell.

I was going to contrast two skilled authors, each with a body of online work. Unfortunately, one of them just changed hosting providers and his chapters have been stripped. I wanted to point you to the one of his chapters where he does species-specific behavior. *Instead, I'll point you to two of my works*.

In _The Toast_ and _As Long As You Love Me_ *the storyworlds seem to use species as races, where they can freely interbreed and there is little or no difference between them.* In spring of 2006 Nathan Ryan announced the contest (it was _The Watching Stone Anthro Story Contest_ under his management) with the theme of Foreigners. Unfortunately, he was forced to drop out before the close of the entry period. I'd started a story titled _'Round the World with Wee Mr. Winkle_, which was a parody of the "species as race" style of furry story. Despite my effort to _not_ do any species characterization some crept in, in the form of body language and behaviors. As I scrambled to get the website ready I created a "test" contest quarter and put that unfinished story there. You can find _'Round the World with Wee Mr. Winkle_ as a test story.

The theme for the summer of 2006 was My Sister and I wrote a sample story with two brother/sister relationships. Like _In the Greenwood_ and _A Fox's Diary_ *I tried to integrate the nonhumanness of my anthros into the structure of the story.* As I normally close access to stories at the end of the quarter following the quarter the stories were in, I moved this sample story to the "test" contest quarter so it'd be accessible. In _Family Christmas_ I did not use all 10 techniques, but I used most of them (1, 2, 3, 5, 7, and 10).

*Maybe not as good a pair of examples because there is some species characterization in Wee Mr. Winkle, but it shows what's minimally possible.*

Finally, the pros work hard at getting this stuff right, even when the story is not anthrofiction _per se_. This is from a phone interview of three authors: Tamora Pierce, Philip Pullman, and Chistopher Paolini.





> Pierce: One of the things that really struck me about both _Eragon_ and the _Dark Materials_ booksâ€¦ I'm touchy on the subject of animals; I like them to be as real as possible. But here in one case you have armored bears, and in the other case, in _Eragon_, the dragon herself. The dragon acted in an alien way, in a way that was not human, and became more believable thereby. She had her own agenda that had to do with her race and species â€” and not humans. The armored bears: They talk, they make their own armor, and they fight, but for the rest of it, they live just like bears. That just blew me away.
> 
> Pullman: I'm glad it had that effect. That's what I was hoping for.
> 
> ...



I suppose the contest theme could be titled More Than Skin Deep.

Scotty


----------



## Le_DÃ©mon_Sans_Visage (Jul 15, 2008)

ScottyDM's site mentions 





> Put a nonhuman inside a human skin, yet still come across as fully nonhumanâ€”that is, truly get under the skin of your character and show us its real nature.



That's an approach I almost never see used in anthro stories, and I find it interesting because it's something I try to do fairly often with my stories. Maybe because I've only ever been within spitting distance of normal myself (hah) I like writing about offbeat psychologies. In my favorite one, a main character was a genetic chimera who looked fully human but mentally was basically an asocial predator like a cat. Even though the story looked like it wanted to be romantic, there could never be anything like a human relationship between the chimera and the female lead, because no matter how much he loved her, it just wasn't in him to be social, to adapt his behavior to being around another person all the time - all the little instances of give and take that make relationships possible.


----------



## ScottyDM (Jul 15, 2008)

Ah yes, *one of the challenges*. It's a challenge precisely because it would be difficult to do well.

Nathan Ryan (Nadan) started the contest in spring of 2005. I had entries for summer and fall of 2005. Nadan skipped winter 2005 - 2006 because of scheduling. When he announced *the spring 2006 contest* theme, my first idea was to do a story about a shape shifter far from home who runs into a fellow countryman. They're in a public place (the restaurant in the lodge at Yellowstone Park) so they stay in human form throughout the story. My plan was to write it in 1st person and to use technique #3 (senses) almost exclusively to show that the main character was _not_ human. Then I though, "Hey, that story has commercial potential." So I decided to save it and I started working on _'Round the World with Wee Mr. Winkle_. Did a fair amount of research for my foreign shape shifter, but haven't written a lick...  :-(  yet.

Le_DÃ©mon, you mentioned your "genetic *chimera who looked fully human but mentally was basically an asocial predator* like a cat." Another character who was human on the outside but something quite different on the inside is *Wolf, from the miniseries The 10th Kingdom*. I highly recommend this video to anyone who likes fairy tales, fantasy, or is interested in anthropomorphic characterization as *an example of what to do*. It's about 5 hours total and if you can find a copy, see it! My local library (Colorado Springs) has 6 copies and they are all currently either checked out or on hold for someone.

I found a couple of excerpts on YouTube that feature Wolf.

*Setup:* Wolf has been in prison and the evil queen let him out so he could track down Prince Wendall, who she transformed into a dog. She sent the three children of the troll king after Prince Wendall too. Virgina (the girl in blue) gets involved when she tries to help the dog. Wolf's part starts at 0:45. *The Grill on the Green*. Poor Wolf hasn't had anything to eat in prison but beanstalk soup.

*Setup:* It's the next day. Virgina's apartment (where she lives with her dad) has been destroyed by the trolls, so she goes to stay with her grandmother. Wolf follows her there. *Wolf Cooking Grandma*. Wolf is the grandson of Big Bad Wolf and Little Red Riding Hood.


*The writing contest has attracted writers and readers from outside the furry fandom, and even some furries have entered stories that are not your typical furry story.*

In fall 2006 (theme: The Harvest) Charles Henry entered _Season End_, in which he'd anthropomorphized *a grape vine*. He'd even managed to get in a bit of species characterization by using catch phrases. For example his vine thinks about her caretaker's "offshoots" (children), his "line" (his father and his son), when she was "set in place" (planted), and about her "separation" (when she was cut from the parent plant and rooted), etc.

In winter 2007 (theme: Transformation) Rabbit entered _Furvert_, where a witch transforms a dying man into *a leopard plush* at his request. After his transformation he's light enough she can pick him up, so she puts him in her bedroom, dresses him up in bondage gear, and talks to him as if he was still aware. I struggled with this--was the plush just a plush, or was it an anthropomorphic plush (a plush with human characteristics). I decided since the witch treated the plush as if it were still aware, and therefore _she_ anthropomorphized him, I'd allow the story.

In fall 2007 (theme: Pumpkins) Virmir entered _Children Shouldn't Play_, which was a deliciously creepy story about a boy who transforms into *a pumpkin*. The character feels what it is to have roots tunneling through the ground, and he retains his awareness even after his fruit (the pumpkin) is harvested and the squirrels eventually tear him apart the day after Halloween.


*Another of the challenges from this quarter's theme* is:





> Clearly show us your character without naming its species and without doing a detailed physical descriptionâ€”some description is okay.


Sometimes a reader will make a comment like, "You didn't tell me what species your character was, so I wasn't sure." However in winter 2007 (theme: Transformation) Kada entered _Love's Discretion_. It was about a... what? *She never names the species, but not one reader complained about it.* They didn't complain because the story was infused throughout by species characterization. You didn't have to be told because you _knew_. The 1st paragraph/scene was a sort of prologue, the real action started with *the 2nd paragraph*:





> whiskers betraying her nervousness...
> "Perhaps if youâ€™d been a queen..."
> a regretful flip of her tail...
> a solemn, farewell blink of her jade-colored eyes...


Can you guess yet? How about *the 3rd paragraph*:





> Losing the fight to keep my ears erect...
> A tom has his pride and being able to salvage even the merest scrap...is vital to oneâ€™s virility.
> Teasing the tuft of my tail with my claws...
> I went outside to chase flitterbyes.


Surely you know. How could there be any question? And this in only two paragraphs. Kada continued this sort of characterization with the 4th, 5th, 7th, 9th, 10th, 11th... and through to the last paragraphs. And by Sangiin's description, I'm pretty sure this sort of characterization is not what he was complaining about back on page 1 of this thread.


*Not putting in some of this type of detail is a characteristic of the beginning writer--even when writing mainstream and all your characters are human.* If it weren't for dialog and the implication that your characters can hear, reading some stories you'd get the impression that humans have only one sense. Also, even when a story is _not_ set in some small town the only culture that exists is the author's culture.

*How much more so then when we write anthrofiction, where the characters are not supposed to be human.* As several have mentioned in prior posts, a lot of these "trends" for the worse are simply bad writing by beginners who have yet to learn.

*So yea... go more than skin deep with your characters.*

Scotty


----------



## dietrc70 (Jul 16, 2008)

Le_DÃ©mon_Sans_Visage said:


> ScottyDM's site mentions
> 
> That's an approach I almost never see used in anthro stories, and I find it interesting because it's something I try to do fairly often with my stories. Maybe because I've only ever been within spitting distance of normal myself (hah) I like writing about offbeat psychologies. In my favorite one, a main character was a genetic chimera who looked fully human but mentally was basically an asocial predator like a cat. Even though the story looked like it wanted to be romantic, there could never be anything like a human relationship between the chimera and the female lead, because no matter how much he loved her, it just wasn't in him to be social, to adapt his behavior to being around another person all the time - all the little instances of give and take that make relationships possible.



My approach to this issue seems to have a lot in common with yours.  I'd like to read this story if it's on FA (when it comes back).

My animal characters are actual animals that happen to be youkai, don't really age, and grow more intelligent over time.  One of them is a several-thousand year old fox who literally takes the body of a depression-era teenage boy.  The contradiction between his human appearance and personality can be fun to work with.  This character learned English from books in the 17th century, and cannot understand why spoken English should be different (spoken language is obviously not a native or instinctual concept for a fox).  He prefers the style of the King James Bible, "for its cadences are like unto the pacing hearts of Foxes and Men alike, and pleasing to the ears of both."  He doesn't understand the nuances of human body language, and rarely makes eye contact except for an intense fox-like stare.

As his only native emotional attachment is seasonal, and then only to his mate and offspring, he describes compassion and intense emotional attachment in humans as "a curious form of predation."


----------



## Toonces (Jul 16, 2008)

The main trend I see in furry stories is fantasy. Everybody wants to talk about mystic forces and alternate realities and shit. It's at least part of the reason why furry stories are pretty much entirely unreadable.


----------



## Le_DÃ©mon_Sans_Visage (Jul 16, 2008)

TooncesFA said:


> The main trend I see in furry stories is fantasy. Everybody wants to talk about mystic forces and alternate realities and shit. It's at least part of the reason why furry stories are pretty much entirely unreadable.



I write about alternate universes, but since quantum physics almost demands multiple worlds (at least in my layman's understanding of it) it's more sci-f than fantasy.


----------



## Le_DÃ©mon_Sans_Visage (Jul 16, 2008)

dietrc70 said:


> My approach to this issue seems to have a lot in common with yours.  I'd like to read this story if it's on FA (when it comes back).



I have it on another site. PM me and I'll send you the URL. I'd like to read yours too, it sounds amusing.


----------



## ScottyDM (Jul 17, 2008)

TooncesFA said:


> The main trend I see in furry stories is fantasy. Everybody wants to talk about mystic forces and alternate realities and shit. It's at least part of the reason why furry stories are pretty much entirely unreadable.


I don't quite understand your statement.

Some people refuse to read fiction, wishing instead to only read what is "real". And some people read fiction, but refuse to read speculative fiction because of the speculative element, which cannot possibly be real.

So, are you saying you do like anthro/furry fiction (a type of speculative fiction) but do not like fantasy (another type of speculative fiction)? Or are you saying you don't like fantasy when the fantasy element is poorly thought out and unrealistic?

Or maybe furry stories are "pretty much entirely unreadable" because you're reading furry off the Web and most of what's on the Web is bollocks.

Scotty


----------



## M. LeRenard (Jul 17, 2008)

Holy nougat, Scotty.  Now I'm going to have to go through all this junk when I get a more friendly internet situation again.  Thanks a lot.


----------



## Le_DÃ©mon_Sans_Visage (Jul 17, 2008)

ScottyDM said:


> . . . Can you guess yet? How about *the 3rd paragraph*:Surely you know. How could there be any question? And this in only two paragraphs. Kada continued this sort of characterization with the 4th, 5th, 7th, 9th, 10th, 11th... and through to the last paragraphs.



The main problem with this approach that I see is that it only works with familiar animals. Whskers, twitchy tail, green eyes and calling a male a tom are pretty obviously a cat. If your character is something more exotic, an unfamiliar species or an invented one, though, you're not going to have that instant recognition. 

Although it's a good alternative to stating "So-and-so was a wolf", I would just refer to him as "the wolf" once or twice and be done with it, unless it's vitally important for the plot that he's a wolf and not, say, a lemur.


----------



## ScottyDM (Jul 18, 2008)

Le_DÃ©mon_Sans_Visage said:


> The main problem with this approach that I see is that it only works with familiar animals. Whskers, twitchy tail, green eyes and calling a male a tom are pretty obviously a cat. If your character is something more exotic, an unfamiliar species or an invented one, though, you're not going to have that instant recognition.
> 
> Although it's a good alternative to stating "So-and-so was a wolf", I would just refer to him as "the wolf" once or twice and be done with it, unless it's vitally important for the plot that he's a wolf and not, say, a lemur.


Quite true.

Unless the species is one that nearly everyone will be familiar with, it can smack of a "Serlingism". Some of Rod Serling's stories for _The Twilight Zone_ featured a, "Ha ha surprise! I fooled you," ending. All the characters knew a secret, but Serling doesn't reveal the secret 'till the very end. That's hack writing, but it worked for him because: it was his show, as long as people watched and the network could sell ads they let him keep his show, and most viewers kind of expected that sort of thing from him. However, in the general market, most readers hate being played the fool.

That said, it certainly wouldn't have hurt _Love's Discretion_ to put the word "cat" in one of the early paragraphs.

But what do you do with an invented species? Give them a name, I suppose. Artist Eugene Arenhaus did so when he invented his fur-covered, tailless alien race. He called them focco. I've created a species too, but I haven't named them beyond what they call themselves, which doesn't exactly roll off the tongue: "manmeri bilong bus" or people of the forest--the language is a real one, Tok Pisin. I suppose they could be "manmeri".

Scotty


----------



## Le_DÃ©mon_Sans_Visage (Jul 19, 2008)

ScottyDM said:


> created a species too, but I haven't named them beyond what they call themselves, which doesn't exactly roll off the tongue: "manmeri bilong bus" or people of the forest--the language is a real one, Tok Pisin. I suppose they could be "manmeri".
> 
> Scotty



Tok Pisin - that's a chinese/english pidgen, isn't it? "Talk business"?  

I suppose the flip side of that would be something like what happened to me with a werewolf story I write years ago and posted to a critique forum - the readers came into the story with immutable fixed notions on an imaginary subject. In the story, the werewolves shifted shape involuntarily every night. Several of the critiquers declared flatly, "Werewolves don't do that, they only change during the full moon." 

I pointed them to resources that showed even the actual folklore couldn't agree on the characteristics of a werewolf, and the full moon thing was cemented into popular conception by the wolf man. I tried explaining, over and over, that there are no such thing as werewolves, and since my plot demanded a circadian rhythm style cycle to the change, it had to be nightly. No dice! It was firmly fixed in their heads that the Platonic ideal of a werewolf changed only during a full moon, and nothing I could say would dissuade them.


----------



## ScottyDM (Jul 19, 2008)

Tok Pisin is used as the common language in the highlands of Paupa New Guinea.

I read your second paragraph and I went  ! Are those people incapable of research? Do they totally lack imagination?

There are werewolf stories from every corner of the globe that has wolves--not all require the moon to function. In fact Romanian werewolves typically do not require the full moon for a transformation (as you probably know). I'd better stop now before I go off into this rant... anyway, those people were _idjiots!_

Scotty


----------



## Fhwdgads50 (Jul 25, 2008)

Le_DÃ©mon_Sans_Visage said:


> Tok Pisin - that's a chinese/english pidgen, isn't it? "Talk business"?
> 
> I suppose the flip side of that would be something like what happened to me with a werewolf story I write years ago and posted to a critique forum - the readers came into the story with immutable fixed notions on an imaginary subject. In the story, the werewolves shifted shape involuntarily every night. Several of the critiquers declared flatly, "Werewolves don't do that, they only change during the full moon."
> 
> I pointed them to resources that showed even the actual folklore couldn't agree on the characteristics of a werewolf, and the full moon thing was cemented into popular conception by the wolf man. I tried explaining, over and over, that there are no such thing as werewolves, and since my plot demanded a circadian rhythm style cycle to the change, it had to be nightly. No dice! It was firmly fixed in their heads that the Platonic ideal of a werewolf changed only during a full moon, and nothing I could say would dissuade them.



*Gasp*...How...could you? How dare you change the features of an obscure, mythological creature that doesn't actually exist? You should be ashamed.


----------



## Le_DÃ©mon_Sans_Visage (Jul 25, 2008)

Tangelax said:


> *Gasp*...How...could you? How dare you change the features of an obscure, mythological creature that doesn't actually exist? You should be ashamed.



Well, I _am_ a fiend.


----------



## lobosabio (Jul 25, 2008)

ScottyDM said:


> There are werewolf stories from every corner of the globe that has wolves--not all require the moon to function. In fact Romanian werewolves typically do not require the full moon for a transformation (as you probably know).



Which reminds me of another common trait of werewolves in fiction:  they're scary fuckers.  It seems that they are constantly portrayed as these big, ruthless killers, when, in fact, this contradicts many of the myths about them.  For instance, in Portuguese myth, werewolves are incredibly cowardly creatures who would gather 'round houses at night and wine at them in order to get the occupants to blow out the candles (the light was scaring the werewolves).  Not to mention the creatures wouldn't even harm the proverbial fly.


----------



## ScottyDM (Jul 26, 2008)

Westerners are getting pretty hard to scare with a mere monster. You either gotta have a government conspiracy, terrorists, or white powder in the mail.

There are different styles of European werewolves. I think some of the mythology was driven by rabies. A normally shy animal (imagine a wolf) turns into a monster and bites some people. He is hunted down and killed. About a month later those people are transformed into monsters and attack other people. They are imprisoned or killed to stop their rampage. Later some of the people they attacked turn into monsters, etc.

BTW, if you want to see something horrifying, go to YouTube and search for rabies. There are videos of children in places like Indonesia who display clinical symptoms of rabies. Yes, they do foam at the mouth. In one video a small girl (6 to 8 years old?) is at the clinic and the doctor, to test for symptoms, offers her a glass of water. Sweet little girl and she looks and acts normal. She calmly takes the water and puts the glass to her lips--then flings it away, screams, and starts crying. It seems that swallowing hurts so much that water becomes terrifying to someone with rabies.

In Romania werewolves as shape shifters (not simple monsters) have many origins. Often a witch or wizard will work magic to change into a wolf for the purpose of gaining power over an enemy. Sometimes they will don a magical belt or wrap a magical wolf skin around themselves. At other times a magic user will curse someone with being a werewolf, but even then the curse is not necessarily tied to the moon. Also in some stories people are born into it. Silver? Not in Romania. Simple iron weapons, even something crude like a pitchfork, can wound a werewolf. And wounded they are forced to shift back into human form.

There was often a kind of uneasy truce between the local werewolf and the village. Normal wolves were abundant in Romania, and even live there today. A village with a werewolf prowling about a night might not have so many wolves of the normal kind, and as long as "their" werewolf wasn't eating their livestock, he was tolerated. Villagers might even take a few things for him to eat (during the day) so he wouldn't be so ravenous at night. If someone was not right in the head they might not be able to hold down a job and become homeless. With the crazy talk and wild look in their eye it doesn't take much for a deeply superstitious people to imagine the crazy dude who lives at the edge of the village is a werewolf. I suppose feeding the local werewolf is a form of charity. But it's a dangerous game. If something goes wrong, say wild wolves kill a half-dozen sheep, then the crazy dude would be blamed and the villagers would kill him. Fear and superstition would keep anyone from knowing any details about the deed, and besides, he was a werewolf and probably deserved it. What if he would have killed a child next?

There's a patron saint of werewolves, which surprised me.

Scotty


----------



## hara-surya (Jul 31, 2008)

I suppose I'm coming into this discussion late and I'm going to be all over the place about what I talk about from what I've seen on the thread...

From what I've read of Furry stories, and I've read A LOT since I'm the writing assessor on the VCL, is a handful of things:

1) Sex, sex, sex...  Somehow the "average" furry in stories have more sex than a busy porn star.  Most people don't have sex on a daily basis.  In fact most don't, even if they could.  In fact, while most people think about sex on a regular basis it rarely goes so far as to even be a note in first-person internal dialog.  When you see a hot woman/man do you dwell on the fact or just admire the part of them you like and get on with life?  If I dwelt on the fact I work with a lot of hot women I'd never get my job done.

2) They beat you over the head with the fact they're a Furry.  I honestly don't to the point I need another character who's not one to make it perfectly clear of what they are.  When you beat us over the head with them being Furry you insult the reader.  If the character is Furry, and they know it, and everyone else knows it because they are too, then why say it a hundred times?  Say it once, maybe twice, then be done with it!

3) Authors often make out their story to be more than it is.  Even I'm guilty of it and I suppose it's just ego, but when you write porn and get pissed that people don't act like you're the Good Bard you need to be taken down a notch.

4) Too many authors have the point of view that if Microsoft Word says it's OK then it is.  No red or green squiggles then it must be OK.  It's not.  I've seen stories that have grammatical errors I haven't done since the fifth grade and then the author claims to be an English major.  I'd love to see that school's accreditation, but I've taken college writing courses with pretentious professors and they typically call that "experimental".

5) Authors forget that you're writing about people.  They might not be humans, but they are people.  People have feelings.  People have prejudices.  People have wants and desires that aren't just sex.  Write accordingly.

6) If you're going to write porn at least be creative about it.  Neil Gamian is the best sex scene writer I have ever read and he never talks about the "naughty bits" (OK, I think he did briefly in Stardust).  What I'm saying it if you're going to write smut, be creative don't just give a blow-by-blow account of them bumping uglies.  It might help you gain points on my third point up there.

7) I loathe with word "yiff" almost as much as I do calling hands and feet "paws".  When you need to use special words to describe normal parts of human physiology and psychology just because they're Furries you need to realize you're either a) embarrassing the reader, b) insulting the reader, or c) losing credibility as an author.

8) Subtly goes further when describing anything more than wordiness.  A picture my be worth a thousand words, but a hundred well chosen words are worth a thousand of rambling.  Anyone can string words together to describe something, an author knows how to do it in as few words as possible.  Then again I have a vocabulary that's much larger than the average person's so I can get away with it.  Also see points 2, 6 and 7.

9 (and finally since I'm getting bored) Keep in mind your audience.  Even if you're writing for the fun of it, keep in mind who you're writing to.  I write to a general adult audience, not Furries, thus I make decisions about my writing that explains things others might not.  If I were writing to Furries I'd write very differently.


----------



## Kitsuneluke (Aug 2, 2008)

genocide agaist furrs is popular


----------



## KypDurron23 (Sep 5, 2008)

Hmm... Have to say I am guilty on most of these cliches. (Except for the sex part, I'm a little squeamish about writing stuff like that.)

In my little story, called Triworld (original name, I know) there are three "worlds" as it were. The first is a medeival-type, Fire-Emblem styled world with all humans. The second is all furry and set in the present, and the third is a sci-fi style world where the humans and anthros are having an all out civil war.

Anyway there's like 6 main chars, 3 humans and 3 non-humans.(A dragon, a fox (I believe the term is 'feral' right?), and an anthro-fox)

Anyway, they all get thrown together via ancient ruins that connects all three of their worlds, and (suprise cliche!) they have to save this alternate world from destruction!

Yay for crappy childish storylines! Heh.


----------



## GraemeLion (Sep 29, 2008)

ciaranskye said:


> 6) If you're going to write porn at least be creative about it.  Neil Gamian is the best sex scene writer I have ever read and he never talks about the "naughty bits" (OK, I think he did briefly in Stardust).  What I'm saying it if you're going to write smut, be creative don't just give a blow-by-blow account of them bumping uglies.  It might help you gain points on my third point up there.



ON this note, I find something very hilarious.  Most sex stories I've read in Furry tend to be horribly written and are more or less just IRC or muck logs.  One of the best authors I've ever had the joy of working with did FANTASTIC work with furry characters, but left the fandom over the the copious amounts of sex.

The funny part?  

When he wrote a scene that involved two characters and the passions that got them all randy, his writing was so evocative that at some point even the reader considered a cold shower.

But he never showed the act.  He never showed the deed.  He never discussed it to any perverse degree.

The moral of the story is thus: 

Sometimes, the more you write, the less effective your writing will be.  Sometimes, when you drag people into your world, and you let them feel with your characters, and you properly show, not tell.. you don't even need to show them.   Imagination is the tool of all writers, and when you can use your reader's imagination to further your story, you are making life easier for yourself.


----------



## KiloCharlie (Nov 27, 2008)

Grimfang said:


> Well.. the word itself is just a pet peeve to probably 62% of the fandom.
> 
> I just don't recall them actually using the word 'yiff'. I think they may mention sex, or something that seems natural.. just anthros, instead of homo sapiens :]



the fscked (intentionally misspelled) up thing about 'yiff' is that the original context is that of greeting and/or joy... that is how i use it... if i mean it as sex i will just say sex... point over...


----------



## ScottyDM (Nov 28, 2008)

ciaranskye said:


> I suppose I'm coming into this discussion late and I'm going to be all over the place about what I talk about from what I've seen on the thread...


All that's just a general rant against poor writing. It's not exclusive to any one genre or fandom. But rather than quit writing or sitting around and pouting, it'd be awesome if writers tried to figure out why their writing isn't working (according to more accomplished writers) and perhaps try to improve.

Some say, "I write for myself," which implies they don't care if their writing is good or not and the readers shouldn't complain. Well that's cool. But if you're writing only for yourself then _please_ don't post your stuff to a website or ask anyone else to take a look at it. The moment you solicit a reader you're no longer writing only for yourself.

I've been seeing some overwritten stories lately. If one metaphor in a description is good, then three must be better, right? No! Well okay, there is a genre where overwriting is the defining element--at the expense of the story, character development, etc--but it's not my favorite genre. I like things to happen in the stories I read. Anyway, that particular style is hella hard to do properly and I can guarantee that some newbie is gonna NOT hit that particular target no matter how good they think their aim is. (Whoo hoo, I used a metaphor, but only one.)



Kitsuneluke said:


> genocide agaist furrs is popular


True, but I think that's a logical outcome of throwing two or more equally intelligent species together and having them compete for jobs, houses in the best neighborhoods, etc. I've noticed that humans are very us-versus-them oriented and that's probably a survival skill that's hard-wired into our brains. It's probably also hard-wired into a lot of other species brains too. We have to work to overcome this attitude in ourselves. Hmm, do you suppose now that the U.S.A. has elected a black man to be Commander and Chief of this nation that authors will stop thinking of this country as ground-zero for all the prejudice in the world?



KypDurron23 said:


> Anyway there's like 6 main chars, 3 humans and 3 non-humans.(A dragon, a fox (I believe the term is 'feral' right?), and an anthro-fox)


Feral means to have gone wild. That is, a formerly domestic animal has gone wild. It can also mean to have the characteristics of a wild animal. Personally, I'd just call it a natural fox, or perhaps a four-legged fox, depending on the context. But a question: Why would a natural fox be motivated to hang out with these other companions?

Also, you can start with a clichÃ©d idea and do something unique in the details.



redcard said:


> When he wrote a scene that involved two characters and the passions that got them all randy, his writing was so evocative that at some point even the reader considered a cold shower.
> 
> But he never showed the act.  He never showed the deed.  He never discussed it to any perverse degree.


How much and what sort of detail you put into any scene depends on the genre and your skill as a writer. Some believe in giving minimal descriptions of characters, for example they don't describe hair color, height, build, etc. unless it is necessary to the story. The reader will see the characters the way they want to see them and create their own idealized personas. The same can be said of a sex scene. If you give clinical descriptions of every step of the action, you remove the reader from the process. Some readers will be uncomfortable with anything more than the missionary position and some have an imagination that would make a porn star blush. So if you give the reader free reign to imagine the action, then your scene will be perfect in their eyes.

Here's a good essay on the subject of creatively withholding information from the reader: The Role of Mystery in Fiction.



KiloCharlie said:


> the fscked (intentionally misspelled) up thing about 'yiff' is that the original context is that of greeting and/or joy... that is how i use it... if i mean it as sex i will just say sex... point over...


Hmmm, I'd read it was originally supposed to be similar to the sound natural foxes make while mating, and therefore synonymous with the sex act. FYI, "spooge" is the generic name of that fake "man juice" the porn industry uses when their stars have been over rehearsing the night before the big shoot. I've stopped using either term.

------
Speaking of sex scenes, I'm writing one (in fact I'm taking a break from it to procrastinate right now). And yes, it's with anthro-foxes (how pathetic). :sad: [laughs] :lol: 

It's tough because I'm more interested in getting critical ideas across to the reader than I am in entertaining them with hot vulpine sex. I need to _show_ the physical passion of a vixen in heat, but for the dominant vixen that will be contrasted with her sadistic streak and twisted sense of justice. There are three other vixens in the room and they normally would not get any of that sweet dog-fox tail (which they desperately need). The sadistic vixen is going to "torture" them with what she's about to do. The dog fox (who happens to be the main character) couldn't care less about anyone but the dominant vixen, whom he only just met, and this is his first time so he's a bit uncertain. And then the room is filled with this invisible fog of female pheromones, so he's feeling wound up pretty tight.

So: extreme _need_ on the part of all four vixens--they've got The Itch and there's only one satisfying way to scratch it; fear of the dominant vixen on the part of the other three girls, particularly the youngest; the sadism and selfishness of the dominant vixen against her "sisters"; desire for the dominant vixen on the part of the dog fox, tempered by his hesitation because she's his first; and finally the effect of the chemistry in the air on the dog fox because he's telling the story in first-person so he feels every nuance, and foxes have highly tuned senses.

'Taint easy.

Scotty


----------



## Hyenaworks (Nov 29, 2008)

I try not to get bogged down in anxiety over whether or not something I'm writing is original.


----------



## ironwolf85 (Dec 4, 2008)

usally the way I do it in my stories with the human/furry question is humans ask themselves "what do we qualify as human?" and for some reason or another decide "yep furries are okay as long as they don't pull nuthin crazy"
for example if an anthro fox snapps and kills/eats an anthro rabbit he will be tried for murder same as a human.

they have all the responsibilities and privileges of humans, they just happen to have a more active sex life.


----------



## psion (Dec 4, 2008)

ciaranskye said:


> I suppose I'm coming into this discussion late and I'm going to be all over the place about what I talk about from what I've seen on the thread...
> 
> From what I've read of Furry stories, and I've read A LOT since I'm the writing assessor on the VCL, is a handful of things:
> 
> ...


Hah, so many of my own gripes with writers is in that list.



Kitsuneluke said:


> genocide agaist furrs is popular


As is racism against humans, which is kind of pathetic really; always making humans out to be baby-eating psychopaths.


----------



## Poetigress (Dec 4, 2008)

ScottyDM said:


> Feral means to have gone wild. That is, a formerly domestic animal has gone wild. It can also mean to have the characteristics of a wild animal.



True, but in the parlance of the fandom, "feral" has come to mean the same thing as "quad" -- an animal that has a quadrupedal stance instead of a bipedal one.  (I used to use the term "zoomorph" or "zoomorphic" for that, but few people seem to understand that anymore, so...)


----------



## kitreshawn (Dec 5, 2008)

I think I have to agree with Poe.  If you use feral people will assume quad and quite possibly non-sentient.  People will probably follow non-morphic, zoomorph, and zoomorphic based off context, however they will also possibly assume sentient animals unless you show otherwise.

All that said I think Scotty's questions about the feral foxy are valid.


----------



## Poetigress (Dec 5, 2008)

I think feral and quad would both be assumed to be sentient, though (again, within the fandom, at least).  After all, plenty of people have feral/quad fursonas.  

If what you have is just a plain regular, non-talking animal, you'd have to show through context (description, culture, etc.) that it's just an animal and not an anthro character.


----------



## ScottyDM (Dec 5, 2008)

kitreshawn said:
			
		

> People will probably follow non-morphic, zoomorph, and zoomorphic based off context, however they will also possibly assume sentient animals unless you show otherwise.


emphasis, mine

Here, by people you mean those in the fandom. People outside the fandom (mundanes) will assume just the opposite.

S-


----------



## foozzzball (Dec 6, 2008)

Poetigress said:


> If what you have is just a plain regular, non-talking animal, you'd have to show through context (description, culture, etc.) that it's just an animal and not an anthro character.



I have this exact problem with my Askazi stories - there are furries running around, and then there are the actual animals. And typically I refer to furries with one set of words derived from some mangled translations - Hounds, Khatul, Mus, Cavalo, Taurus, etc - or specify them as 'People',  - Rabbit People - and then refer to beasts with the regular names and specify them as 'beasts' - A beast-rabbit.

It doesn't always work out perfectly.


----------



## YiffYanWolf (Dec 6, 2008)

foozzzball said:


> I have this exact problem with my Askazi stories - there are furries running around, and then there are the actual animals. And typically I refer to furries with one set of words derived from some mangled translations - Hounds, Khatul, Mus, Cavalo, Taurus, etc - or specify them as 'People', - Rabbit People - and then refer to beasts with the regular names and specify them as 'beasts' - A beast-rabbit.
> 
> It doesn't always work out perfectly.


 
And theirs also the problem of having said animals as pets. 
It's alittle akward. 
For instance:

Jane went through the door and suddenly saw her mate.
Her love. Her ever so long trusted companion. 
She wagged her tail as he came up and pounced on her. 
She patted Sniffers face head as she cooed," Whos a good boy? WHOS A GOODBOY!?" 

....
Actually, it would be kinda funny to have a antro who is also a zoophilist.
A sense of....what is it?


----------



## ScottyDM (Dec 8, 2008)

YiffYanWolf said:


> And theirs also the problem of having said animals as pets.
> It's alittle akward.
> For instance:
> 
> ...


That's a little condescending when presented that way, but lovers _do_ have code phrases they use when no one else is around, so it depends on context. On the other hand if this example refers to zoophilia...  



YiffYanWolf said:


> Actually, it would be kinda funny to have a antro who is also a zoophilist.
> A sense of....what is it?


You can put this in context by imagining a human together with one of the great apes: chimp, gorilla, orangutan, or bonobo. Same squick factor.

If your morphs are morphs because they were genetically uplifted, then most of them might view a union between an uplifted _whatever_ and a natural _whatever_ in a negative light. Crossbreeding may be possible, but what would the offspring be? Also if the two groups are genetically close, diseases may jump between species. In normal zoophilic relations crossbreeding is impossible and many diseases can't jump the species barrier. So there are few negatives other than: massive squick factor, being a social pariah if discovered, it may be illegal in your area, and is a companion animal a proper companion for such a relationship?

Excerpts from a recent chapter of mine:


> Note: The "safety lecture" is for mating season--what parents tell their post-puberty kids just before they hand them a credit card and kick them out of the house for a week so mom and dad can enjoy each others company. Also, Penny is human.
> 
> â€œI remember the safety lecture,â€ Paris said. â€œBe aware of your surroundings and what others are doingâ€”in particular humans who seem to be part of a rowdy group. People may try to take advantage of you this time of year so check room service tabs and other bills. Donâ€™t click on pay-per-view, itâ€™s way too expensive. Avoid close personal contact with wild foxes, humans, and other animals because they can carry diseaseâ€”â€
> 
> ...


This particular society is anti-zoophilic. Even the morphs.

Scotty


----------



## Schmerd (Dec 17, 2008)

Well, I only got my first story in today. I got a present day setting! And the general attitude between anthros and humans is racial hatred for the most part. But not outright "we will kill ya'll folk" attitude. More like... Think whites and blacks in the 50-60's in the states. It just aint all that normal for them to hang out.

Other than that, I can't see why there wouldn't be some kind of tension, seeing as humans are by nature xenophobic. The same, I guess, goes for most animals. You dont see a tiger waving a paw happily at a human walking too close.


----------



## Digitalpotato (Dec 17, 2008)

-Sex
-Sex
-More sex
-Sluts
-Sex
-Humans are evil.
-Dragons are uber powerful.
-Sex.
-Hawt vixens
-more sex
-And did I mention sex?


----------



## ScottyDM (Dec 17, 2008)

Schmerd said:


> Well, I only got my first story in today. I got a present day setting! And the general attitude between anthros and humans is racial hatred for the most part. But not outright "we will kill ya'll folk" attitude. More like... Think whites and blacks in the 50-60's in the states. It just aint all that normal for them to hang out.
> 
> Other than that, I can't see why there wouldn't be some kind of tension, seeing as humans are by nature xenophobic. The same, I guess, goes for most animals. You dont see a tiger waving a paw happily at a human walking too close.


I finished my college degree at a night school in Fremont California. They specialized in providing the junior/senior years for folks who already had the first two years done and who were working full time. This was in the mid-80s and about half the students were Vietnamese immigrants. The Vietnamese would hang by themselves during the breaks and speak Vietnamese, plus they all had accents, and they looked "funny".

That's when I realized that humans seem to be hardwired with an us-versus-them mentality. The only question is, who is "us" and who are "them"? Now I am a pasty-skinned fellow from the Midwest, but I found that the folk in class who didn't speak with a funny accent or in a foreign language were part of "us". That included a black guy, a Chinese girl, etc. It didn't matter than his skin color was radically different than mine, or the shape of her eyes and face where different from either of us--we were a part of "us".

The point is that I believe that if we get real morphs here on Earth it will unite humanity.


Oh, another story!

When I was attending a Pentecostal church in San Jose California there was this white woman (super pale, more so than me) married to a guy who was about as black as they come, and they had a passel of caramel-colored kids. Now in Pentecostal circles there are supposed to be only two kinds of people: saints and ain'ts (us verses them). Turns out she grew up in this little Southern town and started going to the only "holy roller" church in the town, which also happened to be black. (I assume it was sort of like that scene in _Forest Gump_ where Forest goes to Bubba's old church once he returns from the war.) Anyway, she grew up and wanted a husband. Of course to a saint another saint is the best marriage material, but all the saints she knew were inky-black.

I thought it was sorta cool. They'd been married about 15 years at that point, but can you imagine what it'd be like to start married life in an interracial union in the South during the 70s? :shock:

Unfortunately even Pentecostals can be racist. I know of another couple (white/Polynesian) that let themselves be pushed out because a few people were asses. These same asses would try to get guys to cut their hair or gals to not wear makeup and put on a dress. :roll:

Went to a nondenominational evangelical church after that. One day I saw this 50-something goth gal in service. The white pancake makeup, black lipstick, nail polish, and eyeliner where a shock--but then I realized it was my problem. I'm pretty sure God doesn't care about makeup.


Anyway, us versus them.

Scotty

PS: Digitalpotato, I just noticed your data block (below your avatar). What is a "draggy"? A dog in a dress?


----------



## M. LeRenard (Dec 17, 2008)

> The point is that I believe that if we get real morphs here on Earth it will unite humanity.


Ha... I've always thought this about aliens.  That one of the main reasons we need to discover intelligent extraterrestrial life is because then we'd finally realize that despite our differences, we're all pretty much the same creature compared to THEM.


----------



## Attaman (Jan 1, 2009)

Things I've noticed in the few Furry stories I've come across:

1)  As said, Human = Evil.  Humans always start it, Humans always are the horrible ones, Furries "Respect the Land" (Provided it's medieval) and overall Humans are utter dicks.  The reason for this tends to be little more than "VIVA LA FURRY!" where the creator can _make_ their persecution 'real'.  I would weep tears of joy until the day I die if I found a story where Furries were the ones going on genocidal purges, destroying the world at least near the same amount as humans, and they started the war for a shitty reason for a change.

2)  Fur appliances = Human appliances.  Something that can be used by a human will be made the exact same for a Furry.  Same goes for tools, equipment, or anything really.  This doesn't matter whether the Furry is basically a hairy human or their limbs are more animal-like than human-like (Ex. More paw-like than hand-like).

3)  Sex works, no injuries are suffered, both orgasm at the same time.  A woman will usually orgasm only once (unless it's a Yuri / Lesbian story, in which case it is "Orgasm after wonderful Orgasm") and as said it will be at the same time as the male.  A twenty-two inch lion dick will not cause any internal injury to another (Which, for now let's be generous and say the female's only 5'8") when inserted up to the shaft.  The Cervix, if reached, will not be damaged in the slightest.  

Better yet, whatever the couple pregnancy is a possibility.  A mammal can and will mate with a bird or reptile.  Saying "they can screw for the heck of it, but not have children," is too much for most.  Of course, considering the fetish people have for hybrids (specifically those with _four or more species_) who will bear _all the advantages and none of the disadvantages_ of each race this is somewhat understandable.

4)  Furry > Human when it comes to physical capabilities.  When it comes to anything physical, a Furry will be superior to a human (except maybe lifespan).  Their bones are somehow stronger, their limbs can dish and receive much more damage, all their senses either match or surpass human (yet colour-blindness doesn't exist), and are immune to sensory overload.  Put a human bare-handed against a furry bare-handed / -pawed, the Furry will almost always come out on top.  Or would if the human wasn't a cheating, foul playing bitch (see #1).

5)  Human > Furry when it comes to industrialization.  Yes, it would greatly clash with #1 if the Furries also had factories that produced smoke clouds.  But does it need to always be such a huge gap?  You can almost always expect the humans to be one step ahead of the Furries in the tech tree.  Furries have Fortifications!  But humans just got cannons!  Furries have muskets!  But humans have multi-shot weapons!

6)  Furry equipment is heavily detailed, often Asian - Japanese specifically.  Human weapons are bland and common, often European.  Furry with Katana v Human with Longsword.  We've all seen it at least once.  Though to be fair, I guess this could be applied to most fandoms as many people who write have a "Asian > Other" mindset.

7)  (In Medieval Stories)  Furries have no noticeable infrastructure, but when story demands it a whole army can be equipped overnight with steel weapons.  I like to call this the "Overworked and Under-Appreciated Blacksmith" syndrome, as the stories suggest that a very small group of people is worked very hard to make the plethora of extremely detailed tools, weapons, and armour yet are not mentioned a single time unless they are one of the main character's parents.


----------



## ScottyDM (Jan 7, 2009)

Attaman said:


> Things I've noticed in the few Furry stories I've come across:


Some of these issues have to do with the fact that the vast majority of Internet published writers are newbies at writing fiction and they are still learning the craft. This is exacerbated in some instances because the writer has no intent of learning anything or wanting to improve.

Newbies typically borrow heavily from the sorts of stories they enjoy. This often manifests as outright fan-fics, but not always. So it's common to see manga fans put their "cool" characters into a manga world and the characters they don't particularly like into a western world--then mix the two in a single story. Or worse yet, mix every sort of storyworld they like into a single story. Thus you get things like a "Star Trek"/"Lord of the Rings"/"Buffy the Vampire Slayer"/"Hello Kitty" crossover, but done with furries. An experienced writer will know this has Epic Fail written all over it, but newbies blindly surge ahead with the project and then get upset when no one wants to read it.

The intended audience should have a great deal to do with how a writer approaches a project. For example a fantasy story could heavily use "furry" characters, even exclusively, but reaching the general fantasy audience will need a different approach than what it takes to please the furry fandom. Simply coping characters from Furry MUCK will fail within the larger fantasy crowd. Unfortunately, many newbie writers don't understand they should even consider who might be reading their story.

Newbie writers don't understand that perfect characters or perfect species are boring. Some of them seem to approach character generation as if they are creating characters for an AD&D game and shoot for the best, highest-level characters possible. Stories and role-playing games are very different things and trying to translate one into the other is a tremendous amount of work. If you've ever tried to translate a fantasy book into an AD&D campaign you'd know this, but it's just as difficult do go in the opposite direction. BTW nonhumans kicking human butt isn't exclusive to the fandom. Consider the original "Star Trek" were just about every alien species can kick human butt.

Most of the other issues cited are simply a lack of imagination.



Attaman said:


> 1)  As said, Human = Evil.  Humans always start it, Humans always are the horrible ones, Furries "Respect the Land" (Provided it's medieval) and overall Humans are utter dicks.  The reason for this tends to be little more than "VIVA LA FURRY!" where the creator can _make_ their persecution 'real'.  I would weep tears of joy until the day I die if I found a story where Furries were the ones going on genocidal purges, destroying the world at least near the same amount as humans, and they started the war for a shitty reason for a change.



You may be pleased to note that in a current project the history of my storyworld goes back 15,000 years (seemed like a nice round number) when many different groups of humans, and for many different reasons, genetically uplifted over a hundred species. All was somewhat peaceful and stable because humans outnumbered the morphs and humans kept the peace. Then A Really Bad Thing happened (I favor an asteroid strike) that plunged the world into chaos. Most uplifted species went extinct in the first few centuries following The Event--including humans. Many of the rest went extinct in the millennia that followed, leaving only a handful by the time my story begins.

I asked myself who would survive and why. Well, only the most physically and socially adaptable. Or a species that could live in the shadow of more successful species. Some came in direct conflict with certain other species (the major reason for extinction once the ecology stabilized after The Event). With the rise of technology the balance of power shifted.

I imagine that African lions rule the equatorial zones around the world and that red foxes rule the temperate zones, but only because the foxes were able to get ahead in the technology race. Foxes and African lions don't often come into direct conflict and the "shallow" seasonal cycles near the equator render red foxes infertile if they attempt to live much closer than the 30th parallel to the equator. Corvids (the crow/raven family) have a world-wide distribution. There are other species, but they've managed to survive because they've allied themselves with a more dominant species, or they've managed to stay under the radar. E.g. gray foxes which live in a band overlapping fox and lion territory.

For many millennia coyotes have been in a bitter war with red foxes, but that war was finally resolved when the foxes were able to get ahead in the arms race and completely kill every last coyote morph about a century before my story opens. This bloody genocide is something that not many talk about and is a great shame on fox-kind.

My story's genre is cyber/sci-fi + anthro. That is it's the cyber sub-genre of sci-fi mixed with anthrofiction. The story is in thirds and the first third takes place entirely within cyberspace. Most characters are red foxes, but I also have a grey fox and two characters are Eurasian badgers. One of the badger characters has created several AIs (artificial intelligences) who he has made "furry". The main AI is a skunk morph, although two-legged skunks went extinct long ago, and most of the rest are ferret morphs, also extinct in reality.

So, my red foxes have created a technology advanced enough to support cyberspace, and they're bloodthirsty enough to completely wipe out another species.

Almost none of this backstory appears in my story, but then I'm a bit of a nut for detail, logic, and realism.

Scotty


----------



## Attaman (Jan 7, 2009)

ScottyDM said:


> Consider the original "Star Trek" were just about every alien species can kick human butt.


  To be fair, ST humans were horrible at making war.  Kinda deserved it.  



ScottyDM said:


> *Snip awesome*


My eyes!  They won't stop leaking!  It's... beautiful!


----------



## Giorgio Gabriel (Jan 11, 2009)

Attaman said:


> 1)  As said, Human = Evil.  Humans always start it, Humans always are the horrible ones, Furries "Respect the Land" (Provided it's medieval) and overall Humans are utter dicks.  The reason for this tends to be little more than "VIVA LA FURRY!" where the creator can _make_ their persecution 'real'.  I would weep tears of joy until the day I die if I found a story where Furries were the ones going on genocidal purges, destroying the world at least near the same amount as humans, and they started the war for a shitty reason for a change.
> 
> 2)  Fur appliances = Human appliances.  Something that can be used by a human will be made the exact same for a Furry.  Same goes for tools, equipment, or anything really.  This doesn't matter whether the Furry is basically a hairy human or their limbs are more animal-like than human-like (Ex. More paw-like than hand-like).
> 
> ...




This could very well be a primer to making your own Horrible Fur Fanfiction.

Conflict is an important part of writing.  Without conflict there is no reason to read the story, and when there's no reason to read the story, no one will bother looking through your work.  It will stay there, ignored and unread, and you will hate yourself for having poured out all that work into it.

I wanted to paint a more realistic view of how furries and humans would interact.  I haven't yet sat down and seriously thought about writing fiction regarding my character's story universe, but I can outline a few things if asked to.

I chose an alternative version of our own Earth's history, centering mostly on the European continent as the backdrop of the story.  

The idea of furs being harmless do-gooders persecuted by humans stops right at the execution of a Hebrew human, Yeshua Bin-Yosef, by Roman troops.  The spear that pierced his side was guided by the paw of an anthromorph, and it was before a court of anthromorphs that the supposed Messiah of the Hebrews was condemned to his wrongful execution.

The Roman empire itself, in our sordid little tale, was fraught with corruption, excesses, tyrannical emperors who believed themselves to be gods amongst men, and a complete lack of morality whatsoever.  Slavery is extremely common, with a booming market for humans and the occasional anthro.   More often than not, the rulers were Anthromorphs - the few humans who ever ascended to the throne were often killed by Anthro conspirators.  One example is Gaius Julius Caesar, who was cornered and stabbed half a hundred times by the very anthros who had helped put him in power.

All things must come to an end, and their empire crumbled just as the one in our world did.  Human barbarians would lead campaign after campaign, covering the Empire in red war, looting, pillaging, and raping.  For the common folk, they have fallen from one evil to a next - from despotic, greedy ruling to being terrorized by the Norsemen and the German barbarians.  
Unable to support itself, fraught with political infighting and warring between anthro noblepeople who can barely see past their own greed and bestial desires, plunging into a huge deficit from constant war and needless spending on luxury, the Roman Empire tears itself apart as the common folk finally take up arms to defend themselves.  

All the infrastructure and economy that the Empire had built up, all of its knowledge is suddenly lost to the ages.  The finishing blow, the coup de grace for the Empire is the burning and sacking of Rome by a human barbarian leader's armada.

Humans slowly win back a little control over Europe, with barbarian kingdoms sprouting from the corpse of the Empire.  Multiple Gods are worshipped - the mysterious One God of the Jews, Allah of the Muslims, the Roman Pantheon, Odin and the Aesir.  Still some others worship demons and even older gods that time has long since forgot.  In this world, magic and alchemy are very much real, and these are often put to use as much as any other technology.  Steam power is also far more important in this world than it had been in real life.  The Empire's demise means a huge loss of knowledge for most of the civilized world, however...plunging humanity and anthro-kind into a feudalistic Dark Age.

Here is where our story begins, in the 11th Century.  King Duncan of Scotland has been slain by his wolfish lieutenant Macbeth.  The Normans have brutally conquered England, bringing about an end to the constant fighting between factions, starting an era of political organization.  Likewise, Scotland, Wales and Ireland have also fallen under Norman reign.  There is a re-emergence of science and industry, as well as considerable work put into art of all sorts.  Trade and commerce is at an all-time high, as the war economy popularized by the Carolingians in France is fully accepted.



I am fully aware of the highly sexual nature of furries, but my story can stand alone without sex to support it, so audiences of all ages can enjoy it without being excluded.  It's a gritty, sometimes dark universe.  People die easily - humans and furries alike.  If it weren't for the fantasy/gonzo style elements, it would be a depressingly realistic view of Medieval life back then.  

Since I'm not going for the GRIMDARK, super srs sort of writing that most authors of this sort will go for, my tales are not all gloom and doom and furry persecution/human persecution or what have you.  Sometimes I even play off the interactions between furs and humans for subtle humor.

Political struggles and diplomacy also play a large part in all this.  Most of the wars are fought with words and ink and parchment, than with sword and shield.


----------



## M. LeRenard (Jan 11, 2009)

You know, honestly, I'm starting to see a trend simply in this thread of people trying to reverse the 'humans bad furries good' concept by making furries the bad guys or eliminating humans altogether.  What I haven't seen yet is something akin to the Legend of Mana world, where you run into bunny people and cat people and the like, but no one even comments on it because a)it's completely normal to them, and b)any other races (i.e. fairies, dragons) consider said kinds of people as simply a different race of human.  In other words, you have your black people, your Asian people, your white people, and your animal people.
This is an idea I like, and that's essentially what I implemented in my own work.  But it seems a rare idea in the fandom, for some reason.


----------



## Giorgio Gabriel (Jan 11, 2009)

M. Le Renard said:


> You know, honestly, I'm starting to see a trend simply in this thread of people trying to reverse the 'humans bad furries good' concept by making furries the bad guys or eliminating humans altogether.  What I haven't seen yet is something akin to the Legend of Mana world, where you run into bunny people and cat people and the like, but no one even comments on it because a)it's completely normal to them, and b)any other races (i.e. fairies, dragons) consider said kinds of people as simply a different race of human.  In other words, you have your black people, your Asian people, your white people, and your animal people.
> This is an idea I like, and that's essentially what I implemented in my own work.  But it seems a rare idea in the fandom, for some reason.



I subvert this entirely by making everyone bad.  Humans?  Bad.  Furries?  Bad.  Either way, if the person you're dealing with is a dick, you're going to get the ass end of the deal in my world.  The main theme is judging people on a case-by-case basis rather than making hugely sweeping generalizations about species or race....which would of course be lost on most furries.


----------



## M. LeRenard (Jan 11, 2009)

> The main theme is judging people on a case-by-case basis rather than making hugely sweeping generalizations about species or race....which would of course be lost on most furries.


That's it!  The generalization thing is what was annoying me about all this.  Thanks for laying it out like that.


----------



## Whitenoise (Jan 11, 2009)

I've had fairly limited contact with furry stories, the only unifying trait I've  noticed is that the one's I've read have all been complete shit.


----------



## foozzzball (Jan 11, 2009)

That's the problem with limited contact. There's a huge, huge pile of... 'mud'. And somewhere, invisible to the FA gallery system because you can thumbnail a picture but not a story, are the really good ones. 

I'm not sure if that's a 'trend' or not.


----------



## Giorgio Gabriel (Jan 11, 2009)

foozzzball said:


> That's the problem with limited contact. There's a huge, huge pile of... 'mud'. And somewhere, invisible to the FA gallery system because you can thumbnail a picture but not a story, are the really good ones.
> 
> I'm not sure if that's a 'trend' or not.



This is the Saddest Thing.

And searching through all that mud(LOL THAT'S NOT MUD)is way worse than digging through the most horrendous of slushpiles.


----------



## GraemeLion (Jan 11, 2009)

foozzzball said:


> That's the problem with limited contact. There's a huge, huge pile of... 'mud'. And somewhere, invisible to the FA gallery system because you can thumbnail a picture but not a story, are the really good ones.
> 
> I'm not sure if that's a 'trend' or not.



Well, I can take one look at a thumbnail and know "Mrr, that's nice" or eh.. no thanks.

Writing doesn't have that "luxury."


----------



## Poetigress (Jan 12, 2009)

That's why people should post as text whenever possible.  Though you can't look at a thumbnail like you can with art, that way you can at least skim the first few paragraphs, to see if the writer knows what she's doing and if the story's interesting enough to go on with.  I rarely download any files from writers I'm not familiar with -- I just don't have time to bother if it isn't already onscreen.

As far as the slush pile goes, it's tough, but the gems are worth it.  (Hint: Find a writer you like and look to see which writers they're watching.)  All in all, though, that's why the fandom can always use more edited markets -- the editors sort through the slush to find what's worth reading, rather than leaving the readers to do all the work.


----------



## Vore Writer (Jan 12, 2009)

M. Le Renard said:


> You know, honestly, I'm starting to see a trend simply in this thread of people trying to reverse the 'humans bad furries good' concept by making furries the bad guys or eliminating humans altogether.  What I haven't seen yet is something akin to the Legend of Mana world, where you run into bunny people and cat people and the like, but no one even comments on it because a)it's completely normal to them, and b)any other races (i.e. fairies, dragons) consider said kinds of people as simply a different race of human.  In other words, you have your black people, your Asian people, your white people, and your animal people.
> This is an idea I like, and that's essentially what I implemented in my own work.  But it seems a rare idea in the fandom, for some reason.



There's no way for me to be able to back it up, but I'm glad I've never done that whole "human bad furry good" bull. Majority of my stories, both vorish and non-vorish, anthros and humans pretty much live in harmony. Reason I say I won't be able back it up is I don't really plan on posting anything.

I'm really late answering this, but somebody asked me what's wrong with writing gay human/anthro characters? There's nothing wrong with it, but it's something that can get old fast. Plus it's something the majority of the readers might not want to read, and I'm not talking about those on FA.


----------



## Attaman (Jan 12, 2009)

The problem I see with writing homosexual human / anthro chars:  They're often portrayed stereotypically or as horny buggers.  If not a horny bugger (usually done with female homosexuals), they are blatantly sexist.


----------



## Frasque (Jan 13, 2009)

Attaman said:


> The problem I see with writing homosexual human / anthro chars: They're often portrayed stereotypically or as horny buggers. If not a horny bugger (usually done with female homosexuals), they are blatantly sexist.


 
That's a crappy attitude to have. Bad writers will write bad characters no matter what their orientation.


----------



## ScottyDM (Jan 13, 2009)

Giorgio Gabriel said:


> I am fully aware of the highly sexual nature of furries...


Why should this be so? To use only a single example, European wolves have only one mating season per year. So if you have anthro wolves (you mentioned it) then they should be _less_ sexed than humans, not more. Of course how they act during that week.... :shock:

That itself may be a trend in furry stories: All anthros are oversexed compared to humans.



Whitenoise said:


> I've had fairly limited contact with furry stories, the only unifying trait I've  noticed is that the one's I've read have all been complete shit.


I LOLed!

This isn't limited to furry stories. If you want to peruse the worlds largest collection of mostly worthless slush, check out FictionPress or their companion website Fanfiction.Net. In some cases flying monkeys text messaging a story could do better.

Scotty


----------



## psion (Feb 10, 2009)

M. Le Renard said:


> You know, honestly, I'm starting to see a trend simply in this thread of people trying to reverse the 'humans bad furries good' concept by making furries the bad guys or eliminating humans altogether.  What I haven't seen yet is something akin to the Legend of Mana world, where you run into bunny people and cat people and the like, but no one even comments on it because a)it's completely normal to them, and b)any other races (i.e. fairies, dragons) consider said kinds of people as simply a different race of human.  In other words, you have your black people, your Asian people, your white people, and your animal people.
> This is an idea I like, and that's essentially what I implemented in my own work.  But it seems a rare idea in the fandom, for some reason.


You have a valid point and one I will work on implementing in greater detail <self-promotion> in the universe I just started putting together (see my latest submission "The Hunt") </self-promotion>
In all seriousness though, you do have a good point and one I will work on when I'm not feeling as pissed off with the "anti-humans" as I am right now.  But the reason why, in my opinion, is that a story without conflict is pretty much worthless.  No one wants to hear about the good little boy who absolutely nothing happened to; they want struggle, heroes, villians.  And Furries vs. The Big Bad Humans provides an easy conflict to write about...  It's as cheap as bringing a gun to a knife fight but still... it's easy.



Attaman said:


> Things I've noticed in the few Furry stories I've come across:
> 
> 1)  As said, Human = Evil.  Humans always start it, Humans always are the horrible ones, Furries "Respect the Land" (Provided it's medieval) and overall Humans are utter dicks.  The reason for this tends to be little more than "VIVA LA FURRY!" where the creator can _make_ their persecution 'real'.  I would weep tears of joy until the day I die if I found a story where Furries were the ones going on genocidal purges, destroying the world at least near the same amount as humans, and they started the war for a shitty reason for a change.
> 
> ...



Dude, I love you...  In a completely non-homosexual way but you have hit on almost every complaint that has stoked my ire lately.
1.  Get the tissues ready because I'm contemplating an idea for "Dog Catcher" human freedom fighters battling it out with Canine space vikings.  We'll see if anything comes of that but at least you'll have the tissues ready.
2.  Oh gawd I am so guilty of that one.  Most of the time I try to get the reader to assume that the device works reasonably and produces the same result even though it's being used by a being with three or four fingers.
3.  I generally don't describe the sex scenes but when I do, it does show that I have no idea what I'm talking about.  Hence why I don't go into that much detail.  Sex is also far from the main focus of my texts.  Then again, I also don't do any of that fucking hyper bullshit either.  Just how the hell is a horse anthro's penis supposed to fit into... no, no I better not finish that statement.
4.  I tend to treat humans more as the standard upon which other beings are judged.  They're faster but not as strong as (or vice-verse) the average human.  That being said, training also comes into play from time to time (a master in hand to hand/paw has no equal, regardless of his species.)  I cannot understand how people think that way when cats generally do not have the mass to be stronger then humans or beings like bears are too big to particularly agile.  Granted, some levels of exceptions exist but they are exceptions, not the rule.
5.  That has made no sense to me and generally suggests that people who do it have not read what happens when two mismatched armies met.  Either the inferior gets crushed or immediately switches to guerrila warfare tactics (as has been the case in later wars such as Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan.)  So either the furries make a regular habit of stealing or trading for said technology or they know a few other things the humans do not.
6.  Yeah, we do seem to have a lot of Asianphiles (myself included) in here.  I mean, Japan does have some cool shit and China's coming up with some inventive solutions to some of their resource problems but it irks me that people automatically think Asian = Better.  The flood of crappy free to play MMOs from that side of the Pacific Rim begs to differ and people over there have almost as many problems as we do in the West.
7.  Working with sci-fi settings, I don't really run into this problem.  In most cases it's either assumed the characters already have this equipment already (they just have to unpack and assemble it) or are somewhere with a high enough level of industrialization that getting said gear is a simple matter of getting to the nearest dealer's room.

Now, my turn:
-Anthros are perfect-  I hate to call out anyone in particular on this (because someone is invariably going to whine like a little bitch about it) but the webcomic Las Lindas has been a good example of this fallacy.  While humans have made a small but balanced showing in the comic it's implied that when we got drug into their war with an extremely vague "Empire," we got uncermoniously eradicated and had to be saved by the wise and heroic Primes who suddenly had the power to defeat the Empire, a power they didn't have before they met us (convenient.)
This has always pissed me off, largely because unlike most kids I didn't have the sense to sleep through history class in high school.  Humans have a prouder history then that, we have fought wars with honor and virtue yet we also have no problems changing the rules of engagement when brought to the brink of extinction.  Believing we wouldn't fight tooth and nail in the face of a invading alien army and just wait to be saved leads back to the "Furries are just F-ing SUPER!" belief, an epitone of stupidity.
-Not writing important shit down-  This is more a problem with writers then the writing, but if you have something every reader should know before hand, don't make them sift through pages of forum posts or search for defunct websites, put in a FAQ or wiki if you have the programming mojo.  Doing anything else is bullshit


----------



## Poetigress (Feb 10, 2009)

psion said:


> but if you have something every reader should know before hand, don't make them sift through pages of forum posts or search for defunct websites, put in a FAQ or wiki if you have the programming mojo.



Better yet, weave the necessary information into the story itself.


----------



## ScottyDM (Feb 10, 2009)

One way around the "furry good, hooman bad" syndrome is to not have humans. End of temptation.

There's a terminology problem in the whole the fiction authors' world, not just the furry fandom. Whenever you have different sorts of people, they are called races. It's sort of become a literary term. But biologically speaking you only have races within a given species, not across species boundaries. Normally this doesn't cause a problem. For example you've got your dwarvish race and your elvish race and everyone knows the two don't interbreed, and if by some weird twist of the author's mind there is some intimacy--the union would not prove fertile. Dwarves and elves are different species.

The problem comes in the furry fandom when an author thinks "races" and treats his characters as if they were races, forgetting the whole species thing. Cats and dogs are different species. Which makes "cogs" and "dats" a biological impossibility--unless of course you engineer a storyworld where such is possible. But don't assume it is just because you're too lazy to think beyond what every other hack writer in the fandom has done.

I'm a huge advocate of research, or at least close observation. Stories are so much stronger, and so much more unique, and so capable of smashing clichÃ©s when you embrace the differences between your characters' species.

Can a gentleman fox truly find happiness with a lady skunk when their courtship and mating techniques are so very different. She's not going to ovulate unless he bites her, and even drags her around a bit, roughs her up. But will he be able to treat his lady love in such an ill manner?

And some female mammals may be able to safely skip a heat cycle, but if a lady ferret doesn't find a lover, she will stay in heat and after a few weeks go into something very much like toxic shock and die.

But you can't embrace the differences if you don't know what they are. So research!

Plus knowing this stuff gives you tons of cool ideas. And not wimpy American tons, but metric tons, tonnes!

Scotty


----------



## psion (Feb 10, 2009)

Poetigress said:


> Better yet, weave the necessary information into the story itself.


Well, the problem there with Las Lindas in particular is that they generate so much, so many hooks, and then proceed to do nothing with them; settling for T&A instead.  I mean, I like T&A as much as the next man but sex a good story does not make (in most cases.)



ScottyDM said:


> One way around the "furry good, hooman bad" syndrome is to not have humans. End of temptation.
> ....
> But you can't embrace the differences if you don't know what they are. So research!
> 
> ...



Well the problem there is that "no humans allowed" worlds are almost as clichÃ© as stories where furries defeat the ugly, mean, and nasty humans.  I guess it's just a matter of skill and imagination at that point.
While my knowledge on the ins and outs of animal biology is lacking, I do agree that research can provide valuable ideas.  Where else would I have gotten the idea for a stone age tribe of foxes if I hadn't known bits and pieces of Native American shamanism, Sumerian culture, and typical Stone Age mythology?


----------



## M. LeRenard (Feb 10, 2009)

> But the reason why, in my opinion, is that a story without conflict is pretty much worthless.


But there's no reason it always has to be racial or ethnic conflict.  Using race (or species, or whatever) to signify bad and good is old hat.  The oldest of old hat; like, it's a hat that your great-grandfather's great-grandfather wore when he was emigrating from Poland at age 6.  It's not a bad hat, and you can still wear it and be fashionable, but unless you take really good care of it it'll fall apart.  And a lot of 'furry' authors throw it on the ground and stomp on it before putting it on their heads.
Sorry for the extended metaphor, but you get my drift.  I just think there are more interesting forms of conflict than those based on physical appearance, I guess.  But you agreed with me, so I don't know why I'm arguing the point.


----------



## Chanticleer (Feb 10, 2009)

You know, the tools thing is a pretty good point, especially for more "extreme" furs. Recently I had quite a bit of fun having one of my flying characters describe why an enormous, hulking, World War 1 era machine gun was a really terrible weapon for her because it weighed her down so much and she couldn't really shoot it straight while in flight.

However, it should be noted that something like that is merely a tappable resource, and not a required consideration in writing a furry story. I never had such a major problem with furries using things that weren't quite right for their anatomy simply because humans do that all the time. Take, for instance, the qwerty keyboard on which I typed this post. The key layout was designed to slow down typing so early typewriters would not be overstressed by constant ramming on their keys. Yet most people actively use this layout simply because so much has been invested into it.


----------



## psion (Feb 10, 2009)

M. Le Renard said:


> But there's no reason it always has to be racial or ethnic conflict.  Using race (or species, or whatever) to signify bad and good is old hat.  The oldest of old hat; like, it's a hat that your great-grandfather's great-grandfather wore when he was emigrating from Poland at age 6.  It's not a bad hat, and you can still wear it and be fashionable, but unless you take really good care of it it'll fall apart.  And a lot of 'furry' authors throw it on the ground and stomp on it before putting it on their heads.
> Sorry for the extended metaphor, but you get my drift.  I just think there are more interesting forms of conflict than those based on physical appearance, I guess.  But you agreed with me, so I don't know why I'm arguing the point.


Trying to make conversation?
But yes, I don't see why we're arguing this when even in my last submission, vent art brought about by finding a picture of a well-drawn but poorly thought-out British "furry-killer," had hopeful elements.  The human heroine started out chasing after a fox anthro that kidnapped her son but ends up recieving an assist from the fox's former tribe because she wasn't the only one he was a utter monster to...  My skills and exacting demands of quality upon myself have grown stronger then that.



Chanticleer said:


> You know, the tools thing is a pretty good point, especially for more "extreme" furs. Recently I had quite a bit of fun having one of my flying characters describe why an enormous, hulking, World War 1 era machine gun was a really terrible weapon for her because it weighed her down so much and she couldn't really shoot it straight while in flight.
> 
> However, it should be noted that something like that is merely a tappable resource, and not a required consideration in writing a furry story. I never had such a major problem with furries using things that weren't quite right for their anatomy simply because humans do that all the time. Take, for instance, the qwerty keyboard on which I typed this post. The key layout was designed to slow down typing so early typewriters would not be overstressed by constant ramming on their keys. Yet most people actively use this layout simply because so much has been invested into it.



The more you know.... =P


----------



## ScottyDM (Feb 10, 2009)

The problem is not limited to this fandom either.

In the Star Trek storyworld all ferengi are greedy, all klingons are chaotic, all romulans are totalitarian, etc. Take one trait, personify it, and there you have your new "race" of aliens. Piece of cake!

So yea, all furries are noble and all humans are self-centered--or flip that around. It's still simplistic and it makes for the clichÃ©s common in this fandom.

There are two ways around this particular clichÃ©. I've mentioned the first, eliminate humans. Or more accurately, use only a single species. The other way is to make your characters individuals. Heck, if Jewish and Palestinian criminals can work together to run a successful smuggling ring, why can't humans and anthro-numbats work together to bring smugglers to justice? Some humans are evil, some good. Some anthro-numbats are evil, some good.

You still have your species traits, but those traits don't necessarily make for good or evil. For example after studying the red fox _Vulpes vulpes_, I decided that they probably have a matrilineal society and that males and females would handle money a bit differently. If a dog fox came into a bunch of money he'd stick it in a savings account--or more accurately about 20 separate savings accounts. If a vixen came into a bunch of money she'd probably buy a piece of real estate.

I would suspect that in general, an anthro-fox would be alert, skittish, quick, graceful, clever, actively thinking, and athletic. An anthro-skunk would be self-absorbed, calm, thoughtful, easy going, and sedate. An anthro-bear would be centered, powerful, self-assured, slow to anger, and sometimes philosophical. But those are general traits and there's room for individualism.

For example, if you want to see some graceful and athletic modern dance, seek out a performance put on by a troupe of foxes. That doesn't mean that skunks can't be in professional dance, but that they won't do the lifts and leaps that foxes find second nature.

Scotty


----------



## VÃ¶lf (Feb 22, 2009)

cliches are BAD in writing. But what if someone started out that way and then flipped the whole thing upside down later? Try a war between animals and humans; another old idea. But say they finally decide, "Oh hey, we kinda like each other?" And suddenly it becomes the new wave vs. old fashioned? And what about animals that don't live up to their expectations? A couch potato fox? A sly, stealthy, hippo assassin? Consider all possibilities.

Lastly,anybody played a game in the Bloody Roar series? It's video game featuring people who can change back and fourth between humans and anthro-beasts, ranging from tigers and wolves to rabbits and penguins (lol cronos) anyway, it's where I took my greatest and original inspiration for the fandom. What about a story about people like that? I'm actually working on a novel with that sort of thing, come to think of it  I haven't looked at it in a while tho.


----------



## kitreshawn (Feb 22, 2009)

The whole species being reduced to one trait is actually one of the more common things that happen in fiction and even the good writers do it.  David Brin does it in his Uplift Saga's with some races that are the personification of the trickster or administrator or trader.  Main reason I think it happens so often is because it creates a decidedly non-human being that the reader can still understand.

The flip side of this is that if you just make them like humans then you quickly find you fall into another cliche which is the 'everything is a human just wearing a costume.'  This of course has its own drawbacks.


----------



## hara-surya (Feb 22, 2009)

The way I write them they ARE humans with a costume.  My Furries are genetically engineered humans that are mainly cosmetically modified and any racial behaviors are learned, not ingrained.


----------



## ScottyDM (Feb 23, 2009)

Volf said:


> And what about animals that don't live up to their expectations? A couch potato fox? A sly, stealthy, hippo assassin? Consider all possibilities.


In a *serious* story a couch potato fox is a possibility, but it would the the laziness of the individual, not the species. And I would expect that other characters may comment on their friend's lazy ways. However a stealthy hippo assassin would throw me out of the story unless you redefined hippo. And I'd hope to understand your redefined species before I ran into your stealthy assassin. It'd be a matter of thinking about the essence of hipponess outside of the obvious bulk.

Now for *comedy*, specifically busting species traits for the absurdity of it all can be a delight. Have you seen Disney's full-length animated "music video" _Fantasia_ (1940)? I found the "Dance of the Hours" scene (11:50) on YouTube: part 1 and part 2. At 0:21 (p1) start with dancing ostriches, then at 3:21 (p1) bring in the hippos in tutus and ballet slippers, at 5:16 (p1) the dancing elephants appear, and at 1:45 (p2) villainous crocodiles enter, there's a dramatic leap and lift at 3:17 (p2), and finally at 3:48 (p2) the whole troop returns for the finale where they smash the set.




ciaranskye said:


> The way I write them they ARE humans with a costume.  My Furries are genetically engineered humans that are mainly cosmetically modified and any racial behaviors are learned, not ingrained.


While I prefer the animalness of the characters I read to be more than skin deep, if while reading I learned that your characters were genetically modified humans, then I'd accept that premise and run with it. What I don't care for is when the author appears to have done zero thinking about how to create his characters.

So can your characters use their nonhuman body parts to show emotion? As gen-eng humans I assume their senses are just like human senses.


I distinctly remember two short stories over at Anthrofiction.com. One was a day of turmoil at a high school and the story was filled with teen "humanimals" (my term). The story wasn't too bad, a bit angsty tho. The writing wasn't too bad either. However the sum total of species characterization was for the author to describe his main character as "a snow leopard" and the MC's girlfriend as "a skunk" etc.

There was a second short story about a fox-girl and her human friend. The writing was quite poor as the author didn't seem to understand how paragraphs worked. However the fox had a sense of smell. In fact the plot of the story revolved around the fact that a fox has a keen sense of smell. IMO that put the story ahead of most others in the fandom.

Scotty


----------



## hara-surya (Feb 23, 2009)

ScottyDM said:


> So can your characters use their nonhuman body parts to show emotion? As gen-eng humans I assume their senses are just like human senses.
> Scotty



They typically have better than human senses, and often a musk and the ability to move their ears, tails, etc. as well as race-specific reproductive issues like a normal animal, all of which I take into account.  Hearing is simply due to having larger and more efficiently designed and mobile ears and smelling is due to having a larger area devoted to smell receptors due to an enlarged sinus cavity.  Their brains are subtly different to accept the influx of more detailed senses, but it's no different than than a human who grew up with better senses and their racial abilities are still well within the human ability, but just better than the human norm.

My fox-woman character might have her musk change when her mood changes and undergoes an estrus in February, along with a normal monthly period.  However, unlike the "canny fox" she's kind of dull, but more due to her life situation

Since I'm building a culture around such races, sexuality is considered a healthy and normal part of life due so many of them having an estrus and even their religion accepts, and even emphasizes that fact.  People in the world often have prejudices based on how the animal is perceived and races that appear like scavengers or pest creatures are discriminated against, while top predators are the upper-class.  And since the setting is being presented from the eyes of a modern human, learning body language for a species that has both the complexities of a human and an animal, it makes things very difficult for him.


----------



## AshleyAshes (May 4, 2009)

I use a more restrictive furry setting, that is, one that's less fantastical than most furries would go for.  The only 'talking' animals are the cute fuzzy ones out of personal preference, no lizards, birds, livestock, and there's no such thing as dragons.  This is mostly personal taste at this point but afterworks I try to make it more logical.

By default every trait is just like humans unless otherwise specified.

I figure that in a furry world if any anthro species could breed with any other anthro species and produce a hybrid, and this is popular in a lot of furry works, then you'd have lost any definition of species generations ago.  They'd just be fuzzy mutts.

So instead I make it so that conception is progressively more difficult the farther unrelated the two species are and intern the risk of medical complication, miscarriage and birth defects goes up.  To even conceive a 'Dog-Cat' fetus would be difficult in itself without fertility science and then you have the risk that you're kid might have flipper arms or be mentally challenged.   So inter-species breeding comes with it's concerns.  While I've never USED this fact, I decided that in the United States and other western nations in my 'furry world' that it's actually illegal to use fertility science in assisting interspeices births, this after some notable incidents of mulitiple births having severe mental and physical issues.  It's not illegal to do it the old fashioned way but it's ill advised.  So a character that would be say, a Tiger-Husky hybrid that is a fully functional member of society would be considdered fairly remarkable.

But ontop of that, I find that 'furry' is interesting since it gives you an extra 'flavor' that you wouldn't get with human characters.  It's basicly the same but not quite.  You can play with ears and tails as body language.  You can have clear visual differences in species that could point out that a step-parent of a family is obviously not biologically related to the rest of the family.  Same with adoption.  You can look and know, you don't even have to ask.

For simple medical treatment like stitches you'd likely need a blatently obvious patch of fur shaved off.  Fleas as a regular concern of spreading in schools.  Different species traits clashing, like a feline that purrs loud and ALWAYS when he's asleep, much to the irate of his canine partner who has to put up with 130lbs of purr machine muzzled into his ear every, single, damn, night.

How about using dyes to change the presentation of your fur to appear like a different species or breed?  Or teens blowing $300 to dye flames into their tail, when it will grow out and fade in 3-6 weeks, only to have their parents go 'WHAT THE HELL IS THAT?'?

I'm actually musing around the idea for a story of a snow leopard soldier who returns from Iraq with his tail blown off down tot he last 3 inches, now having to adapt to the signifigant change in counter-weight that he's taken for granted for the last 20 years.

...But, you know, most people would probably just write 'paws' instead of 'hands' and be done with it. ^^;;;


----------



## Carenath (May 4, 2009)

Chanticleer said:


> Hi,
> 
> I've noticed there are a few trends which keep on showing up in anthro stories and I was wondering if anyone else had noticed them.
> 
> ...


I've always chalked that down to the general bitterness that flows through some elements of the furry fandom.
It is a little ironic that furries can be so misanthropic yet they make their characters half-human.. I would suspect most of these bitter furs see humanity in a negative light through their own morals and experiences.

Consider this... it is safe to say that many members of the human race are particularly intolerent of anything that isnt 'normal' for their society. This closed minded, intolerent and small attitude.. the lack of tolerence for not being like them, probably shapes their views on humanity as a whole, so they choose to put humanity down in their stories as a way of venting their frustrations against a society that doesnt accept them for who they are.

This is, more or less, why I am deeply cynical and a misanthrope.. being put down for not being 'normal', should I choose to express myself fully, I fully expect to be chastised for it as if Im somehow wrong because I dont think like everyone else. I look down on these small/closed minded people and I pity them, but I dont consider myself superior to them, even if I do feel that I am a better person for not acting the way they do. Rather than confront them and create conflict and drama, I generally ignore them and dont pay them attention. Dispite all this, and my generall low view on humanity as a whole, there are numerous cases of individuals that do the human race proud, which shows me that as a whole, society is slowly improving and rising above the inhibitions of human nature. But one look at sites like 4Chan and SomethingAwful tells me... they have a long way to go yet..


----------



## Henk86 (May 4, 2009)

I have to admit, I decided to read back something I posted on my FA last night, and found it is riddled with furry cliche lol, then again I did have a few drinks whilst writing it, it seemed good at the time.


----------



## Iburnaga (May 14, 2009)

I try to aboive cliches as best i can within good reason. Sometimes Cliches can actually work well which is why they've survived to become cliche. I see a vast amount of fanfiction. And not the good kind, the creepy kind that make you stop and spray blood from your eye.
I'm working on a sci fi, and by working I mean currently tossing the whole bloody thing and bumping it up to the future of the future where things are so fudged that I have to resort to metaphysics, and the humans still exist. They're a pretty varied bunch just as they are now and the furries are there as well. Lots and lots of different groups.
That is one thing that irks the hell out of me, why is it that in any sci fi, a whole species can come together on one thought? How is it remotely possible that every species in the galaxy or even the universe can come to some sort of psychic unity? I mean really, why can a species up and decide "We hate specie X Y and Z because of X Y and Z" Or a interstellar war breaks out and there aren't 13 or 40 parties involved like a real war, just two. WTF!?!


----------



## foozzzball (May 14, 2009)

Iburnaga said:


> That is one thing that irks the hell out of me, why is it that in any sci fi, a whole species can come together on one thought? How is it remotely possible that every species in the galaxy or even the universe can come to some sort of psychic unity? I mean really, why can a species up and decide "We hate specie X Y and Z because of X Y and Z" Or a interstellar war breaks out and there aren't 13 or 40 parties involved like a real war, just two. WTF!?!



Because it's easier for people to pick a simplistic option.


----------



## Shotgunjim (Aug 9, 2009)

I've noticed this too, and even have an example of it in the third chapter of the fiction I'm writing right now. I chose to do this because it kind of makes things more interesting and I suppose also gives a clue to the reader what the reactions of anthros and humans to each other would be in the real world. Something akin to racism I guess, brought about by fear and lack of understanding. Its can also provide a means of character development and thickening the plot.


----------



## hara-surya (Aug 9, 2009)

I try to parallel the racism in my story to real, historical prejudices. A lot of the details about how the Temnere, the second-class citizens in my story, are treated comes from the treatment of Jews in Renaissance Europe. However, I try to make it unique to my story, too.

Actually, other than the caste divisions in my story, people are fairly cosmopolitan about what each other looks like and rarely, if ever, makes an assumption based on the animals someone looks like. The only case where I have that happen is that the Mephids (skunks) are the lowest-caste of all of the Furries with even other Temnere looking down on them.


----------



## Shotgunjim (Aug 9, 2009)

Interesting. In my story, _Crucible of Deliverance_, the anthros, regardless of species, are all united by a common goal and by how they came to exist. I'm still writing the story, but I've got the first three chapters uploaded. Maybe you'd like to check them out?


----------



## hara-surya (Aug 9, 2009)

Shotgunjim said:


> Interesting. In my story, _Crucible of Deliverance_, the anthros, regardless of species, are all united by a common goal and by how they came to exist. I'm still writing the story, but I've got the first three chapters uploaded. Maybe you'd like to check them out?



Well my setting, despite them having been genetically engineered, effectively has no humans. It takes place 2,000 years into the future where human genetic engineering became possible before the end of our current century, and was good enough and powerful enough by the 24th century to make a race of 48 chromosome parahumans who were inhuman enough that when a bioengineered virus killed off all humans in the mid to late 24th century that they, and a very small number of baseline humans, survived.

Those humans were such a small number (my hometown of 38,000 is bigger than the surviving population in North America) that they were sent to Central and South America and a legend was created that the Mojave is unpassable. Considering the rest of the world did the same (sending the few human survivors to South America on "Humanitarian" grounds) most all of the rest of the world is populated by Furries who have since forgotten about Humanity until they were simply a part of their religion.

I've not really gotten into the reasons why their systematic racism exists, other than some vague notions about the types of races that are in each caste. The upper-class Panterus are very specifically the Great Cats, but the rest are blurred with lots of overlap both ways.

If you're asking me if I want to check out your story I certainly can, but I can't guarantee I'll give criticism. I don't read much fiction anymore (curse of going to college and working) but I can try.


----------



## Shotgunjim (Aug 10, 2009)

Sure, criticism is welcome. It only lets me know what I did good and what I need to improve on.


----------

