# Literary Furry Fiction



## Altamont (Jan 21, 2011)

So, I'm trying to figure out a way ti phrase this without sounding like a pretentious artsy type that likes to discount so-called "light fiction", because I really love all types of quality fiction, regardless of tone or intent.

Here:

I've been reading and listening to a great deal of very good furry fiction lately, by a great many talented authors, and there is a question that I've been meaning to posit.

I was wondering: Are there any authors here, published or otherwise, that write with a literary ambition? Whose stories are not simply written for entertainment but for the purpose of communicating some kind of complex theme that can only be communicated (at least in the perspective of the author) via anthropomorphic fiction?

Keep in mind I'm not saying the fiction I've encountered doesn't do that; I would just like to know if the authors in our community who have that conscious intent of complex thematic communication as they write what they do.

*Note: I realize that I probably should define my interpretation of "complex theme", but I'll cross that bridge if/when anyonone desires clarification.


----------



## Scarborough (Jan 21, 2011)

Well, you've crossed that bridge early. I'd like clarification. 

I have had one piece published (in a non-furry or -sci-fi or -fantasy-based lit mag), and, coincidentally, the piece has one (albeit peripheral) anthropomorphic character. I don't think I consciously intend complex thematic communication when I write so much as I intend to write an interesting story.

I think I could discuss the topic better with a working definition of "complex theme," though.


----------



## M. LeRenard (Jan 21, 2011)

You know... kind of, I think.  But I could probably use clarification on your definition too.


----------



## Altamont (Jan 21, 2011)

Hm...well by complex theme, I mean a notion or idea about an issue that extends beyond a simple topic. Example of a topic: Human Nature. An interpretation of that topic into complex theme: human nature is defined not by species or culture, but by the thought and emotions illicited by a creature based on their interactions with others and the world around them. Does that make sense? 

Essentially, an idea with multiple means of interpretation that is communicated using the various facets of a story, ie syntax, diction, characterization, form etc.


----------



## Scarborough (Jan 21, 2011)

It makes sense, but I had the two ideas completely switched around.

That is, I thought of "Human Nature" as the more complex of the two ideas, with "human nature ... defined not by species or culture" etc. as the more narrow and definite and unambiguous and, therefore, less complex/thought-provoking of the two.


----------



## Altamont (Jan 21, 2011)

Well that's the thing; "Human Nature" isn't a theme, it's something to create a theme about, or to extrapolate a theme from. Human nature is too vague to be a theme; it isn't a message or an idea to be communicated. The later of the examples is, however. It's an idea that I can use the various aspects of a story, especially an anthropomorphic story, to try and express. Whether or not that's what the reader gets is an entirely different matter. It's the act of utilizing the elements of the craft in an attempt to communicate this idea that, in my opinion, makes something literary in its most basic form.

There's more to it of course, especially in regards to the quality of the craft. But what I wanted to explore for now was the literary aspects of anthropomorphic writing in our community at its essence.


----------



## Kadrian (Jan 21, 2011)

I think I know what you're looking for but it's going to be hard to find.  The purpose of literary fiction is to bring to light various aspects of reality through fictional means.  Because the focus is on reality, anthropomorphics are invariably excluded because they are fantasy creatures.

Nonetheless, there are those of us who make the attempt.  I wrote "How Cruel the Wolf" in outrage after hearing about a reprehensible decision by a California judge concerning a person's right to die.  If that's the sort of thing you're looking for you'll find it here:

http://www.furaffinity.net/view/4599323

Happy reading.


----------



## Altamont (Jan 21, 2011)

Awesome! I'll have to give that a look 

And the thing is, there are no limits to what genre can include literary aspirations, at least not to me. Kurt Vonnegut was a master of science-fiction satire that held very deep insights to the human experience, and Kafka himself used anthropomorphic animals in many famous stories, including the incredible "The Metamorphosis".


----------



## M. LeRenard (Jan 21, 2011)

The focus is on real concepts.  You can still discuss real concepts using fantasy or fictitious elements as a stand in.  Have you ever read anything by Isaac Asimov or Arthur C. Clarke?  Terry Goodkind?  Fantasy and sci-fi authors do that kind of thing all the time.  Some are clearly better at it then others, but that doesn't mean it's hard to find.
So I don't think you can pooh-pooh anthro fantasy or sci-fi just because it features fantasy creatures.  It depends on how you use them.  In my novel, for example, I try to keep the focus on the fact that the main character is mostly a lonely carnivore, so he doesn't keep friends (if he makes them at all) and he uses people to get what he wants.  But I don't portray him as evil; instead, I try to show through him that morals are relative things that depend on environment and individual ideals.
People can read it differently than that, of course (most would probably just call him an anti-hero), but you get my point.  I think anthros could be incredibly useful for stuff like that.  Apparently Aesop and Jean de la Fontaine thought so as well, although their usages of them were far more basic and one-dimensional (and hence not exactly literary).  But I don't think it's too much of a stretch to take it to the next level beyond that.


----------



## LizardKing (Jan 21, 2011)

Altamont said:


> ...I've been reading and listening to a great deal of very good furry fiction lately...



Listening? Like an audiobook or what?


----------



## Kadrian (Jan 21, 2011)

A reading list would be nice.  I'm always looking for quality stuff so I'll peruse your watch list.  Sadly, most furry fiction is just porn or idle fantasy.


----------



## Scarborough (Jan 21, 2011)

Altamont said:


> Well that's the thing; "Human Nature" isn't a theme, it's something to create a theme about, or to extrapolate a theme from. Human nature is too vague to be a theme; it isn't a message or an idea to be communicated. The later of the examples is, however. It's an idea that I can use the various aspects of a story, especially an anthropomorphic story, to try and express. Whether or not that's what the reader gets is an entirely different matter. It's the act of utilizing the elements of the craft in an attempt to communicate this idea that, in my opinion, makes something literary in its most basic form.
> 
> There's more to it of course, especially in regards to the quality of the craft. But what I wanted to explore for now was the literary aspects of anthropomorphic writing in our community at its essence.


 
You're making the assumption that "literary fiction" necessarily communicates an unambiguous idea.

In _You Shall Know Our Velocity!_, Dave Eggers discusses Friendship and Traveling. He does not tell you what to think about friendship or traveling, and he does not come to a certain conclusion about friendship or traveling. _Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close_ by Jonathan Safran Foer doesn't come to any conclusions about 9/11 or parenthood, except maybe to say that both of those change people irrevocably. _Point Omega_ by Don DeLillo explores various ways in which war affects people, but it doesn't come to a definite point about what we should do about war. _The Crying of Lot 49_ discusses conspiracies and human connections, but it does not attempt to tell you what to think about conspiracies.

Even classics like _A Tale of Two Cities_ and _Tess of the D'urbervilles_ did not have well-defined messages to be communicated. Indeed, I think if an author ever did have a well-defined message to communicate, s/he would be better off writing an essay than a book. (Only a few authors can get away with well-defined messages, like Samuel Beckett or George Orwell.)

From what I understand, most "literary fiction" don't have clear messages or ideas to be communicated.

EDIT: The Wikipedia page for "literary fiction" states that literary fiction focuses more on "style, psychological depth, and character," whereas mainstream fiction is more concerned with "narrative and plot." Which, interestingly, has nothing to do with complex ideas, except maybe in the case of "psychological depth."


----------



## M. LeRenard (Jan 21, 2011)

Kadrian said:


> Sadly, most furry fiction is just porn or idle fantasy.


Can't exactly disagree with that.


----------



## Altamont (Jan 21, 2011)

Scarborough said:


> You're making the assumption that "literary fiction" necessarily communicates an unambiguous idea.
> 
> In _You Shall Know Our Velocity!_, Dave Eggers discusses Friendship and Traveling. He does not tell you what to think about friendship or traveling, and he does not come to a certain conclusion about friendship or traveling. _Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close_ by Jonathan Safran Foer doesn't come to any conclusions about 9/11 or parenthood, except maybe to say that both of those change people irrevocably. _Point Omega_ by Don DeLillo explores various ways in which war affects people, but it doesn't come to a definite point about what we should do about war. _The Crying of Lot 49_ discusses conspiracies and human connections, but it does not attempt to tell you what to think about conspiracies.
> 
> From what I understand, most "literary fiction" don't have clear messages or ideas to be communicated



Well, the problem for me with all of the above is that all of those texts have to say _something_ about the topics above; they certainly don't just come out and explain it, but they aren't simply stories without purpose. Just because an idea is not clear to a reader does not mean it wasn't intended by the writer. The exact theme isn't something you'll usually find spelled out in the book, it's the conclusions one can draw from analyzing the text itself. For example, _Extremely Loud_ isn't just "about" 9/11 and parenthood. The book touches on how the intimacies of communication stretch beyond the mere spoken and written word, how the traumatized psyche of a gifted adolescent boy is affected not only by personal tragedy but the quest for resolution he embarks upon, only to find that perhaps resolution is an almost impossible thing to find. That book isn't "about" 9/11 at all; it uses the event as a catalyst for the plot of the book, which he uses on a whole to communicate some of the ideas I've just mentioned.

And the bits from the Wikipedia article are what I was talking about when I mentioned the quality of craft and form.

I misspoke (mistyped?); I should have noted in my definition that complex themes are made so by the multilayeredness they are given, a quality that is achieved by using whatever literary techniques you can think of that would qualify as adding to "psychological depth and character".

Edit:


Kadrian said:


> Sadly, most furry fiction is just porn or idle fantasy.



That's why I started this whole thread in the first place ;P I was wondering if someone was, like me, consciously trying to subvert that norm.


----------



## Kadrian (Jan 21, 2011)

Altamont said:


> And the bits from the Wikipedia article are what I was talking about when I mentioned the quality of craft and form.
> 
> That's why I started this whole thread in the first place ;P I was wondering if someone was, like me, consciously trying to subvert that norm.



The bits from Wikipedia are over-simplified.  "Perrine's Story and Structure" gives a better explanation along with some excellent stories to read.  Pricey, but worth it.

I wouldn't say that I'm trying to subvert the furry norm.  That would be like trying to divert Niagra Falls.  There's nothing anyone can do for RHS (Raging Hormone Syndrome) other than wait for it to pass.  I just write whatever is interesting to me at the moment.


----------



## Altamont (Jan 21, 2011)

Kadrian said:


> The bits from Wikipedia are over-simplified.  "Perrine's Story and Structure" gives a better explanation along with some excellent stories to read.  Pricey, but worth it.
> 
> I wouldn't say that I'm trying to subvert the furry norm.  That would be like trying to divert Niagra Falls.  There's nothing anyone can do for RHS (Raging Hormone Syndrome) other than wait for it to pass.  I just write whatever is interesting to me at the moment.



Oh no, not subvert as in change altogether. More like actively attempting to avoid the norm, I guess would be the best wording.


----------



## buni (Jan 21, 2011)

I'll go out on a limb and say that my novel, "Beautiful World" is literary in the sense that I deliberately wanted to tackle the question of "what is human" through the opinions of the characters and their reactions to one's decision to digitize himself to live with a digital sapience in a virtual world. That may be stretching it, though, since it's a lot of other things as well, but I do hope I give the subject fair treatment. Certainly not everybody feels the same way about it all. Of course, the story is really _about_ several things, of which that's one driver. Your mileage may vary.

I would also argue that Austen Crowder's "Bait and Switch" is really about coming to terms with the Need To Be Different, but it's not like that's subtextual at all. It's very openly and honestly an exploration of that compulsion through a specific metaphor. And the author herself will admit the story needs some work. Still, it's pretty good and a fairly quick read.


----------



## sunandshadow (Jan 21, 2011)

I consciously intend themes but my work is sff erotic romance, so people tend to interpret it as weird smut, fluffy romance, or anime-flavored 'original fanfic'; it's pretty rare that I get a comment mentioning that a reader cared about a theme.  Either way I don't have fiction available to be read.  But I'm interested in the topic of designing theme into fiction if you want to talk about that here.


----------



## -Rufus- (Jan 21, 2011)

I started writing a few years ago, but only recently started sharing my work. Literature is one of my biggest interests in life, and it seems I have dedicated my existence to the study of it. Writing is deeply personal for me, which is why I donâ€™t share very much. What I do share is usually intended to be read by others, and is usually erotic in nature. I consider erotic writing to be fun and relaxing. I also find the conditions that lead to sex and romance can lead to some of the most complicated emotions known to the human condition (which is ultimately the perspective from which we write). Ultimately that is what I am trying to explore. For me this writing stems from a desire to be creative and not merely analytical as I am so often forced to be when I write. I want what I write to be of quality, and to delve into themes that try to further our (or at least my) understanding of how we communicate. I also enjoy writing through anthropomorphic subjects. Itâ€™s interesting to delve into what is essential in anthropomorphic characters without explicitly touching upon the human condition. It really helps me think when I get into something like an emotion or a condition that I would otherwise label as â€œhumanâ€. It forces me to reinterpret that which I am trying to explore through the physicality of a something non-human.  Enough rant though. 

I can certainly recommend some work that includes anthropomorphism.  However, I really loath to label something as furry that have nothing to do with the fandom. There are some really great works of literature out there that talk about animals with human qualities, but are not furry. Tiek, E.T.A. Hoffmann, and Kafka come to mind for example. In fact the German genres of the Tale and the Kunst-Maerchen are full of anthropomorphism. Its really fascinating and I am surprised its so seldom talked about within the furry fandom.


----------



## Scarborough (Jan 22, 2011)

Altamont said:


> Well, the problem for me with all of the above is that all of those texts have to say _something_ about the topics above; they certainly don't just come out and explain it, but they aren't simply stories without purpose.


I'm not suggesting that at all. I'm suggesting that stories are _explorations_ of themes, and don't have a clear, well-defined, single "correct" message. The "multilayeredness" in stories means that any discussed/explored theme can be interpreted in multiple ways. Thus:



Altamont said:


> The exact theme isn't something you'll usually find spelled out in the book, it's the conclusions one can draw from analyzing the text itself.


I feel like we're on the "same page," except for:



Altamont said:


> Just because an idea is not clear to a reader does not mean it wasn't intended by the writer.


According to some literary schools of thought, not only can we never know the author's intent in a story, but the author's intent _is irrelevant_ in analyzing a story. The arguments as to why the author's intent is irrelevant is just as well backed-up as the idea that the author's intent is very important to interpretation of the text. i.e., not that well backed-up at all.



Altamont said:


> For example, _Extremely Loud_ isn't just "about" 9/11 and parenthood. The book touches on how the intimacies of communication stretch beyond the mere spoken and written word, how the traumatized psyche of a gifted adolescent boy is affected not only by personal tragedy but the quest for resolution he embarks upon, only to find that perhaps resolution is an almost impossible thing to find. That book isn't "about" 9/11 at all; it uses the event as a catalyst for the plot of the book, which he uses on a whole to communicate some of the ideas I've just mentioned.


Yet, I could tell you that it is, too, about 9/11, that if 9/11 never happened, the boy (whose name I forget right now) would never embark on his quest, and would never have to so desperately re-find his grandmother and make new friends. I could argue that the book is about how 9/11 forces people to come together in desperate and strong ways. I say that the book is about 9/11, and I have ample evidence to back that up. You say that you have evidence that the book is about communication, and you have ample evidence to back that up. I don't think either one of us can claim to be more right than the other. What I do think is that the text provides enough texture and character that we can interpret the text in different ways, if we so choose.

That's what I mean when I argue that literary fiction is necessarily ambiguous.


----------



## sunandshadow (Jan 22, 2011)

Scarborough said:


> I'm not suggesting that at all. I'm suggesting that stories are _explorations_ of themes, and don't have a clear, well-defined, single "correct" message.


 There are certainly some stories that have a single "correct" message, or more than one obviously intended "correct" message.  Aesop's fables, for example, have the moral stated right in the story.  This also can be found in modern stories; it's particularly common in children's television, both western and anime.  Also quite common in science fiction short stories.  So, not all stories are multilayered and/or ambiguous.  Unless you were specifically talking about stories within the literary genre?  Those have a reputation for ambiguity because that's what's fashionable in that genre, but even then not all of the stories are going to be like that.


----------



## Scarborough (Jan 22, 2011)

I am talking about stories within the literary genre. (That was in response to ideas on what makes a work "literary".)


----------



## sunandshadow (Jan 22, 2011)

Ah, okay then.  It's easy for confusion to occur when taking about the literary genre, because the term literary is overloaded.  I was assuming the OP was talking about 'literary merit' which is something I value, as opposed to 'the literary genre' which is something I don't like much.  And then 'literature' is different from either of those.  My personal opinion is that communicating a premise and a clear theme is part of having 'literary merit' while ironically most 'literary genre' stories go the opposite direction and are deliberately obfuscating or ambiguous.


----------



## M. LeRenard (Jan 22, 2011)

No one should ever talk about the literary genre, because it sucks.  I ranted about it awhile back after I read another short story in The New Yorker (why do I keep doing that to myself?!).
Discussing literary merit does kind of beg the question, though... how far must one reach before you start reaching too far to find literary merit?  I used to work in a research library, right, so I would constantly come across these books by English grad students or professors that would make an in-depth analysis of popular culture works (Goosebumps, Family Guy, Harry Potter, to give a few examples of ones I saw).  Now, to me this was clearly just someone trying to fulfill a quota (whether that be a doctoral thesis or the required number of publications to keep one's job at a university, whatever), but even so, these people did work pretty hard to find literary merit in these things that most people consider don't have much, if any of it.  If you compare the kid who gets bitten by a scarab beetle at the end of _The Curse of the Mummy's Tomb_ to Jesus Christ, does that mean you've found literary merit?  Or is your head just really far up your own ass?  I sure don't know.


----------



## Altamont (Jan 22, 2011)

Oh wow, this has gone in a totally different direction than I thought it would :S I wasn't trying to spark up some kind of debate towards the definition/worth of literary ambition (although I should've totally expected it...), I was simply trying to get an idea of the approach certain authors took to their writing within the furry community.

Renard has a point; there's obviously a ridiculous amount of ambiguity to the very nature of what one can interpret as being literary or not, I realize that, but I'm not trying to aggrandize/demerit any other works of fiction or nonfiction. As pretentious as it might be, I was simply curious if anyone approached the writing process from a similar perspective as I do, which is to say: When I write I like to emphasize the conscientiousness of my writing towards the communicating the themes I find important within the work be it through the use of style, form, various types of metaphors, et cetera. I focus on the story and characterization very much as well as the development of those two points is also a method by which theme can be communicated.

If I may borrow the definitions used by many a high-school and college professor I've encountered (and keep in mind this is merely a reflection of my own opinion), something is defined by literary not so much by the themes the work communicates, but by the skill and dexterity of form and style it possesses with which it uses to explicate said themes. Those are the aspects of fiction that I desired to know if anyone else experimented with for a specific thematic purpose.

I've just realized that it was almost inevitable that the conversation would metamorphose into an argument over semantics/rhetoric. I suppose I should have just asked if there are any other pretentious artsy types who think they'll be the Furry James Joyce...


----------



## M. LeRenard (Jan 22, 2011)

I usually just try to do what Stephen King said in _On Writing_ that he does, which is to write the story first, then see if there happens to be any special thematic element to it.  If there is one, you expand on it and make it more integral to the story.  Otherwise, you should just leave it alone, because if you try to force one in there, it will sound like you just tried to force one in there.  And that's always a turn-off.
So I guess the answer is... it depends on the story.


----------



## sunandshadow (Jan 22, 2011)

I don't see why it would always sound forced.  I feel out the theme I want to write along with the plot when I am outlining.  But I don't think there's much difference in the final, polished story due to whether you discovered what you wanted to write by outlining or discovered what you wanted to write by writing a draft.

I've read very few stories where the theme came across as forced and they were usually a combination of two factors: the story was written specifically to propound a political idea, and the writer wasn't that skilled.


----------



## buni (Jan 22, 2011)

@Altamont:

I know this is an oversimplification, but I've seen two broad methods of approach to the subject of theme in writing. The first says, "yes, if you have a point, write to it." The second says, "no, the reader will figure it out." Both have problems. Deliberately calling attention to the themes in a text is a very quick method to making it feel heavy-pawed and laborious. Not deliberately calling attention to them is a good way of having most people overlook them. I suppose my greater problem is that there is no "definitive" reading of a text. One can talk about authorial intent, but there's no guarantee that the reader will approach the text with the same outlook.

This is actually an existentialist dilemma, and one that, as someone struggling against a tide of postmodernist though in her life, annoys me greatly. Whatever I put into a work, regardless of the words I use, must go through an interpretation layer on the reader's side before communication happens. No matter what I say, I'm filtering my words outbound through a set of beliefs and ideas and understandings. The reader is then making the same decoding on the other side, but I as an author have no guarantee that my filter and my audience's filters are anything like one another, and very likely I can guarantee that for the most part they will differ. So, what I write and what others read aren't the same thing, no matter how hard I try to weight my words to convey a particular meaning. That makes the idea of "putting theme in a work" difficult. I can only talk about what I meant to write, but I have no control over what others read between my words.

This doesn't stop me from trying, mind you. It just means that I understand the frustration of trying to do this.


----------



## Scarborough (Jan 22, 2011)

Altamont - I hope I didn't offend you? I feel like I might have, from my posts. o.o

I think my approach is more similar to MLR's than to yours, in any case. I set out trying to write a story, and then I pick themes from there and kind of flesh those themes out more. Specifically:

First Draft is usually just getting to know what my characters are thinking, or what (roughly) is going to happen in the story. I don't do any outlining at all, and I pretty much walk around blindfolded when I write.

After that, I kind of look the draft over and see what elements would make an interesting story, and what elements are unnecessary. I flesh them out and remove them, respectively.


----------



## Altamont (Jan 22, 2011)

Ah, don't worry about me Scarborough  I'm not offended at all; I actually love this kind of conversation. And to be honest, my approach is probably more similar to your guys' than you might think; I'm absolutely a writer who cares about story and characterization, and I usually think of the themes in relation to the characters I develop. What have they learned? How have they changed? And how could this apply or be communicated to the reader? I always start with both a characters and a kind of broad idea of what I want to communicate. I use the aspects of the characters in relation to said idea into the development of the story itself. So where I'm guessing you two would start with story and and characters and then go to theme, I develop characters and use the aspects of their lives and personalities that relate to the themes I'm interested and flesh out the story from there 

Of course, that's an over simplified version of all of our proceses, but I think the comparisons are apt. I'm just really interested in the themes that furry writers like to explore, and how they go about doing that. I know a lot of transformation stories are analogous to"coming out", and a lot of furry stories (including mine, to a degree) deal with human/anthro interaction on a kind of allegorical level.

I know every story has a theme to some extent; I just like hearing about those themes straight from the authors' moths  Or keyboards, in this case.

Oh, and by the way MLR; On Writing is one of of my all time favorite works about the craft


----------



## sunandshadow (Jan 25, 2011)

I mainly use anthros to explore the theme of prejudice - it gives me the freedom to create two races, each with their own culture, who aren't entagled in real-world argument and stereotypes about real races.  A secondary theme I use anthros for is to explore the conflicts between being a civilized, culturally-trained individual and being an animal with instincts and needs which aren't particularly rational or compatible with one's economic or social situation.  Hmm what else - oh shapeshifters.  I use a race of shapeshifters to get at problems of appearance, attractiveness, gender roles, and the issue that anything which doesn't have a recognizable face tends to get taken for granted as a machine or animal rather than seen as a person with their own heart and desires.

Transformation I tend to see as being a metaphor for progress and getting the outer reality more in-tune with the inner self.  That's kind of like coming out, but much broader since it doesn't necessarily have to have any relationship to sexuality or gender.


----------



## â™¥Mirandaâ™¥ (Jan 29, 2011)

To jump in and interject this banter (and to try to sound smart!), I find Anthro characters help when working with romantic themes. As an example, I once wrote a steam-punk cosmic-horror short story, which featured Anthro characters to represent people sequestered from nature; They've donned the features of the animal kingdom in some contrived attempt at returning to nature. 

Most romantic themes lend well with the idea of anthropomorphism, I think.


----------

