Also wanted to post this because the guild and the Cóyotls were mentioned… 
Nifty! Thanks for sharing, PT.
Thanks for sharing this.
I’m glad I’m not the only one who was wondering this too. I just hope it becomes the other way around at one point (wishful thinking, I know).
It’s sort of true what he says, though publishers don’t take talking animals well anymore due to the whole ‘furry’ bad reputation. It still has a better chance than any other form of furry art, though, I agree.
An interesting response. I agree with most of it, though I am not so sure we cross over into the ‘mundane’ world as much as he suggests we do. Yes, there are anthropormorphic works in Science Fiction and Fantasy, but I wouldn’t classify those as ‘furry’. (though yes, they technically are)
Furry fiction written as furry fiction tends to be different than those works that contain anthropormorphic characters. Only when we come to works like, say, Summerhill, do we start having the true cross over begin.
Hopefully that sort of makes sense since I am at work and only using half a brain to do this.
Pssssst someone mention Fangs and Fonts podcast on there.
shifty eyes
Excepting the bit about the fandom’s origin, which I disagree on, I’d say he’s pretty much on target. I probably have twenty non-fur readers for every furry one.
Someone should…
You bring up the (other) age-old question then of what defines furry. What makes a story a furry story vs a story that happens to contain anthropomorphic creatures? Where is the line drawn, and is this a universal line or is it fuzzy with a lot of give or personal preference?
Sorry most of these are movies, yet it’s the field I first fell in love with anthros through, so thoughts of movies constantly come to mind for me. Would Disney’s Robin Hood be a furry story? What about Rescuers (and its sequel)? Secret of Nihm? Aristocats? The Great Mouse Detective? Watership Down? Animal Farm? Alvin and the Chipmunks? Planet of the Apes? Beatrix Potter Tales? Chicken Run? All Dogs Go to Heaven? Care Bears? Duck Tails? Cats Don’t Dance? The Land Before Time? A Goofy Movie? Kung Fu Panda? Rock-a-Doodle? Wind in the Willows? Shark Tale? Tiny Toons? Disney’s Tarzan? Oliver and Company? Turbo? Wolf Children?
Why or why not? What are the fundamental strings that tie furry stories together and exclude any other antho story?
I personally call anything with anthro animals/plants furry. Some people do not share this definition. I don’t care. XD
If you define furry as oriented towards the furry community, then my work is only incidentally furry. I create work with anthro animals and am here because the community wants that.
[quote author=Munchkin link=topic=473.msg4332#msg4332 date=1416324657]
I could go through each of those, but really, in the end, they aren’t furry.
They weren’t created to be furry, and most of them are talking animals which was a genre before furries decided to try and make it their own and ignore what came before.
I am willing to state that the only true furry fiction are those pieces written by self identified furries. Bold statement, I know. But honestly, why not be proud of the work we produce as a fandom rather than slapping our title onto things that were not created as such?
[quote author=Voice link=topic=473.msg4334#msg4334 date=1416327646]
How do you know none of the writers of the screen plays weren’t furries, or even closet furries? Would it make any of the stories any more furry if they were?
On the same token though, I know several artists who arts beautiful anthro work (one of which was what drew me into FA), yet they swear up and down that they’re not furries. Should this mean their artwork shouldn’t be considered furry, even when their work tends closer to the 50:50 / human:animal ratio most on this site tend to prefer in writing vs any of the self-proclaimed furry artists that lean more toward the 90:10 ratio that most on this site seem to cringe at?
I’m not a cyber-punk writer. I’ve never claimed to be one, nor will I ever. I’m not even a fan of the genre except for a very small handful of movies. Yet my very first publication (not to mention very first honorable mention in a writing contest) was in cyberpunk. Yet since I never have and never will claim to be a cyberpunk writer, does that make my story any less cyberpunk than anyone else who claims to be a cyberpunk writer?
You are, of course, right. They could be closet furries. It is quite possible. That said, with movies, there are a lot more than just one person working on them. That’s the main reason that example falls flat.
Take Swann’s Moreau series. Science fiction, with blatant anthropormorphic animals. He mentioned in one of his journals that he found out about furries and their love of his work, and he was thrilled by it. Did he write a furry story? No. He wrote a science fiction story with anthropormorphic animal elements.
This applies to all the films you listed. They were never created as furry works. Furry is something that has been attached to it by us as a fandom in a desperate attempt to attach our name onto things that aren’t/weren’t created as our own.
Your Cyberpunk example doesn’t work as they don’t have a cohesive fanbase like furries do. (or they might) You are a writer writing within the cyberpunk genre. In Abandoned Places, I have a non-furry writing a story inside a furry anthology. Does it make the story furry? Not really. Reading it, it reads like science fiction with furries rather than furry. It’s so noticeable that all of my beta readers picked up on it. It was nice and refreshing because of that fact. We, as furries, have a certain ‘style’ as it were to our works and worlds. In the end, he is basically doing what you did with Cyberpunk. If Cyberpunk has a solid fanbase, they would most likely find all of our works in that anthology to be interesting, unique, but lacking in the cyberpunk ‘feel’.
I still don’t see how the line can be drawn. What of the art example? While I won’t argue that we have much to be proud of within our own community, it still feels… I don’t know if elitist is the right word… exclusive? for us to state that only self-proclaimed furries can write stories considered furry. I’m a (semi) straight woman. Does that mean I can’t write true homosexual fiction between two men? It’ll always just be two guys who are in love, but never a True homosexual fiction since I’m not apart of the community?
Wow, we are getting seriously far from the original topic >.> Though I’ll be honest, I’d love to see this as a Fangs and Fonts episode. If it’s been done already, care to point me to the right epi?
The reason to attach the word “furry” to works that were created outside of the fandom is because “furry” is a useful marker for finding fiction that contains anthropomorphic animals. If you want to read or watch or otherwise experience artwork that contains anthropomorphic animals, it’s FAR easier to find such work when you have a label for it.
I’m curious to know more about how you would define that style, in terms of what you think makes a story “furry” as opposed to genre fiction with furries. I know there’s a potential to just make this kind of topic about semantics – “furry” as a synonym for “anthropomorphic-themed” vs “furry” meaning “created by/for the furry fandom” – but it sounds like you’re saying something different from that. What makes a typical furry story feel like a typical furry story to you?
Sorry, Voice, but I think I’m with Munchkin here. 
The best way to demonstrate the problem I have with privileging authorial intent over all else is by replacing “furry” with, say, “science fiction.” Margaret Atwood explicitly denied that The Handmaid’s Tale is science fiction because to her science fiction is “talking squids in outer space” (actual quote). Yet it was nominated for the Nebula and Prometheus Award and won the Arthur C. Clarke Award (roughly the British equivalent of the Nebula).
With all respect to Ms. Atwood, I’m inclined to cast my lot with the rest of the science fiction writing community and classify her story of a dystopian future America as science fiction, despite its notable lack of talking squids. And I don’t see a particularly good reason not to apply the same logic to furry; saying “this is furry, but this is just science fiction with furries” seems roughly akin to describing The Dresden Files as “this isn’t fantasy, it’s just a noir series full of supernatural elements.” It is a noir series full of supernatural elements… which is what makes it fantasy, right?
Or to look it at another way: I don’t think what makes Out of Position furry is solely that Kyell Gold says it is. If he’d never heard of furry and the book had come out from a non-furry publisher with cover art from someone who isn’t in the fandom but it was otherwise exactly the same book, I’d find it very tough to argue it wasn’t furry.
Discussion generation spider for the win!!
;D
I can’t really counter-debate on all that has been said, mostly because I am playing devil’s advocate as well as stirring up conversation. Everyone’s points are valid, and that comes with the issue of Furry being/not being a genre unto itself.
But, that’s all off topic ramblings.
The art vs fiction debate among furries is one that will continue for a long time. Writers are a less recognized art form, and we’ve discussed this on FnF a few times already. It’s because with art, you look at it, and you’re done. With writing, the person has to invest a bit more into it. It’s amazing that someone is willing to shell out a hundred dollars for a furry piece of art yet cringe at the thought of spending twenty dollars on a book.
That… doesn’t answer my question at all, but okay.
I could probably spend paragraphs trying to explain what is basically a generalized concept in my head chalked full of observations. Thus, I won’t try at this point, mostly because I am at work and that would be bad… so very bad.
I just see a certain ‘feeling’ between say, Kyell Gold’s anthro work and say, Swann’s science fiction anthropormorphic animal works. Part of it has to do with the fact that in Kyell’s work, furries exist. No explanation needed. With Swann, he had to explain where they came from. (genetics for wars)
But that’s a weak example. As I said, I could probably ramble for a long while on this…