There's an oft forgotten creative approach to furry characters and storytelling that I think we all subconsciously engage in but don't lend very much thought to. It ties into the human brain's tendency to detect the vestiges of other humans in natural phenomena, like animals. Even non-furries subconsciously apply human characteristics to animals, sometimes unconsciously. Some people, like Stewart Guthrie, speculate that the basis of all religion ties into the natural urge to humanize our surroundings. There's a word for this:

Anthropomorphism!

So why is it that while we are immersed in a world of talking animal people we often forget about the subconscious aspects of what we do? Looking specifically at zoomorphism, have you ever built a character, then applied their characteristics to an animal that you thought best embodied their personality? Have you ever taken the reverse approach, picking an animal and then building a personality around their traits and habits, forming a new character?

I think that in the flurry of artwork available on FA on a daily basis it's easy to forget the raw, subconscious power of anthropomorphism. We see a lot of avatars sporting glowy hair, outrageous fur patterns, form fitting clothing, science fiction weaponry, and oversized naughty bits, but many of these characters are weak because the main purpose of their design is to call attention to their creator and not to stand alone as an actual character, an individual.

Most of my favorite artists and storytellers take into account how humans perceive various animals and their 'personalities' when crafting their work. We all know about the sly fox, the lithe cat, the lumbering bear, and the cunning wolf, and even though science has empirically proven that each individual animal species is neither good nor evil, we as humans are still so ready to embrace the conventions of fable and our own individual conceptions of what 'attitude' animals have. Every writer should take this phenomenon into account, whether they plan to embrace it or not.

There are aspects of zoomorphism not to like. If you were to treat other human beings the same way, judging them based purely on experience and preconceived notions, it would be called stereotyping, even racism. Being aware of our zoomorphic tendencies, however, is not the same as embracing them- but it can guide your discourse and keep your characters connected with their audience. Lions don't have to be strong, noble, or regal if you want, as people expect this characteristic. You could instead choose to create a leonine character stricken by torpor, twisted by malice, or raised as a parvenu boor to throw folks a loop. Hyenas have a reputation for diabolical laughter, so an odd twist would be a stoic, quiet individual, maybe even humorless.

It's a concept that can be great fun to ape or embrace, allowing for good interplay with the audience as you test or play to their preconceptions. I now challenge you- if you fancy yourself a creator of any kind, do you consciously consider anthropomorphism or zoomorphism in your works? If you're more of a fan than a creator, have you ever considered why you like certain characters or avatars? Have you ever examined them as they 'fit' with their species?

It's an interesting, broad, and I suppose innocent topic to discuss and I'm kind of surprised that it doesn't come up more often. Taking a moment to consider this part of the human condition may help your work, or it may even help you gain a better understanding of why the furry fandom appeals to you.