Anthro Fiction discussion


Comments Showing 1-5 of 5 (5 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Stephen (new)

Stephen Coghlan | 8 comments Alright.

While trying to explain what 'anthro' is to an uninitiated, I was asked a question that, for me anyways, was difficult to answer.

Are Ewoks anthro?

Let's hear your thoughts on this.

message 2: by Dale (new)

Dale Crowe | 4 comments I would say yes as they are a blend of both human and animalistic features. They are bipedal, sentient beings with fur a Teddy bear would envy.

message 3: by Stephen (new)

Stephen Coghlan | 8 comments okay good. I said yes...but I was hesitant at first. I don't know why I find it hard to accept them as such.

message 4: by Stephen (new)

Stephen Coghlan | 8 comments Next 'Is it anthro', Gargoyles. Are they fantasy creature? living statues? Demons? or bat anthro?

message 5: by Altivo (last edited Feb 04, 2017 01:00PM) (new)

Altivo Overo | 4 comments Ewoks are extraterrestrial aliens. Anthropoid rather than anthropomorph. But that's a technicality I guess. No one seems to question whether Wookiees are anthro, so of course Ewoks are in the same category.

Gargoyles that speak, think, and move (in other words, are live and sentient) would qualify as anthro on grounds of sentient intelligence, reason, and language in a non-human body. Same as Bambi or other characters who speak and think but have non-human bodies. Or Mr. Ed, if you prefer. ;p

back to top