FurRag forums
June 23, 2017, 05:07:57 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
Author Topic: Paws or Hands?  (Read 4184 times)
iain
Guest
« Reply #15 on: August 04, 2011, 06:35:10 PM »

I think it has more to do with how you want to present them. Because anthro characters are essentially a blend between two different types of creatures, you can represent them as being more animal (paws) or more human (hands) depending on the story and how, if at all, it effects the storyline.

It shouldn't bother you, though, it's the fun part about writing; you're the author.
Logged
quoting_mungo
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 446



View Profile WWW
« Reply #16 on: February 10, 2012, 08:24:00 PM »

What I choose to use tends to reflect how I depict creatures - if the anthropomorphs in the setting in question have hand-like things at the end of their arms, they're hands, if they have plantigrade things roughly consistent with human feet at the end of their legs regardless of species, they're feet. If they have hind limbs more like their animal counterparts, those will end up being referred to as paws/hooves/etc as appropriate, instead. To me it's a matter of internal consistency; unless the different groups have different native languages, it doesn't make sense to me for a horse to call his feet hooves and a dog to call them paws, if they look practically the same.
Logged

tundrawolf
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: June 29, 2012, 01:50:16 PM »

I say hands, because if you say "He picked the gun up with his paw" it makes no sense. Just how did he do that? (Picturing a dogs foot) If you say "hand", then you automatically assume that the appendage on the end of their arm is more like a human hand, and lends to more functionality of the character, IMO. That being said, depending on the attitude of the observer, and from their perspective, I have called fully functional hands "paws" when I am trying to bring about an air of disdain for any anthropomorphic species, as seen through the eyes of a jaded human being. It lends to the sense that they never will fully acknowledge the anthropomorph as remotely human, viewing any characteristics the creature may posses, however human, as strictly animal.
Logged
Rimmer-Gnome
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: July 22, 2012, 09:20:41 AM »

This one's dead simple for me.

When you're writing, you don't know who your audience will be really. A successful story won't need the reader to be an expert in anthropomorphism.

You call them hands, but describe how they are paw-like.

In my literature at least, anthro characters tend to have the pads, but I describe that while referring to them as hands. Paw, to me and many others, is the foot of an animal. Describing them as paws would be confusing. They'll read the word paw and assume that they're feet. To establish anthro, use the word hand, then add in the paw-like features in description.

Simple.
Logged
Altivo
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1126


Wandering about distractedly...


View Profile WWW
« Reply #19 on: July 22, 2012, 12:05:06 PM »

Ah, but not really that simple. "Paw" is in fact used in mainstream literature to describe human hands. It's a metaphor that should be familiar to readers. Authors have used it for a long time to refer to hands, particularly those that might be large or clumsy or have traits associated with the animal, such as brutishness or heavy hair. In every day conversation, the term is frequently used in reference to unwanted grasping or touch.

"Get your paws off that."

"He pawed at her inelegantly, consumed as he was by drink."

I don't think there is any need to oversimplify language unless you are writing for children. And even children can handle metaphor and symbol as long as it has been treated with care.
Logged

-
“Don't be seduced into thinking that that which does not make a profit is without value.” ― Arthur Miller
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.14 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!