Fictional thought exercise

[chipotle]

In a setting that is an alternate version of feudal Japan, with races of anthropomorphic animals instead of humans but no other (overt) magic and myth, what would it mean for a fox-person to be a kitsune?

Comments

[kynn.livejournal.com]

Extra tails.

Wait, why would this "Japan" even exist? Why are there kitsune myths at all? I don't get the premise even, so I don't see how the question can be answered apart from "whatever the author wants to say about it."

It's sorta like asking what "werewolves" would be in a furry world without humans. Like...morphic rabbits or whatever that turn into wolves? Morphic wolves that turn into...other morphic wolves?

So, author fiat. What do you think kitsunes should be in such a setting -- and what do they represent? How do they fit into this pseudo-Japanese culture?

That said, I'd say it wouldn't be all that bad to racially code them as Ainu or Okinawans...unless you're going to give them Fantastic Magical Powers. (We really don't need more "magical minority" stories, do we?)

[kereminde.livejournal.com]

Oh dear gods, splitting hairs isn't any fun for the thought exercise. Splitting hares . . . maybe. The author is referring to "Japan" as a reference point of culture, parallel in outward appearance and customs to what we would call "feudal Japan". And, a Socratic answer is not what I think was wanted . . . and "author fiat" is not an answer which is any help. (Consider: "What do you think I should cook for dinner?" "Whatever you want. Chef fiat.")

I'll address the point you both brought up, and invoked, and trace it back to the root . . . what do kitsune represent in the first place, beyond the cultural concept? From what I've read, they're a trickster fox spirit. Or demon. Who have multiple tails, the rules for which are never really explicit.

So if you're going to approach "anthropomorphic foxes as kitsune" then you should stop and ask some questions for foundations:

- Are there foxes which are not "kitsune"? If so, what's the difference?

- If "kitsune" are indeed mystical in nature, are they actually magical or SPIRITUAL in nature? (There is a significant difference in nature depending on approach there.)

- What would their relationship to the material world actually be? Even if they weren't spirits, magical, mundane, or none of the above, how do they relate to the world at large?

From there you can use your answers to build up with more questions. Sure, it's all "author fiat" but then you have a roadmap of questions to work with.

[kynn.livejournal.com]

You probably could have made your point without dissing mine; they're not incompatible. :)

[kereminde.livejournal.com]

Yes, you are right. I just didn't like the tone of your post, and I admit that freely.

That and the Socratic method of answering questions irritates the living crap out of me :P

[kynn.livejournal.com]

Why do such things bother you so much? What drives you to feel the need to rebuke people whose tones you dislike, rather than just making your own contributions to the discussion?

I'm just curious. I didn't find anything to disagree with in what you said about kitsunes, so maybe you can explain what I did that offended you so much.

[kereminde.livejournal.com]

What makes you think I haven't made a contribution?

[tashiro.livejournal.com]

I respectfully disagree. In a Japanese-like setting, they would most likely be kami, with all the weight and symbolism that such carries.

I've actually dealt with 'werewolves' in a furry setting. Essentially, the person infected goes feral. They get larger, more violent, and get the tools to become killing machines.

A 'were' rabbit would turn into a large, feral rabbit. The claws would become weapons, their bite would be devastating, and they would rabidly attack anything that gets near them. They wouldn't turn into a wolf... they're turn into a killer bunny.

[kynn.livejournal.com]

Well, they're not really like werewolves/lycanthropes then -- they're more like Dr. Jeckyl/Mr. Hyde, right?

[tashiro.livejournal.com]

Except that Hyde was a scawny, thin, figure, smaller than Jeckyl, ugly and mis-shapen. Basically, think of Gollum as Jeckyl's counterpart.