6 / 12
Feb 2021

Which subset of characters do you tend to sympathize with/invest in more?

  • Human
  • Nonhuman

60voters

I think I've done a topic like this before...but what the hey.

I have a feeling the results of this poll are gonna be relatively even, but even so, I already know the general consensus is that humans and humanoid characters are just 'more relatable'. I'm just looking for specific opinions.

My specific opinion is that, regardless of which subset is more relatable, when presented with both I usually tend to side with the nonhumans. Whether that's robots, aliens, animals, plants, even (honestly, plants rock).

Humans are kinda bleh, especially in fiction...because in fiction they never fail to make everything about them. T_T
That's what always bugged me about the Transformers movies...I read a great quote some time ago that having humans in films like that is actually kind of necessary for scale, and I get that, but I also kind of wish they would move their little fleshy selves out of the way so I can see the giant robots better. Like, okay, be in the movie, but stand over there. Quietly...

I have similar issues with Pokemon...ngl, the franchise looks so fun and part of me would love to get into it...but every time I feel tempted, I have to step back and think: are you gonna be in this for the humans or for the Pokemon? Answer: Pokemon, obviously!
Then the follow-up question: in that case, will you be able to stand watching the humans take center stage, constantly treat the Pokemon like pets/weapons, and have the aforementioned beautiful powerful fantasy-animals be relegated to basically comic relief whenever they have the chance to act on their own?
Answer: ...No. :[

Ethical stuff aside, it just feels like a wasted concept. An entire world full of mystical creatures, many of which are highly sentient in various ways, and the only way we get to look at them (when they aren't threats) is as accessories for various forms of human entertainment, literal proxies for human accomplishments, and occasionally as safari attractions: again, human-centric experiences.

I think that's why the weird secrets in things like Pokedex entries are so interesting: they reveal that these creatures have so much more depth to them...which will unfortunately never be explored in any way that might take agency away from the human characters. =_= I don't think even Pokemon Mystery Dungeon gets into that stuff...if it does, I really will have to look into it...

ANYWAY, nonhumans rool, humans drool; you get it. There are lots of ways I could explain why...for one thing, they're usually cuter~. For another thing, they tend to challenge human supremacy and rosy ideas about colonialism, slavery, and manifest destiny that still linger in the modern zeitgeist...and occasionally they get to win. ^^

  • created

    Feb '21
  • last reply

    Mar '21
  • 11

    replies

  • 733

    views

  • 11

    users

  • 20

    likes

It depends on the series and quality of writing for me, personally.

But I can see why in media the safer bet is to have human characters, look at things through a human lens, and/or make the animals/nonhumans talk. It's because it appeals to wider audiences. A lot of people, whether consciously or not, like having a human anchor there to relate to. Nature documentaries, where the focus is all nonhuman, don't appeal to certain people because they find it hard to empathize with what's going on and they're more or less just watching a textbook.

Some folks need a relatable human, humanoid, or something that speaks like a human to segue them into a more complicated world removed from what's familiar to them.

Hell, some people find the first half of Wall-E boring because there's little to no talking.
Some people don't like silent or wordless comics for the same reason.

Ever since i was a kid I always related more to non-human characters in shows and books.
But if you happen to take a look at my profile pic and the furry novel I write... You will probably realize why that is. xD

I guess it has to with being a social outcast and how those characters are often portrayed in the shows they appear... That and the cuteness factor. ^^

I can't really answer because it depends of what kind of non-humans we are speaking of.

I relate better to non-humans who think a bit differently than humans, with a bit different moral principles.
But obviously, similar kind of story can be approached also with humans, just a bit more odd than the average humans.

Super different non-humans can be fascinating, but maybe have less relatability.

Average humans can be boring (not always).

Talking animals who act exactly like humans are extremely offputting. If you give me sapient animals, make them very different from humans.

Robots can be fascinating. But like animals, if they are going to be exactly like humans, give me humans instead (unless the plot resolves around the fact the robots have so advanced programming that.. bla bla..)

As a conclusion, I prefer nonhumans, but I really dislike when characters look nonhuman but speak like my neighbor.

It depends on the story and the narrative.

For example in Wall-E, I care way more about Wall-E and Eve because they are the focus and given the most personality and time to develop/connect with. I could really care less about the humans floating around in space.

I think the amount of time I spend with a character human or not, is what I'm going to empathize with more. It also depends on what character you connect with. Some people find 'quirky side kick robots or pets' adorable and others hate them and find them annoying.

THIS!!
I just get so hissy when people make interesting lore for different species but then you look at them and they are just... Human with cat face.

I want the cat whole thing, i want them to talk weird because of the barbed tongue, to have 'strange' behaviours that don't match human culture, maybe their cities work better at night? And have strange street shapes because every citizen is so agile and used to jumping around!
Maybe they have special clothing designed for their tails and to factor in the fur problem into their clothings and daily lives.

What about dogs? They are know for rellying on nose more than eyes... maybe their cities are cleaner? Maybe they have policies to reduce emissions... maybe wagging is seen as socially inaceptable behaviour (kind of like if you went around hugging every person you saw)... Maybe there are policies against howling, or its considered just a 'not cool' thing to do (kind of like in zootopia)

I love tiny details that make them more their own thing and less of a 'human with fur'

TBH, I actually don´t really care.

For me it always depends on the "character". You can write both very boring but also make both very engaging (even a rock ^^). When I started writing my stories, I always mix it up, because I always hated this "Black & White" thinking, that one side has to be better than the other or anything like that.

But that is just my opinion - I think I just got bored from all these Holywood cliches :smiley:

i'm totally for anthro/furries since forever, I can't help it. However i'm not as attached to ferals (or 4 legged) than humanoids or standing cartoon animals.

Sidenote: I choose cat as sympathetic protagonist than other species because it's much more effective (because cat). Also younger characters are even more effective. :smile:

22 days later

I have this issue with Star Wars. There are so many alien species, but all of the media is invariably about human characters at the center of it. Clone Wars is probably the only one where an alien character (Ahsoka) was on the same level as the 2 main human protagonists (Anakin and Obi-wan), as well as maybe Rebels that has 2 alien characters as part of the main cast. and a very salty droid.

Same with a lot of video games that have playable species beyond humans. They usually have a non-descript bland human as a canon \ default protagonist. Altho in Skyrim I do have primarily human characters, one of them is a werewolf, and the other is missing his heart, making him sort of undead. Skyrim is probably the only game where I have many human characters lol.

I don't think I've seen a fantasy \ scifi world that didn't have humans at all except Thra from The Dark Crystal.

I don't hate human characters, they can be great. I just think not including more non-human characters is kinda wasted potential.

I don't care about the species, as long as they have a solid characterization and are interesting enough.

I've always tend to notice the character first, and their species second.
But when that isn't available (the characters were just introduced for example), then I always go for the most exotic person in the room. Why are they look like they do? What's their culture? What's their biology? How are they different? ETC. Give me that sweet sweet lore, let it pour down from the skies as this thick red rai... Ahem. So, yes, I gravitate to the nonhumans more. Even if a lot of times I left disappointed by the shallowness of their concepts, I still more excited about learning alien things than I am about reiterating same old human stuff for the 15000th time. Yes, yes, we got it, you love him and he's indecisive, now just connect your oral orifices already and move aside so G'Kar could tell me more about his homeworld culture!