Worldbuilding is about making places and people! Whether you worldbuild to write, for an RPG, or just for fun, welcome!
World Building and Talking Animals
What do you think are some of the common pitfalls that can come with introducing talking animals into your world? Particularly, if there are also other animals of their type who can't talk?
For example, it might still be perfectly acceptable for humans to eat non-talking chicken - whereas for humans to eat talking talking chicken would be tantamount to cannibalism. But what about talking chickens themselves eating non-talking chicken? That very thought probably can't help but squick many of us out.
Another pitfall would be dealing with the issue of human supremacy in a world with talking animals, and whether ot it's portrayed as a bad thing. I think that was a major issue with the Chronicles of Narnia series. On one hand, eating a talking stag was established to be a major taboo - but, on the other hand, there was also this overwhelming idea that the country of Narnia should be governed by humans.
So what are your thoughts?




Well, in The World, talking animals have no compunction regarding the preparing and eating of other talking animals. The Wolf-cycle tales, focusing on King Isengrim and his jolly band of knights and hunters, demonstrate well enough that, talking or otherwise, wolves are wolves and wolves fancy a bit of ham and chicken from time to time.
Re human supremacy. Talking animals (at least, in certain highly magical or narrative countries), non-human sophonts, were-folk, manifest fairies, elfs and personified natural phenomena all being well known among Men, knowledge of these peoples has never stopped Men from thinking themselves superior to everything else. In The World, it's neither bad nor good (in a moral sense), it's just human nature. Wrongthinking, but, well, there it is.
At least none of those aforesaid non-human sophonts or talking animals' dearest wish is to be lorded over by the wonkiness of Men! They know which side of the bread is buttered.
I think talking animals are not really an issue if you take into account their natures --- in my opinion, don't just make them humans with wolfy faces. Their culture ought to reflect their nature. Also, it's best to leave the talking "lower" animals to the fabulists. I can see a talking wolf or pig or dog. Relatively big brains, "higher" thought processes going on. A talking cricket? A talking fish? Not so much. That's one of the big pitfalls, as I see it.
I've been thinking about this a decent amount in my new mermaid world and trying to figure out if there should be any other sentient sea creatures, and to what degree. I've mostly landed in the area that it's by species—either you're the type of creature that can talk, or you aren't, the same way you might be able to fly or not, or be a certain color or not, or anything else. Like, currently on our own planet, we don't have a mix where one species has that varied or drastic disparity of abilities. There are dogs that look different from each other or have somewhat varying strengths of being scent hounds or sight hounds or big or small or somewhat differing levels of intelligence, but they're all firmly dogs and still fit within a certain range. No dogs have figured out to read, and no dogs (without significant mental impairments not standard for the breed) are incapable of learning what "sit" means.
If it's by species, then it gets rid of most of the issues. The same way we don't eat dogs or horses but do eat chickens and fish, you just treat animals that are sentient as more like you would humans, and treat ones that aren't more like food, with possibly some gray area in between.
The only way I can account for it within a species would be if it were a mutation of some sorts, a la the X-Men have wildly fantastical abilities outside of human norms, and any species can also have birth defects which are also a form of mutation, just in a negative way, etc. But I'm not completely convinced of that one.
"If it's by species, then it gets rid of most of the issues."
That's one good way to do it. Certainly to avoid any angst over wondering whether your sandwich filling was once a speaking animal!
"The same way we don't eat dogs or horses but do eat chickens and fish, you just treat animals that are sentient as more like you would humans, and treat ones that aren't more like food, with possibly some gray area in between."
Well, humans are pretty good at, in some places, treating animals better than other people (the US); and in some places treating even sentient animals like rubbish (many parts of Asia, for example, where dogs are, in fact, eaten).
Question: have you determined if there are any other sentient species inhabiting Merfolk waters?
I have a few creatures that are more sentient than most but aren't quite the same as humans/mermaids either. The details are pretty rough and I haven't decided for sure what to call them since most of them are pulled from multiple mythologies, but right now here's what I'm working on:
Kelpie (ish)
Really, it's a mix of the neck/nokken/nixie, a kelpie, the wihwin, and my own creation, that is a water-based creature that most closely resembles a horse. They can leave the water and try to lure other creatures into the water, where they drown and then eat them. When they eat a creature, their whole mouth transforms into rows and rows of sharp teeth. By eating them, they gain the ability to transform themselves into that creature, but it's never quite perfect in how they're able to do it.
They're most obsessed with luring humans into water because they want to be human more than anything else, but they can never get close enough. For one, they still can't speak, and still aren't as intelligent as adult humans (think like a young child or a heavily mentally disabled person that can do a lot of things and is still human but not quite "normal" and able to interact perfectly in society). But there are also certain tell-tale signs, like the hem of their clothing always being soaked, and their hair resembling seaweed more than hair, and their eyes having more one giant dark pupil and less human-like, etc. They're obsessed with luring more and more humans, trying to get it right. And there is some slight evidence that perhaps they do improve in both intelligence and appearance as they do so, but only over decades and still only slightly.
I'm also thinking about possibly pulling in the bunyip mythology, which comes from Australian aboriginal mythology: "Descriptions of bunyips vary widely. However, common features in many 19th-century newspaper accounts include a dog-like face, a crocodile like head, dark fur, a horse-like tail, flippers, and walrus-like tusks or horns or a duck-like bill." I'm thinking about those possibly being young kelpie that haven't figured out how to just be one thing yet, or maybe a dumber cousin of the kelpie that just continues becoming more weird-looking as it eats more things?
Taniwha
These are god-like protector spirits inspired by Māori mythology. Either basically they just are whales, or they're very similar to whales, or maybe they can be several different creatures (like also some giant crocodile/sea dragon creatures and giant squid, etc.). Mostly they aren't really seen or interacted with by anyone, and are believed to reside either in the most dangerous parts of the oceans where other living things have difficulty going to or mostly live underground, in caves that have grown around them so that you would never suspect such a giant creature could be hidden in that tiny opening. They are pretty mysterious and not really understood, but they are considered spiritual and important by everyone. Either they can't speak, or they just don't except for once every hundred years or something. They're mostly dormant and don't come into play super often except in superstitions. As you can tell, this idea is much less formed than the other one.
Octopus, squid, and dolphins
These are more similar to dogs or horses in our own lives. They're very intelligent and have personalities, and sometimes merrow and these creatures form close bonds, but also definitely aren't sentient in the same way that humans and merrow are.
I agree that they 'by species' approach works well.
It also gives you an easy way to paint a character or group in your story as 'evil' if they refuse to follow this social convention.
Clearly the good and virtuous characters would be aghast at the idea of eating a talking animal. But the evil goblins might delight in eating talking animals...
I like the idea of animals that vocalise without being sapient - simply if animals spoke in English but still had the same thought processes of their species.
Doug from Up is the closest example I've seen, but then again I don't watch much television.
You mean like Lady and The Tramp? Or Homeward Bound? Probably the latter more so. Those are both good films. We know that, in neither film can humans understand them - although, in the former, there is an Italian chef that knows how to speak "dog" - and Tramp speaks differently to him than he does to Lady.
TV Tropes has some good articles about degrees of animal anthropomorphism. Peter Rabbit is probably the best example of a talking animals that combines both human traits and natural rabbit traits.