The Problem with Hivecanon (Opinion piece by Oculus)

The Problem with Hivecanon

Or why Oculus keeps saying “Depends on headcanon”

~

This opinion piece was something on my mind, but I decided to write it after I was informed about a recent post by @anon3053411 which you can see here: What if peta hadn't released the fluffies? (Swiftbitches)

In many ways, its similar to Soulyin666’s pic on the subreddit from over a year ago. Now, whether fluffies should be perfected or not is a separate matter unto itself and deserves its own opinion piece (and hopefully soon) But the one thing that I did take issue with was a particular line said in the entry.

So I’m just going to come out and say something that not many people had realized:

A number of notable people actually do not follow the PETA break-in canon, nor the unfinished fluffies canon. And some do not follow Fall of Cleveland, or had not read it.

And I’m going to name two examples: @Carpdime and @SqueakyFriend

It would be good to establish why this question would even be asked in the first place, and why that line of thought keeps appearing. The fluffy pony fandom had its roots in the MLP fandom (something that was established in this article), and one of the ideas about fluffies being the way they are was that they were “incomplete MLP”. This lore did make sense when fluffies were part of the MLP fandom, as there was a MLP base to rely on.

However, when the fluffy pony fandom became less involved with MLP, it attracted people who were unfamiliar with or never watched MLP to begin with. Carpdime is one example of this – in conversations with him, he has confirmed that during the period when he was initially active on the Booru, he never watched MLP. The one time he drew a Lyra mare and foals was because it was Lyra week on the booru.

From here, it stands to reason that, in his canon, Fluffy ponies were actually a finished product. Yes, it is true that Carpdime drew fluffies as deeply flawed and troublesome beings and also incapable of handling the harsh world around them. But Carpdime did not base his work on a “perfected” MLP. In Carpdime’s canon, one could imagine that the hypothetical “fluffy pony” shows that preceded their creation actually spoke in fluffspeak, and the Hasbio of this setting made fluffies as based upon the depiction in that show.

As to why that matters, and while it could be argued that Carpdime had drawn his art in such a way that different people could have different interpretations of it, Carp did not follow certain ideas that were dominant in the hivecanon, whether it was before of after this time. His fluffies were not based on MLP, and he has also never drawn litterpals, enfie babbehs and foal-to-sketti machines. What some people take for credit as hivecanon may not actually apply to all artists. Even the one time he drew a bloated dam, purely for the fun of it, does not mean that he follows the “bloated dam” hivecanon.

The same would apply to Squeakyfriend. Like Carpdime, Squeakyfriend did not read Fall of Cleveland, and was not aware of the ongoings of that story. So he just treated the Fall of Cleveland like an urban legend, and was unaware of any effect it could have on present-day stories. Even @Booperino had his own ideas on a supposed “fall of Cleveland” which is completely outside with what the actual story was.

The reason why I am putting this out is because I feel that people do take hivecanon for granted. Yes, there are some things that are given about fluffies: that they should be small, speak fluffspeak, have a lot of fluff, and be bio-engineered. But liberties can also be taken with any of these prerequisities. And going further, hivecanon is not a constant thing, its evolving. Some people may follow a basic guideline of fluffies but come up with their own thing, much like what Carpdime and Squeakyfriend did. And this may apply to more artists than we realize. Even simple things such as how much fluffies poop depends on the artist – I have noticed that most hugboxer and hugbox-ish artists don’t depict fluffies as overly shitting. Its why I am of the opinion that people should actually consider an artists work as their own work, unless they acknowledge that they follow an idea that’s popular in the fandom, aka the hivecanon.

26 Likes

Reagarding the “PETA break in” and “unfinished” fluffies, I don’t make use of either one as my headcanon. That is not to say I didn’t know about these popular canon pieces at the start, nor am I advocating for the eradication of those canons. I just don’t find those canon necessary to tell the stories I want. Fluffies can have flaws without being reduced to “imperfect” beings incapable of escaping their lot. But canon is such a wonderfully complex subject that I wish to explore in detail at a later time. Suffice to say that the interpretations of an agreed canon is infinitely variable, two people can believe the same headcanon but create two completely different works based on it.

Canon is ultimately a self serving device to allow a creator to maintain consistency within a single story or series of stories. It’s a tool that makes a story more readable and consistent. Also, it is entirely possible for a single creator to maintain different headcanons for different series they may work on.

For those starting out in the fandom or are interested in fluffy lore, it is great to get opinions and ideas from the varied members in our wonderful community. This can be done by discussion or consumption on the material that has gone before us. Just remember at the end of the day, you have the last say on what goes into your own headcanon.

On a final note, in the unlikely case of any creator falling foul of the administrators in respect to canon related matters, it’s good to think of the creator and FC admin relationship as a “contract”. If there are any works that are deemed to be unacceptable from a fluffy canon perspective and all means of negotiation are reasonably exhausted, it would be appropriate for the creator to find alternate platforms to publish their creations.

This isn’t really a foreign concept as there are artists who post their non-fluffy works on other creative platforms to audiences that are arguably wider that what we have on the FC site.

8 Likes

Your reasoning ought to be based on the personal autonomy and authority of the individual artist or author to create what they desire, not historical precedents set by past creators. Like I’ve told you often, no one artist, no matter how popular, has any more authority on the subject of “correct” fluffies than any other, no matter how obscure.
Continuing to name drop artists and lean on their work as a form of legitimacy is not only lazy, but also insinuates that those authors have more validity as creators than small time artists and authors, which is simply untrue.

7 Likes

I personally never read the PETA break in.
( And probably won’t either)

But i do prefer the idea of unfinished fluffies.
Fluffies can be whiny, entitled, bratty, uncooperative, unpleasant, jealous, loud, and obnoxious.
The equivalent of a bratty spoiled six year old on a sugar rush.

They can also be much much worse then that, from violent to unrepentant rapists.

All that makes for interesting characters and much more interesting stories.
But as a product, as a toy, which they started out as all that is nothing more then lawsuits waiting to happen.
And all those traits would have been removed.
Because no child would want a fluffy like that ( or be given a fluffy like that by parents )
Especially not for the high prices they started out as.

To me the PETA break in and the release of unfinished fluffies is just an easy short cut to explain why they are the way they are.
Because I can’t imagine a company would release them like that.

It also explains why there are so many different versions with different personalities and temperaments as well why fluffies have been devalued so much.
Going from 15k for a single one to 2 bux or less because of rampant breeding by feral fluffies.

TLDR : unfinished fluffies just make it easier to explain their flaws.

10 Likes

I feel it becomes a question of whether fluffies are a toy or an animal. And there’s no easy answer for that, as different people have different ideas regarding fluffies. Flawed as they may, some people have depicted fluffies existing as rather adequate or even loveable pets. And as pets, of course you’d forgive them for their flaws, the way we would with cats and dogs. That alone falls into the question of “should fluffies be perfected”, as one would argue that pets are fine “the way theya re”. And if we consider fluffies to “bio-engineered pets” as opposed to “toys”, then of course it’d make sense if they had the kind of flaws pets have - who hasn’t hear the stories of mad and violent cats and dogs?

2 Likes

That’s why i prefer the unfinished explanation
The flaws can be handwaved away by claiming they were unfinished

i generally consider them to be a unfinished bio engineered toy that were released in to the wild and became a scourge due to their rapid breeding

and oiff course fluffies can be great pets depending on the story and artist ( i have hugboxing tendencies as well )
but there are also a lot of fluffies with numerous flaws that cant be overlooked
Their whiny entitlement.
Their lack of bowel control.
The propensity for feral stallion to become ( baby) rapists.
The high pitched screeching.
All of that and more, just doesn’t gell with what would have amounted to a living Furby pushed out by a company, for a premium pricetag.

So to me Fluffies started out and imperfect unfinished biotoys.
Were released in to the wild.
Became a scourge and an invasive species.
Before eventually several decades later people learned to live with them and accept them as a new kind of ( wholly artificial) species of animal

And to others they are just talking little rat horsies that need to be eradicated.

But that’s how my own head canon is shaping up.

4 Likes

But the thing is, all these things you are mentioning, and while they may be in hivecanon, aren’t depicted by every artist. That’s the point I’m trying to make. Yes, I do agree that fluffies as an unfinished product worked for a setting where they are depicted as such. But one cannot assume that a hugbox picture by, say, Coalheart or Carpdime has this type of fluffy. Its why I keep saying my catchphrase - not all people draw “unfinished” fluffies, if that makes sense.

2 Likes

Oh i know.
I’m just explaining my own take on it
I like the hive canon idea up to a degree, but I wil always march to my own beat.

But I also like interlocking my own stuff with that of others or what has come before.
Probably because I’m a comics reader.

The fluffy diversity is both the strength and weakness of them
A fluffy can be almost anything we want.
But we the fandom wlil never agree on anything much really.
Not even the definition of a fluffy.

Its best to see everything as its own micro continuity with several core tenets we can’t deviate from:
A fluffy is a creature created by Hasbio.
They are supposed to be little horsies.
They have lots of fluff.
Highpitched voices.
A ( mostly) childish demeanor.
Speak in fluffspeak.
Like to play with toys and run and play.
Have a thing for sketties.
Breed like rats.

And those in my opinion are what the core of fluffies are.
Anything else is added by the creator in question.

Am I waffling on ?

4 Likes

Here’s the problem with the use of “hivecanon”


There, that’s the problem

4 Likes

Honestly, for me, I’m just too ambivalent about certain canons or headcanons to depict them. Maybe the Fall of Cleveland did happen, or it’s some vague urban legend, or Cleveland doesn’t exist. Maybe some fluffies do mate with newborns instead of someone their own age, or there’s fluffy kibble factories where the food’s made of 100% real fluffy meat. Maybe fluffies are finished, or unfinished, or a freak accident caused by someone trying to summon a demon.

All that stuff’s off-screen or ancient history as far as I care, so unless I decide it’d be funny to draw someone finding a pile of fur in their food or a cultist accidentally opening a portal to Fluffyville, Tennessee, it just won’t come up. Whatever backstory you have applies!

3 Likes

And the thing about flaws is, they can be fixed. Hell, that’s an entire subplot in my headcanon. A certain group of people working to resolve the many flaws of fluffykind.

I see hivecanon as being the foundation of a headcanon. And everyone can build something different on that foundation. I started out with the basics: Hasbio, PETA, Murdoch, et cetera. And look at my headcanon now.

2 Likes

Old man Jberg360 here with some old timey grumbles.
One of the reasons I moved away from fluffies years ago (aside from personal reasons) was that the fandom shifted from “innocents survive in a cruel world” to what I now see called “Hellgremlins” In that time a lot of the “canon” lore never changed. The fall of Cleveland was a good story but influenced daily posting and art very little. Same with PETA.

The fluffy fandom started as a corruption of the mlp overly positive world view and the lore was based on the explosion of mlp merch and fandom. It made sense that Hasbio/Hasbro would be the company to take things to the next level. A passing joke was that PETA let them go not for an explanation of them being incomplete but as an explanation as to why they could breed in the wild. Because Hasbio would have sold them as neutered creatures under their complete control. If PETA hadn’t released the breeding stock we wouldn’t have the feral population.

Now people came up with a lot of story ideas around that early release and some of it was good enough to keep. Personally, I like to think Hasbio didn’t think fluffies could even live on their own as they created them to be dependent on their own name brand fluffy food (that looked like sketties). Without a proprietary enzyme in the food the digestive tract couldn’t absorb nutrients. Of course they did survive but they have constant shits because they aren’t getting that enzyme and it messes with their bowels.

Now that last paragraph was my personal canon, and as far as I know not shared with anyone. But I keep it in the back of my head when I create fluffy stuff but it honestly hasn’t come up as an interesting plot point in any story so I don’t mention it. The same can be true for fluffies being a complete/incomplete product or if they actually came from Hasbio. It hasn’t been something important to my stories so I don’t write about it.

And that is sort of the point. A person doesn’t need to acknowledge that the PETA break in happened of that they are even a product of Hasbio unless they need a reason for fluffies to exist to tell their story. I couldn’t tell you how many people have old lore as canon since people don’t typically say, but I suspect that for the first year, most people post something they find interesting and learn a little from comments that let them seek out different stories and discover the older lore. They might build on it or reject it.

Long story short. You do you, create something you like and if others like it they might run with your ideas and the canon and lore may change over time. Good or bad.

6 Likes

I actually rather like that idea .

6 Likes

I believe I stole it from the Jurassic Park Novel.

6 Likes

I think thats the best approach.
Use the basics and then add your own concepts.

Thats alright.
We all steal ^^

But I like it as a reasonable explanation why fluffies are walking shitmachines

Like i got a whole back story for kitsune fluffies ( my fluffy poison of choice)

4 Likes

My take is simple. A more realistic view of fluffies, or at least I strive to portray them as such.

I read Cleveland. I read the PETA breakout.

I deeply disliked the first one. Too many moving pieces, too much meddling with the occult, arcane and with people being dumber than fluffies to actually ignore the writing on the wall.
People going ham on fluffies because they believe the frickin’ flawed things blew up a city willingly/nobody cares about who should have been in charge of the maintenance?
It’s not for me. But not because of the unrealistic standards. I like most of NobodyAtAll’s works and those are almost shonen-mixed-with-DC-comic level of crazy atimes. But because of how they are inserted in an otherwise regular world or how much they ignore logic only when it comes to be stacked against fluffies. Regardless, I know many people loved it and all that the spinoffs it spawned, but it just ain’t my cup of tea.

The PETA raids I adopted in my own canon, but gave them little importance. It happened, fluffies were scattered and against all odds managed to survive through trial and error or simply dumb luck. I like to think they are a human-animal dna mix 'n match. Hence them talking, reasoning, dreaming and having personalities. Sure, like eels, who know how to get to the ocean despite never seeing it, most fluffies retain base instincts (my own take on the programming thing. Programming is for computers, not flesh and blood creatures who have bodily functions in my book.) like the love for spaghetti, hugs, love, innately trust humans, etc.

But I always saw them being “retarded” as them being extremely naive, until life (or people) hit them in the nuts. Then there can be character development, something the basic “fluffy poneh drowns” lacks for my enjoyment.

Then the whole “biotoy/soap” thing goes out the window. Scientific definition is the way, I have no need for a random dystopian element in an otherwise regular world. Plus, that trope merely allows people to abuse fluffies in plain sight. But if an animal abuser wants to have fun, they still get it, but not so easily. Which means I have to come up with motives and ways for them to achieve their own goals and I think most people who use that trope either do that for extra “sad points for the poor fluffies” or to avoid having to write a character having people around them.

Tl; dr, sorry for the wall of text. In short I wholeheartedly agree with @Oculusfluffy.

Of course, fluffies should still be easily recognizable as such. I personally dislike Puffygriffins, Cannibal Fluffies and Fuzzies, but I live the bowlfluffies, micros and seafluffies. To each their own, I guess.

3 Likes

I see you are a man who values self expression above conformity now get off your lazy mod ass and prove you mean what you say and return my post Muh head cannon ripoffMcgee - #30 by jberg360 back to image self posting

2 Likes

I don’t know if I’d go that far.

1 Like

I would , and oculus claims to so I will appeal to a like minded mode

1 Like

download (6)

2 Likes