# Re-inventing the Harpy and the Unicorn



## Mindfire (Jul 9, 2012)

I notice that "harpies" are often depicted as these vaguely sexualized bird-women supposedly inspired by Greek myth.







I'm throwing all that out the window for my design. I'm thinking more along the lines of a Man-Bat looking creature, but with huge owl-like eyes. For those of you who've never heard of Man-Bat:






I'm also thinking of giving it the power to spellbind people either with a shrieking cry (to pay homage to the siren myth as well) or with its breath, or both. The end result would be the same: the victim sees an alluring vision, and then experiences a brief moment of clarity before he is devoured alive.

I'm also entertaining the idea of allowing them to vampirize/zombify/mindslave their victims and keep them alive as lackeys or merely as a method of food storage. Naturally they will be nocturnal.

I'm looking for some suggestions on fleshing out the idea. Does anyone think this is departing too far from the myth for them to retain the name "harpies"? If so, what would be a better name? (I will not accept "vampires" as a suggestion. lol)


As for the unicorn, I'm not exactly sure how its image has changed from this:







to this:







But I want to reverse that. I'm thinking of including the unicorn in my book as a kind of cryptid or rare creature that was once plentiful, but has now faded into folklore. People might also report sightings of it in the desert, like bigfoot. I'm thinking of tying it into my mythos by having it be the legendary ancestor of the Madrigan horses used by my desert-dwelling clans. There might be a small handful left out there in the world somewhere. I'm not sure. The problem is that I want to avoid the current pastel-pink-sparkly-rainbows connotation that the word "unicorn" has acquired. My creature is _not_ a purveyor of cuteness. Thus I'm thinking of calling it a "monoceros" instead. Thoughts?


----------



## Devor (Jul 9, 2012)

I would keep unicorn, but use the word scarcely and give it plenty of introduction before the word comes up.  Rabbits, smeerp, and all that.


----------



## Mindfire (Jul 9, 2012)

Devor said:


> I would keep unicorn, but use the word scarcely and give it plenty of introduction before the word comes up.  Rabbits, smeerp, and all that.



Couldn't calling a rabbit a smeerp be justified if "rabbit" has embarrassing connotations we don't want associated with the "smeerp"? I have this haunting fear that the mere word "unicorn" will elicit ridicule instantaneously.


----------



## Devor (Jul 9, 2012)

Mindfire said:


> I have this haunting fear that the mere word "unicorn" will elicit ridicule instantaneously.



I don't think so.  Maybe if you just said "Oh, it's a unicorn."  But start the description a little, and suspension of disbelief will sink in.

I'd be much more concerned about a strange word breaking disbelief than I would about unicorn doing so, but of course, it's possible to pull that off, too.  It's just, how many strange words are you using?  Normally there's quite a few, so scaling back where you can is usually a good idea.


----------



## Saigonnus (Jul 9, 2012)

Change a few aspects... maybe a flame colored mane, tail and fetlocks... glowing red eyes. Larger or smaller in size perhaps (like a deer perhaps) and add a second, smaller horn beneath the longer one... give it a "decorated" hide (spots/stripes etc) that way you can paint them into the story and call them what you want... Bicornoceros


----------



## RedMorningSky (Jul 9, 2012)

I think if you want to portray the unicorns as a force to be reckoned with then you can still call it a unicorn but just make sure the description and the creatures actions defy peoples' beliefs about what a unicorn is. I'll believe that the unicorn is badass when it takes the horn and stabs the dragon in the chest. As long as you show that it's not the creature that are stereotypically for children then I think you'll be fine and the readers will believe it.


----------



## dyga19 (Jul 10, 2012)

I love your take on harpies; yes, it's a departure from the myth, but its a unique and, to me, interesting way of portraying them. As for unicorns, you could call them Uniquos, derived from "uni-" and the latin word for horse/steed, "equos". You could also consider adding different physiological features; I'd recommend looking at different cultural variations of similar myths, such as the kirin/kilin, and see what you can apply to your design. I have to say, I do like the idea of a deer-like body as well. 

Here are some wikipedia pages on creatures similar to unicorns:

Qilin
Shadhavar
Sin-you
Camahueto
Indrik
Monocerus

Hope this helped!


----------



## Mindfire (Jul 10, 2012)

dyga19 said:


> I love your take on harpies; yes, it's a departure from the myth, but its a unique and, to me, interesting way of portraying them. As for unicorns, you could call them Uniquos, derived from "uni-" and the latin word for horse/steed, "equos". You could also consider adding different physiological features; I'd recommend looking at different cultural variations of similar myths, such as the kirin/kilin, and see what you can apply to your design. I have to say, I do like the idea of a deer-like body as well.
> 
> Here are some wikipedia pages on creatures similar to unicorns:
> 
> ...



Thanks dyga! I've already turned the qilin into a cheshire cat-jaguar beast. But the others look promising. I'll take a closer look.


----------



## Mindfire (Jul 10, 2012)

Whatever that is seems not to exist.


----------



## ScipioSmith (Jul 12, 2012)

RedMorningSky said:


> I think if you want to portray the unicorns as a force to be reckoned with then you can still call it a unicorn but just make sure the description and the creatures actions defy peoples' beliefs about what a unicorn is. I'll believe that the unicorn is badass when it takes the horn and stabs the dragon in the chest. As long as you show that it's not the creature that are stereotypically for children then I think you'll be fine and the readers will believe it.



I always have trouble imagining how the unicorn would get the body off its horn again. 

Anyway, it isn't the looks that make a thing badass, but what it can actually do. I'll beleive a unicorn is badass when it raises the sun, and if it has pink hair while it does it then so be it.


----------



## Ireth (Jul 12, 2012)

ScipioSmith said:


> Anyway, it isn't the looks that make a thing badass, but what it can actually do. I'll beleive a unicorn is badass when it raises the sun, and if it has pink hair while it does it then so be it.



Allow me to point you in the direction of Princess Celestia from My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic. XDDD


----------



## Kit (Jul 12, 2012)

Oh, man, it's a low blow when she invokes My Little Pony!  


Pssst, Ireth- I blush to confess that I still have a boxful of them in a closet somewhere.... and the "stable" carrying case... okay, I have now just blown every trace of credibility I might have had on this forum.....


----------



## Loupgarou (Jul 13, 2012)

Celestia is indeed a bad-ass, but i go to a different forum for discussion of that.
For non-animated unicorns, i still think you can call them Unicorns. Really my first thought of a unicorn as a kid was of the kind that was bound to a virgin maiden and protected her, though that may just have been because of a book about monsters i had. A large horse with a horn is intimidating if you write it that way.

On Harpies, i think their feminine nature is very integral. Beyond that, you can do anything. As monstrous or as human-like as you want. In 'the last unicorn (fittingly)', the harpy looks like a giant vulture with multiple breasts, but isn't sexy at all and doesn't even have a human face. It works well as the almost deity-like figure it is in that movie.

And remember, even if they're obviously female and even very human they can still be terrifying if they have combat prowess.


----------



## Mindfire (Jul 13, 2012)

I suppose a mention of My Little Pony was inevitable, but I still don't like it. -_- My Little Pony is part of the reason I have to redesign my unicorn in the first place. It's also the reason that it will most certainly not be white. I'll make it black perhaps, or maybe brown to be more original.


----------



## Mindfire (Jul 13, 2012)

Loupgarou said:


> On Harpies, i think their feminine nature is very integral.



I don't see why this should be the case. The whole point of their hypnotic power was to serve as a replacement for the femininity. Also to put in a reference to the sirens, which supposedly looked similar to harpies. Besides, if all harpies are female, how will they reproduce?


----------



## SeverinR (Jul 13, 2012)

Mindfire said:


> I don't see why this should be the case. The whole point of their hypnotic power was to serve as a replacement for the femininity. Also to put in a reference to the sirens, which supposedly looked similar to harpies. Besides, if all harpies are female, how will they reproduce?



reproduction: Maybe harpies use men like a black widow? They service the man, then dine on them?
Mythological beasts frequently are humans twisted by the gods as a punishment. The harpy is a woman with the desire to mate and then feast on the remains of the conquest.  And you don't have yet another evil creation killing the poor fair maidens.


----------



## Mindfire (Jul 13, 2012)

SeverinR said:


> reproduction: Maybe harpies use men like a black widow? They service the man, then dine on them?
> Mythological beasts frequently are humans twisted by the gods as a punishment. The harpy is a woman with the desire to mate and then feast on the remains of the conquest.  And you don't have yet another evil creation killing the poor fair maidens.



I actually pictured them being more like beasts than "monsters" per ce, so using human males to reproduce is kind of impossible. They also don't go out of their way to terrorize humans, but if there's a ready source of humans nearby they'll go for it. Human senses are less acute than a deer's and they don't pose as great a physical threat as a mountain bear or an ursine would.

Also, I think they'll live in small colonies of perhaps 4-10 individuals, in a cave system that is secluded, but still near a source of food. As for social structure, I'm not sure whether I'm going to model them on ants and bees, with a queen served by workers and drones, or if I'm going to model them on wolves, with an alpha pair as head of a pack or close-knit family group.


----------



## ScipioSmith (Jul 13, 2012)

Ireth said:


> Allow me to point you in the direction of Princess Celestia from My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic. XDDD



Yes, she is the main reason that Winged Unicorns are now an official mascot of the Empire.


----------



## Loupgarou (Jul 17, 2012)

Well it seems like you have a pretty good idea of what you want already. Personally, a harpy without any feminine element at all is just a bird monster. And bird monster is fine, i just wouldn't call that a harpy. And yea, there is the whole repoduction thing, you could make it asexual or predatory but you could also just have the females be the hunters and therefore the ones most often seen. 
Maybe there's a bird monster, and the females are called harpies and the males something else? I dunno.


----------

