This article focuses on designing the lives of sentient creatures.
Where and how creatures live is largely a function of what they eat. Humans, being omnivores, are able to live in a variety of regions, on diverse diets. For most of the history of our species (apologies to any others in the audience), humans were primarily hunters and gatherers, wandering the land in search of their next meal. The developments of agriculture and animal husbandry (no, that is not connected to bestiality, at least not inextricably) forever changed how humans interact with their environment. It was this change that made it possible for humans to stay in one place and proliferate.
It is not necessary for creatures to follow the same pattern as humans have. After all, there are a seemingly infinite number of methods creatures use to survive in the real world. However, these creatures are all connected to, what is these days referred to as, the food web (yes, we have complicated the idea of the food chain). Most numerous in this web are the Producers (plants and algae) who essentially convert chemicals and sunlight into an energy source available for the consumption of others. A significant amount of total energy is lost between the layers (indigestible bits and energy use for things other than reproduction). Consequently, the total biomass decreases significantly as you ascend the layers. Dependance on natural balance of the food web, as a top predator, is a significant limitation on population.
http://www.tutorvista.com/content/biology/biology-iv/ecosystem/food-web.php
The important idea to recognize here is that the system is self-regulating (which is why extinction and non-native species are such big concerns in the modern day). In a simple example: maybe a rainy year increases the number of terrestrial and salt marsh plants. Insect multiply rapidly because of an increase in habitat and food supply and in turn fill the rats' tummies (and inspire large litters in response). This goes up the web. When the snake population will explode proportionately as a result. If the rat population begins to decrease (because of less insects in a dry season, or too many snakes) the snake population will as well. Top predators serve to cap this system, but are subject to all of the conditions that govern those "below" them. Therefore, every group requires the development of agriculture or animal husbandry to stably increase population (without moving into a new environment).
Large carnivores require large territories to feed their family groups. A pride of lions will cover somewhere in the neighborhood of 100 square miles (http://animals.nationalgeographic.com/animals/mammals/african-lion/). A male black bear may cover 200 square miles (http://www.black-bears.org/). The smallest recorded area of a gray wolf pack is 25 square kilometers (thanks wikipedia). The point is, that if you want to create a group of goblins living up in the hills, they either tend some animals (humans are a reasonable food supply) or they spend a lot of time walking (as everyone knows, goblins only have pointy teeth, which is highly suggestive of a carnivorous diet). It's also probably a pretty dang small group.
While writing and rewriting all of this, I recognize that most of my fixation on this topic connects to the idea that these other civilizations have to be in direct competition with humans (sharing the same environmental niche). Traditional orcs, goblins, lizard-men, and so on could not exist in large enough numbers to compete with humans without learning about how to grow things and raise animals. It seems that if we want to include creatures like these as competitive cultures, they must be more advanced than we traditionally view them as being. However, this does not preclude beings from filling other niches.
Large populations of sentient herbivores (of any size) could exist without this restriction. Perhaps creatures in the midst of the food chain would be more philosophical about their place in the world (like those green guys from "The Dark Crystal"). These creatures could migrate or tend their own crops if they liked and band together to protect against predators (like herds do now). After all, vegetarian does not mean pacifist.
Similarly, creatures of a smaller size might rise create a culture as a secondary or tertiary consumer. They would have to be of smaller size, because they would otherwise be higher level consumers. The creatures of Brian Jacques' world certainly fit the bill here. Sprites and fairies might also fit in this role (though perhaps too flighty to tend to plants or animals). Again, the place they hold in the food chain would certainly impact their POV. While they probably would have trouble competing with humans for ascendancy in the world (agriculture is tough with owls around), they could certainly make for some fine adventures.
Goodness, this has all taken much longer than I anticipated and accomplished less than I'd hoped. I suppose in general we've covered the idea that for a carnivorous creature culture to threaten humanity as a whole, they need to be raising animals and/or planting crops. Maybe I've even gotten you to think a little outside the traditional fantasy box. I know I'm going to be introducing some thoughtful herbivores to my world.
No comments:
Post a Comment