I was watching “Rocky & Bullwinkle” and I was looking at the crude drawings and noting how that works for the series and that fact that Bullwinkle still is identifable as a moose and Rocky as a squirrel.
But I got to thinking what other cartoons have been, through the years, where you have looked at the cartoon character and said “What animal is that supposed to be.”
To me Arthur of the show “Arthur” looks nothing like an aardvark. Someone explained to me in the original books he looked like one but that later on changed.
I remember once when I worked in Florida, someone asked me “What is Goofy? A cow?” I remember thinking “A COW???”
I can see where there would be confusion. Compare Goofy to Clarabelle or, for that matter, Horace. There are a lot of simularities between what are supposedly three different species.
My mom likes to point out that Sonic doesn’t look the least bit like a hedgehog. I know she’s right but I can’t help feeling that she’s missing the point.
Actually, I kind of got straight in my head when I read “Wicked.” In Oz, it seems, there are animals and Animals. The capitalized version are sentient and can communicate. So I figure Pluto is a dog and Goofy is a Dog.
I remember a comedy bit where the guy says, “I asked a friend, ‘How come Goofy owns a dog named Pluto when Goofy is a dog?’ and he said, ‘Dude, Goofy isn’t a dog, he’s a COW!’, and I’m like ‘Wow! That makes so much more sense!’”
Mickey wouldn’t be recognizable, either, if he weren’t so ingrained into our consciousness. Seriously, no animal has ears like that.
Even more than Goofy, though, I’m going to have to nominate Taz, who looks nothing at all like a real Tasmanian devil. My understanding is that they designed the character first, and then went looking for an exotic real-world animal that eats rabbits.
