"What Measure is a Non-Mammal?"

Art first. Click for big:

Some time ago, I brought up the Onion AV Club's interview with David Petersen (Mouse Guard, which I am currently reading and is terrific). In it, he explains that he had written a sweet short story for his wife for their first Valentine's Day together. (This is where you either go "Aww" or "Barf". Or both.) The publishing company decided it would make a terrific children's picture book. All Petersen would have to do is change the whole damn thing.

Executive Meddling, and the various tales of woe associated with such, is a ripe subject for at least a month's worth of blog entries. But what stuck in my craw was the following, almost throw-away line:

"We eventually determined that they'd (the couple in the story) both be rabbits. I was originally going to do both as cardinals, but they said no, we really need something cute and fuzzy. Children don't relate to birds as well." (Emphasis mine.)

Well, readers (both of you), it's Survey Time! How many of you had any problems whatsoever relating to non-mammal animal characters?

Because, and this is just off the top of my head, the publishing company's line of thinking completely discounts things like "The Land Before Time", "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles" (they had a Token Human Friend, but still), "Finding Nemo", "A Bug's Life", "Happy Feet" (love it or leave it), Donald Duck, Daffy Duck, Tweety, Woody Woodpecker, Heckle and Jeckle, ad infinitum.

I wonder if these are the same people who decided we wouldn't enjoy Disney's "Dinosaur" unless it had some primates for us to relate to...

Feederwatch Wednesday!!!

I'm doing this early to remind everyone that this upcoming weekend is the Great Backyard Bird Count. Participation is considerably easier than Project Feederwatch. This is the first time I'll be participating after forgetting to do so for so long. Good luck, everyone!