Daemons v muses

I have long had a problem with the concept of a muse. Muses are traditionally very pretty young women who inspire. Striking interesting poses in very pretty Grecian robes. Flopping down and sighing a lot. And I have always thought more suited to men.
However, as I have been reading Kipling Sahib, I see that Kipling spoke of his inspiration not as a muse but a private Daemon who came and sat on his shoulder as he wrote.
I thought it interesting as of course Phillip Pullman wrote His Dark Materials long after Kipling.
But I can also understand what he meant. there are times when the words flow -- no reason -- but they flow from my fingers. And I can read them back and think -- yes, this is what I meant to say. Other times, my writing is like day old porridge with lumps in it. It just happens. And I know that if I keep showing up and writing, the inspiration will strike again. It does come from somewhere deep within me, but I do not want to examine it too closely.
Daemon is a variation on demon, but in some ways is more sorted to me as a writer than the languid muse. Demons are mischievous. Daemons tantalize. Daemons can take different shapes depending on their mood. They are not just languid young women -- although could be on occasion. Daemons can come in on cat's paws, or lumbering like a bear. They can be young or old. It depends on the daemon's mood. A muse's form to my mind remains steady and unchanging.
Daemons are not sitting around, waiting, or spouting poetry about God's daisy chains. Daemons are active. Daemons are liable to pounce at odd unexpected moments, whisper a few words and then depart laughing. Daemons like to be put to use. Daemons do not worry about dust balls. Somehow, I always get the impression that a muse wants the room to be tidy so her frock won't get dirty. Daemons don't care.
In short, I think my muse is daemon. Now all I have to do is consider its form.
So do you have a muse or a daemon? And if a daemon, does it have a form it prefers or does it keep changing shape?