PDA

View Full Version : Loss of Redwall lore?



Martin the Warrior
January 27th, 2003, 06:57 PM
Through the years, Brian has been slowly but surely ticking off one thing after the other-- stories fans often clamored (you could say demanded) for-- Martin's past in Martin the Warrior, the story of Sunflash in Outcast of Redwall, Luke's final voyage in The Legend of Luke, the story of the famous "first" Badger Lord in Lord Brocktree, and now the story of Redwall's predecessor in Loamhedge. Not only that, minor issues-- such as the placing of Martin's sword on the weathervane, the construction of Redwall Abbey, the Joseph Bell's origin, how Redwall began its tapestry, St. Ninian's founding, and so forth-- have also been explained.

Is this a good thing? Does the telling of these tales damage Redwall, in a certain sense, by destroying its sense of history? By removing the unknown? Does assigning absolutes to these adventures that, previously, existed only in the minds of readers negatively affect the series in any way? Are we losing the lore of Redwall by having everything explained?

Discuss.

Jade the Warrior
January 27th, 2003, 08:15 PM
I don't think so. It helps us understand things better and in some cases, allows us to enjoy the characters a bit more (Martin), or enjoy characters we wouldn't have known otherwise (Rose).

Besides, some mysteries haven't been uncovered yet, there are still many gray characters we don't know the history about. Mask, Verdauga Greeneyes, and maybe Ramsca come to mind.

~Jade, who will have to think a little about this before continuing...

Darkhood_343
January 27th, 2003, 08:59 PM
Nah, I don't think it ruins it, but it would be kewl to sit there and imagine some stuff, like badger lord stuff. I'm interested in Badgers mostly so I thought it was kewl that they included Brocktree. It would also be kewl to wonder and make up what you think it would be like.

LadyBeelze
January 28th, 2003, 09:06 PM
Not really, when i'm reading how it happened i say "Oh so thats how it got there" or something like that. But in another sence leaving things unexplained makes the imagination wander thinking up own versions of how. Meh it doesn't matter either way

VanessaNB
January 29th, 2003, 04:57 PM
Not really. I remember some mouse or another saying that there was a lot they didn't know about the abbey, and that's probably true.
We know the histories of a lot of things, in more detail, yet they still seem mysterious...
Whoooo

Treerose
January 29th, 2003, 05:23 PM
Originally posted by Martin the Warrior
Are we losing the lore of Redwall by having everything explained?

Chalk up one more for the "no, we're not" opinion. ;) Having all the backstories written up only further fleshes out the already 3D world of Redwall - it's so great that those like Brocktree and Luke aren't just names on a page anymore, but have real tales of their own. I'd take BJ's imagination of Redwall lore over my own any day, so I'd never think that he's destroying its sense of history by writing tales only hinted at previously. The more BJ yarns, the better, I say. :)

Tree

~~~~

"I remember being handed a score composed by Mozart at the age of eleven. What could I say? I felt like de Kooning, who was asked to comment on a certain abstract painting, and answered in the negative. He was then told it was the work of a celebrated monkey. 'That's different. For a monkey, it's terrific.'"

~Igor Stravinsky~

Slagar the Cruel
January 29th, 2003, 10:14 PM
Not at all. As Tree said, it fleshes out the world of Redwall. Finally reading about the great legendary characters like Luke and Brocktree is very intriguing, and in any case I like reading (and writing, as a matter of fact) explanations of things of great importance to a story's world that had only been alluded to previously.

One explanation that disappointed me was the description of the Painted Ones as rather ordinary tree-rats. In my opinion it completely stripped them of their mystery and menace. But that's not quite the type of revelation you're talking about, is it?

Lord Brocktree's tale only disappointed me slightly by it's striking similarilty to later books. The other "pre-Redwall books" (Mossflower, the 2nd book of LoL, and MTW to an extent) really seemed like another historical period to me, for whatever reasons. (I could probably list some if I racked my brain hard enough.) It did portray a historical period before mice had become a major part of things (most of them were probably living in tribes up north at that point), which I found interesting.


(As a side-note, I like your Igor Stravinsky quote, Tree. Neat guy, that Stravinsky. :cool: )

Martin the Warrior
January 30th, 2003, 12:19 AM
Okay, let's approach this from a different angle, then: Should everything be explained? Should anything be left vague and up to the reader?

Treerose
January 30th, 2003, 09:25 AM
(As a side-note, I like your Igor Stravinsky quote, Tree. Neat guy, that Stravinsky. )

<G> Very neat guy. When I get around to reading his autobiography one of these days, I'll have tons more good quotes to use, other than just the ones floating around on the web.


Should everything be explained? Should anything be left vague and up to the reader?

No, and no. ;) Why should anything be left unstated? Like C Tolkien said somewhere (only thing of his I really like <g>), the Silmarillion was intended to give the readers who were only able to glimpse the far horizon of Tolkien's world in LotR a chance to explore it firsthand. Same thing here - why on earth would I be against an opportunity to travel the far reaches of BJ's world? If I see some pretty forests or hills or whatever, I'd like to go there, not hang back and say, "It's better to imagine what they're really like up close." I said it before... it'd be a sad day when I'd take my own imagination of what happens in Redwall over the master bard's. ;)

Tree

~~~~

"One has a nose. The nose scents and it chooses. An artist is simply a kind of pig snouting truffles."

~Igor Stravinsky~

Interesting... Berlioz said something about pigs and truffles, too:

"When I see what certain people mean by love and what they look for in the creations of art, I am reminded involuntarily of pigs snuffling and rootling in the earth with their great coarse snouts at the foot of mighty oaks and among the loveliest flowers, in search of their favorite truffles."

Martin the Warrior
January 31st, 2003, 01:33 AM
Tree, I'm obligated to point out that answering "no" to both is a contradiction. ;)

"Should everything be explained?" becomes "No, everything shouldn't be explained."

"Should anything be left vague and up to the reader?" becomes "No, nothing should be left vague and up to the reader, he should explain it."

Let's further clarify, however-- should Brian ever write about Stonepaw and the previous Badger Lords? Lord Brocktree got away with no mention of Redwall because, in a certain sense, he was the first Badger Lord (to forge Salamandastron into a fighting army, of course), and his adventure took place in the same general "age" as Mossflower-- but, if he stretches back any farther, in a time when Redwall isn't even a stray thought in Germaine's head, when the age in which Redwall is built isn't even close-- has he gone to far? Can it even be called a "Redwall" book?

Should he document the first time a Badger or a Hare ever came to Salamandastron? Show a time when it was a volcano?

Should he explain how it is Martin is able to communicate to others? Say, an explanation akin to "the Force" becoming "midi-chlorians"?

And keep in mind that no one is saying if Brian has a story to tell that he shouldn't write it. This is a fan discussion which means you get to be selfish and say exactly what you feel. If it were up to you, should he ever write about these things?

I'm offering no opinion on these items, simply trying to foster a discussion. ;)

Treerose
January 31st, 2003, 02:18 PM
Tree, I'm obligated to point out that answering "no" to both is a contradiction.

No, it isn't. Yes it is. ;) Seriously, I know... I just misread it. <g>


if he stretches back any farther, in a time when Redwall isn't even a stray thought in Germaine's head, when the age in which Redwall is built isn't even close-- has he gone to far? Can it even be called a "Redwall" book?

Well, do the books of Redwall owe their charm solely to the Abbey itself, or is it the entire world BJ has crafted? For me, it's the latter. Everything BJ has in his books - the land of Mossflower, Southsward, the North, the shores of Salamandastron, the descriptions, the inhabitants, their customs, their food, their music: everything. That's Redwall to me.

::tries a non-music analogy:: ;) It's like the Star Wars universe without the New Republic, or Lord of the Rings without hobbits. (Heh, for all most of the inhabitants of Middle-Earth knew, the world was without hobbits. <g>) Sure, they'd be missing a vital part of their histories, and there might not be too much else to relate, but it's still SW and LotR. Just with big chunks missing to us, because we're used to relating to those worlds through things like the New Rep and furry-footed halflings. ;) Same thing with Redwall. I'm not saying Redwall's not important...that's how we've come to the books, after all. I just don't think that such a concept is going too far, or that his Redwall books are only Redwall books if they've got the abbey in it.


Should he document the first time a Badger or a Hare ever came to Salamandastron? Show a time when it was a volcano?

Both of those scenarios would be great, I think. I can see it now... ;)

"Salamandastron was young, the mountains green,
No stain yet on the moon was seen,
No words were laid on stream or stone,
When [name first badger lord] woke and walked alone..."



Should he explain how it is Martin is able to communicate to others? Say, an explanation akin to "the Force" becoming "midi-chlorians"?

That would be very interesting, too, and I'm sure his explanation wouldn't be as much of a let down as the midi-chlorians of the Force were. ;)

Anyway...there's my humble little opinion. I'm curious to see what others think - maybe we could get a good discussion going.

Tree

~~~~

"(Prokofiev) played on a level with the keyboard, with an extraordinary sureness of wrist, a marvellous staccato. He rarely attacked from on high; he wasn't at all the sort of pianist who throws himself from the fifth floor to produce the sound. He had a nervous power like steel, so that on a level with the keys he was capable of producing sonority of fantastic strength and intensity, and in addition, the tempo never, never varied."

~Francis Poulenc~

Great description. Wish a few more pianists would follow that. I see too many fifth-floorers. <G>

MoonShadow
January 31st, 2003, 06:01 PM
Just to say, I loved every one of those books. ;)
Personally, I don't at all mind him writing about such things, as long as its a good yarn. Sure, not everything in Redwall can be answered, as we would have about... a thousand... maybe more... books published in order to satisfy "everything", but then, those new books will always bring more to wonder about.... I'm glad that Brian Jacques wrote Martin the Warrior. The series would be seriously have a great, empty hole in its history.... We need some books of those books, just to fill in the empty spaces our imaginations just can't fill in.

As for Lord Brocktree not being a Redwall book, it still takes place in the Redwall universe, and that's good enough for me.

Treerose
January 31st, 2003, 06:29 PM
Originally posted by MoonShadow
Sure, not everything in Redwall can be answered, as we would have about... a thousand... maybe more... books published in order to satisfy "everything", but then, those new books will always bring more to wonder about....

Good point, MoonShadow. :)

Tree

~~~~

"I was a disagreeable baby."

~Sergei Prokofiev~

Cornflower
February 1st, 2003, 12:33 PM
I don't think it damages the series. We should know the real stories behind Redwall and who else but BJ to tell them. :cornflow:

Matthias of Redwall
February 23rd, 2003, 08:15 PM
Well see here I don't think it destroys the sense of unknown in fact it clears up the mystery for instance about me search for the Sword up on the roof but not knowing how it get up there;) but there is a disadvantage... it acctually mess up the history a bit like one or two mistakes that is not mention in other book.

EX: In Mossflower Timballisto did not die in the war but in Legend of Luke Martin said he died in the war with Tsarmina... (provided you read it carefully;) )

LadyBeelze
February 23rd, 2003, 09:15 PM
Matthias

EX: In Mossflower Timballisto did not die in the war but in Legend of Luke Martin said he died in the war with Tsarmina... (provided you read it carefully )

Hmmm i must of not read The Legend of Luke good enough because i didn't know that...bad me......must reread book ^^

MoonShadow
February 24th, 2003, 06:46 PM
Actually, from what I remember, he grew sick in the following winter and died.

Martin the Warrior
February 27th, 2003, 11:03 PM
Originally posted by MoonShadow
Actually, from what I remember, he grew sick in the following winter and died.

That's how I remember events, but I haven't read TLoL since the summer of '99.

Darkhood_343
February 28th, 2003, 10:34 PM
Martin
That's how I remember events, but I haven't read TLoL since the summer of '99.
I just read it. He did. My friend hates it, in fact, that's where my friend got the insparation for his RP squirell, Sarkin.;)

Furrtil
March 2nd, 2003, 08:11 PM
While I think that some exploration is needed, I have this thing against Loamhedge. Loamhedge and (somewhat) Noonvale are the only places that seem to have a surreal mysterious feeling. Making Loamhedge seem just like an earlier larger Redwall will greatly diminish it's mystical appeal. It's sort of like, if you go to Six Flags every day, it loses the appeal and wonder that it had when you only went once a year or even less than that.

While I think that Legend of Luke was a wonderful story, it was not absolutely necessary. On the other hand, Lord Brocktree was probably needed, to explain the Long Patrol. I believe Mossflower was pretty crucial, as a second book, after all the emphasis on Martin in Redwall.

Once Brian Jacques starts writing books about the first hare, the first mouse, etc., it looks like has run out of creative ideas. I believe when someone runs out of quality ideas, they should stop. Quality over quantity, wot? If he continues writing stories just for his fans, his work will decline, and who would like that? For instance, moles are my favorite character and sometimes I feel they are underplayed. But when I see little Bungo as the champion of Redwall Abbey, I'm going to be a little ticked off.

I don't think Brian Jacques will go that far, but that's where it might go.


*that was long*

Slagar the Cruel
March 5th, 2003, 09:09 PM
I don't think everything should be revealed. But honestly, can you say that's a feasible possibility, especially when BJ seems to be mainly moving forward?

Darkhood_343
March 6th, 2003, 02:33 PM
Slags
But honestly, can you say that's a feasible possibility, especially when BJ seems to be mainly moving forward?
Yes, but Loamhedge is technically moving backward, so we can't be to sure, now can we?

MoonShadow
March 6th, 2003, 07:50 PM
Well, we're moving forwards and backwards, as it takes place both after Triss and before Brocktree. ;)

Darkhood_343
March 7th, 2003, 05:53 PM
Bah. Your right. It's all to confusing.

Sunflash
March 17th, 2003, 10:17 PM
Hmmmmm, I think that it would be good to not have every single mystery explained. But I think BJ could write alot more books without having all the mysteries explained.

Keyla
June 24th, 2003, 12:30 PM
Firstly, just to straighten it out for anyone who has randomly come across this thread and has not been in the ROC for ages, there is no indication whatsoever that "Loamhedge" has any part set when it was still a living and working abbey and I would be surprised if there were, as there is another parallel story.
Coming back to a point earlier in the discussion, I think the comparison with Tolkein doesn't work. The "history" of Redwall and the surrounding land is different from the "history" or Middle Earth; Tolkein created an entire mythical world that develpoed over time and the stories are just like little snatches of history, while Brian is concerned with writing tales, where historical events are conveniences in writing the tales and enrichments of the world. Why does this matter? Well Brian isn't concerned with characters in the past until he writes about them. By writing about a historical character he is doing virtually nothing different from writing a character set in the past who has never been mentioned before; he is writing a new character (notice I didn't say figure; there is a difference) from scratch either way. If he wrote about Bluestripe the Wild for example he would only know the following beforehand: he rules Salamandastron; he somehow has a feature that makes the name "Bluestripe" appropriate; he is wild, possibly due to bloodwrath. Everything else is completely new. However, the difference, and possibly the problem, with writing about a historical figure is that a few features and events are already known, which he has to work around and fit into, possibly limiting the tale he wants to write and causing him to make up the few slip-ups dotted about the series.
I am not, however, against the histories. I think they give variety to the series by having books where Redwall is not at the centre of any of the storylines. I agree the different feel is good. It also means that Brian is not constantly trying to move forward in a linear way, as it would be hard to stop it from being repetertive; a different set up from just Redwall the ancient abbey attacked by vermin stops the series from being a dead end of trying to emulate and repeat the first book. I think by expanding the Redwall universe, or, I should say, our perspective of it, we get a far richer experience. I think perhaps what I am against is Brian's writing being dictated by his fans, wanting to know something about someplace or someone and not letting him have the freedom to write what he feels he wants to. However, I don't think this is really happeningvery much, if at all; it's just a good thing he doesn't like technology or he would always be seeing what fans want on websites and feeling that he has to write for each thing.
As to whether we are loosing the lore, as long as Brian doesn't become too focused on "back tracking" and not develop the series forward I am quite happy; as is already said, it fleshes the series out. As Martin said with badger lords on another thread, a sense of history, and perhaps more importantly, mystery is important and, by explaining everything away, this can be spoiled, but I personally think that this point is by no means close and may never come as new lore is being created with each book.

Mariel StormRider
February 15th, 2004, 02:08 AM
I just wish he wouldn't come up with a totally new cast everytime. I always liked returning characters and book sequels. Lomhedge was okay, but I wished there was at least one returning charater

Martin the Warrior
February 23rd, 2004, 08:37 PM
Triss and Loamhedge were actually the first books in a long time to feature completely new casts. The first since Salamandastron. Every other book had one or two carry-over characters.

Keyla
February 24th, 2004, 01:32 PM
I think I can see what Mariel is getting at. "(The) Taggerung" had Cregga, much to my joy, but it's not quite the same as seeing Mariel and Dandin come back for "The Bellmaker". In "Lord Brocktree" the only character we had previously seen in the flesh was Russano and he was only there to frame the story. Of course you might say Brocktree had been spoken of before, but that is by no means the same thing. Of course "The Legend of Luke" saw the return of the "Mossflower" gang, but "Marlfox" before it only had Cregga returning, if I remember correctly.
Fresh casts have never bothered me either way. Sometimes it has been good to see how characters have settled into the roles they were given at the end of the previous book, such as in "THe Bellmaker" and Mattimeo", but I don't usually have any real compulsion to see the same hero again, even when they have been very well done. Often once they have been developed in one novel Brian can't really go much further with them, at least not in the same vein, without risking being repetetive.

Nora the Rover
February 24th, 2004, 06:10 PM
Sorry about going somewhat off-topic... I noticed something rather unusual; I just recently re-read The Outcast of Redwall. Barlom, the recorder of Redwall Abbey, claims to be Timballisto's grandson, and that "he loved to listen to the stories that his grandfather told of Martin the Warrior, etc." I suppose BJ forgot all about it by the time he wrote The Legend of Luke.

I've been pondering over this for a while, it's sort of a spoiler for those who haven't read Loamhedge, though...

There is a huge time gap between Triss, and Loamhedge. Of course, this can only mean that BJ will be writing a book, or something of the sort, that takes place sometime between both of them. ;) In Loamhedge, it was also mentioned that 'the times of Matthias and Mattimeo were very long ago, and were compared to "the dawn of time"'. This probably means that the gap between Triss, and Loamhedge could be bigger than expected.

It kind of proves the fact that, as BJ writes the books, the history is being made.

Cheek Stag Otter
February 25th, 2004, 04:33 AM
Personnaly I think Brian has gone back far enough in the timeline for me. I'm not all that interested to hear about Luke's father Martin for instance (although I'm sure Brian was hinted we'd be getting a story about him). I feel there are lots of other places and times that need take place after "Mossflower" that need to be investigated (times between Salamandastron and Redwall, Whats happening in Southsward/Noonvale).

I welcome any Redwall book because the ones I've doubted and felt weren't going to be all that good I've been proven wrong about (Martin The Warrior, Marlfox, Legend Of Luke).

We'll just have wait and see what Brian comes up with next I guess.

Martin the Warrior
February 28th, 2004, 09:01 PM
Originally posted by Keyla
I think I can see what Mariel is getting at. "(The) Taggerung" had Cregga, much to my joy, but it's not quite the same as seeing Mariel and Dandin come back for "The Bellmaker".

And Russano. ;)


In "Lord Brocktree" the only character we had previously seen in the flesh was Russano and he was only there to frame the story. Of course you might say Brocktree had been spoken of before, but that is by no means the same thing.

Russano is all we need, though-- of course, there's also Ripfang, depending on where you fall on that particular issue (I found Brian's post-book denials that it wasn't the same character to be rather weak, myself).


Of course "The Legend of Luke" saw the return of the "Mossflower" gang, but "Marlfox" before it only had Cregga returning, if I remember correctly.

Nutwing, the child of Orocca, would also qualify as a returning character-- and I'd wager there were a few babes from TLP that also showed up, though I haven't checked yet (Sloey, perhaps?). Establishing it as the time period immediately following Arven's reign as Abbot also helped give it that semi-familiar feel.

I'll grant that it's not the same as using the same cast again, ala Mariel's generation and Matthias' generation, but with virtually every story carrying a few characters over, I welcomed the completely new casts of Triss and Loamhedge. ;)

Keyla
February 29th, 2004, 08:13 AM
How could I forget Russano, Sloey and Orocca?


I welcome any Redwall book because the ones I've doubted and felt weren't going to be all that good I've been proven wrong about (Martin The Warrior, Marlfox, Legend Of Luke).
I know what you mean, although often it is because people have told me that it was not any good beforehand.

t@gg :)
March 9th, 2004, 02:32 PM
I like history tales.

Sandstripe the Wild
March 12th, 2004, 11:08 PM
Originally posted by Martin the Warrior
[B]And Russano. ;)


Nutwing, the child of Orocca, would also qualify as a returning character-- and I'd wager there were a few babes from TLP that also showed up, though I haven't checked yet (Sloey, perhaps?). Establishing it as the time period immediately following Arven's reign as Abbot also helped give it that semi-familiar feel.


Friar Butty also made a return appearance in Marlfox as the abbey recorder, I believe Sloey was also there as cheif healer along with a couple of other characters including her mole friend whose name I can't remember.

LordTBT
March 12th, 2004, 11:46 PM
He can keep going back. I prefer history stuff over present stuff. All the present time tales seem to be alike. Some sort of vermin is always trying to invade the abbey. History tales mix it up, most do involve sea-faring baddies though. But its a bit more different that:

bad guys: "argh theres the abbey, lets break in and kill the creatures there" "yeah"

good guys: "oh no bad guys, and theres no defender here! what will we do? Oh i know that dibbun will grow up and change from an annoying child into a mature adult and save us and defeat the bad guys"

good guys come up with clever schemes and defeat bad guys. redwall is saved. the end.

Wild Doogy Plumm
August 11th, 2005, 10:05 PM
I think its interesting to have any theories you have made proved right or wrong as the novels keep coming, unraveling Redwalls past. BJ could write 50 more novels explaining the past, but our imaginations will do the explaining for us, because no matter how many books he writes, there will be no definite beginning or end.

Ember Nickel
August 12th, 2005, 03:31 PM
Welcome, Doogy! Forum policy is not to resurrect old posts, but now that this has been resurrected anyhow I'd like to say that I definitely prefer carry-over characters to Triss, Loamhedge, Rakkety Tam etc. It almost feels like BJ is afraid to carry over anymore so he's doing entirely new casts, which is boring. I would not, however, like to hear about the first badger lord/lady, that would feel like ruining something.

stoatmaster54321
August 23rd, 2005, 02:31 PM
yeah :mad: ...er, i mean :( ....er, i mean :)