It may just be me, but from Salamandastron and on it seems like Woodlanders were a bit too merciless on the villains.
I'm reading Pearls of Lutra right now (love it!) and I notice that Martin especially seems quick to kill the vermin. Even if they haven't exactly done anything wrong (like that rat he took hostage and threatened to kill. He did nothing bad I know of...)
And so, the basic point is, are the vermin bad because they are treated so?
I should think so, if the very first generation of woodlanders treated the very first generation of vermin unfairly, they must have said it to the second generation, making them think woodlanders are evil. Just my two cents.
I'd have to agree with you on that...
The woodlanders are too merciless on the vermin on some occasions (the Long Parrol are particularly guilty of this). Captain Rake, for example, captures Crumdun, even though he hasn't really done anything. In several books, the woodlander armies pursue and wipe out the fleeing vermin armies, even though their leader had already been killed and they were not a big threat. The only time the woodlanders actually peacefully co-exist with the vermin they defeated is in Marlfox, with the water rats.
I think the Long Patrol and most badgers go too hard on them.
As seen in Outcast of Redwall, sometimes hordebeasts have children, who all were killed within the book at some time or another... Poor things.
I think these woodlanders may be a bit more aggressive then we notice on first sight.
I would've loved to see a book where the roles are switched (y'know, a tribe of evil mice would've been interesting to see...) ;)
Romsca had posted something very interesting on a similar topic. . . Lesse if I can dig it up. . .
Here it is!
Quote from: Romsca on October 19, 2014, 02:42:44 PM
I'm taking a sociology class right now :D and we just learned about certain gangs in LA and how they formed and why they continue (this could also apply to vermin, keep reading).
Strain Theory - Since there are not enough resources for everyone there is a strain on society therefore some people respond to it in different ways. Some examples that would apply to vermin: Innovation - try to achieve society's goals (earning money) with abnormal, socially unacceptable means. Rebellion - protest against both society's goals and following norms of behavior
Labeling Theory - People (or vermin in this case) are called "bad" for so long they start to act like it because no more is expected of them
Differential Association - A person (or vermin in this case) learns to favor one subculture or another due to life experiences or socialization
Conflict Theory - History is a series of class struggles and conflicts
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
That would explain why they act as they do. ;)
It does make sense. Never even thought about it that way.
This is why Mossflower is one of my favorite books; in the end, they let all of the vermin go free. In my opinion the earlier books are better because you see none of this kind of action in the more recent books. BJ said that he made the vermin all of the same kind of creatures so that they would be easily identifiable for children, but maybe he had a different meaning. He could have done this to make people more aware of the injustice in the world, class discrimination, and the horrors of war. I remember that this always bugged me.
Mossflower seems like the most realistic of the books, putting toward it being my favorite book of the series.
I like that the vermin in Mossflower aren't all bloodthirsty barbarians either; they have some sense of civilization, though they aren't exactly "angels," and in the end, they respectfully obey the commands of the woodlanders. They seem, to me, more realistic than those vermin that just want to burn and murder everything.
Frankly, I'm forced to say no with a firm voice. Evil is one of the worst diseases we face, this evil can be plainly seen in almost every vermin (Swinky? and Blaggut being two of very few exceptions). Russano let Ruggan Bor leave after he was clearly planning on attacking Redwall (Taggerung). As before mentioned, there were the water rats from Marlfox. The painted ones, I believe, from Doomwyte were released. The remains of the Green Eyes in Mossflower were allowed to live. The only time I can think of the vermin being "hunted down" was when they were more so prevented from escaping in the original Redwall. Most of the time, it's a fight to the death, or both sides back off.
Furthermore, let's do a personality test real quick. Ferhago the Assassin, a cold killer, wouldn't look twice before killing his own mother. Urthstripe? Dedicated to his Hares, and justice (granted, he had a mean temper, but this was always taken out in battle). Cluny the Scourge was as heartless as any, threatening death to any and all questions posed him, whereas you could take any of the leading defenders of the Abbey and they would lay down their own life if it meant somebeast else lived. The Marlfox's? Conniving cowards, they avoid fair fights at all costs, maliciously hurt others and each other for even the slightest personal gain. Dannflower? He sought to protect all from any force, even nature. Choosing to fight for freedom, and with honor. Song? She would rather herself be hurt than those around her so much that she jumped off a cliff after a stranger. Tsarmina? All she really wanted was for everything but her to be dead. Martin fought because he had nothing else to do, and to keep the promise he made to the wildcat (that he would return and kill her with the sword).
Are the woodlanders perfect? No, Grath sought revenge, the Rogue Crew lived for nothing but killing vermin (and partying possibly, really the vikings of Redwall), Tugga Bruster beat his own, there were a few insane or crazy hedgehogs that enslaved or threatened others. Are the vermin evil? Yes they are, Brian drew very clear lines to represent the good versus the bad. He did not dance on the line he drew, everything was perfectly clear.
I completely agree!
I'm not so much referring to the horde leaders ('cause, yeah, there's no doubt that they're evil!) but more so those that happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, like Ashleg or Romsca, but mostly Veil as an example.
He was the first to be accused about everything because he was a ferret...And then Bryony declares that he was evil, and that she realizes that now, after he saved her life. :-\
We don't know a lot about Ashleg's career before Mossflower, so I can't say much about him, but I do think you might be underestimating just how much of a villain Romsca was. She was first mate on Waveworm, the ship whose crew massacred Holt Lutra. We don't know for sure whether she was on shore at the time, but if I had to guess I'd say so. There's no evidence that any of them stayed on the ship (pirate crews seem to have a way of leaving them unguarded), but if they did, I think it's more likely the ship leader who stayed would've been Conva, the ship's most senior officer and best navigator, instead of the more expendable first mate. She probably murdered a few otters, along with the rest of the crew. She then succeeded Conva, and was chosen by Ublaz "Mad Eyes" to ferry his Monitor General and a corps of the lizards to retrieve the Pearls of Lutra, a mission that they probably figured would involve killing more beasts. None of this takes into consideration the numerous acts of piracy, etc. that would have been involved with her career prior to Pearls of Lutra -- you don't get to be the first mate of anything without being an essential part of the ship's functions. Waveworm's function was raiding and pirating, so it makes sense to assume that she was very experienced in and good at doing those things. She wasn't a victim of circumstance -- she rose to the top by skill and enthusiasm for her job. She told the Abbot that she "liked being a corsair and wasn't ashamed of her life", and there's no reason to disbelieve her.
That's what made her turn at the end of her life so surprising, because there's nothing that suggests she would have done so. She had a distaste for the Monitors, sure, but that was shared by all of her fellow pirates. Simply having a shared enemy doesn't make you someone's friend. Based on her previous life and behavior, we shouldn't have expected her to befriend a peacenik mouse, especially one that she was holding as a prisoner. She did, though, and that's why she's such a well-known character -- not because she was good all along.
Quite an interesting topic, I believe.
So James's opinion on romsca is correct, and I have to agree wholeheartedly. However, we must take into consideration that vermin are driven by a single thing: Fear. So even if they are intentionally driven to commit a act of bloodshed, they could still be driven by fear. Admit it, every person must face their fear, but vermin don't. They seek to escape it, thus putting them under its control. So, to a certain point, vermin are treated unfairly (BTW, see my post in WHy di the vermin go bad? topic.
I say yes and no. There are times where the vermin deserve the harsh treatment. Then there are times where the woodlanders were to unfair.
Yes, I think sometimes they are treated somewhat unfairly. Actions by woodlanders can be a little drastic on some 'vermin' when you rather feel they aren't through-and-through bad and perhaps could learn to redeem themselves. Though if B.J. really was thinking more black and white terms then I guess maybe all those baddies killed would have gone on to be more bad? Certainly those who were ready to kill. Perhaps the thieves could have been redeemed yet.
Anyway, I'd like to think some vermin could become better beasts and that woodlanders could have some better understanding of such vermin.
I think the fact that The Goodbeasts are so blood thirsty some times makes them worse then some vermin,
Depends on the situation and the book. It should be noted that almost every tale lets some vermin survive, mainly lesser low-level thugs and common crooks. Though yeah, somewhere around the halfway point Jacques was all "Kill 'em all at let Martin sort 'em out."
Why not let some of the feral cats survive High Rhulain ? Would it have really hurt to let the last 6 members of Gulo's horde live? What would've been so wrong with letting some of those birds and reptiles escape in Doomwyte? And I got to where I hated the shrews just as much as the vermin.
Thing is, I think Jacques finally realized it was a problem near the end. In The Sable Quean and The Rogue Crew he had woodlanders at least try to be decent to vermin and give other goodbeasts flak for being so eager to kill foebeasts.
Sure it was a rough & tumble world where things got down and dirty. But when the good guys aren't much different from the bad guys, it's a problem...
Quote from: JangoCoolguy on January 02, 2015, 03:46:38 AM
Depends on the situation and the book. It should be noted that almost every tale lets some vermin survive, mainly lesser low-level thugs and common crooks. Though yeah, somewhere around the halfway point Jacques was all "Kill 'em all at let Martin sort 'em out."
Why not let some of the feral cats survive High Rhulain ? Would it have really hurt to let the last 6 members of Gulo's horde live? What would've been so wrong with letting some of those birds and reptiles escape in Doomwyte? And I got to where I hated the shrews just as much as the vermin.
Thing is, I think Jacques finally realized it was a problem near the end. In The Sable Quean and The Rogue Crew he had woodlanders at least try to be decent to vermin and give other goodbeasts flak for being so eager to kill foebeasts.
Sure it was a rough & tumble world where things got down and dirty. But when the good guys aren't much different from the bad guys, it's a problem...
One thing about it though, is that war is war, and the woodlanders must have thought them a threat, and in war, there is no good or bad, only death.
Bloodwrath, really.
Ya except the Woodlander entire argument is that they are only fighting for their lives not to kill because they want too. I find that hard to believe when they massacre every single vermin warrior.
Many of the fights are so one sided as well.
That's why I like the Rogue crew. A decent number of woodlanders die in the final battle, and that makes it seem more realistic.
Charicter development plays a role as well. The good east must have a dark side, that's what makes them less corny and perfect and stuff. They had savage emotions that could have surely been displayed by acts of violence like that.
Yin yang, y'know
I think that in The Sable Quean Globby is treated unfairly by Skipper and Diggs. All he wanted was to try some cake and they beat him with an oven paddle! And he was young, too, so he could've had the potential to be good. Although I realize that he wasn't killed "on purpose" as in the woodlanders didn't plan on killing him.
"An enemy who's dead, ain't an enemy no more." A very well put phrase from Marlfox.
You know, I fear a few badger lords now that I see that they are so eager to end innocent lives.
Yeah ;v;
I read a fanfic about how a group of harmless travelling foxes were brutally butchered by some Long Patrol recruits. It was so sad. I think racism is hugely prevalent in the Mossflower era.
Quote from: Lord_Ashenwyte on February 02, 2015, 08:39:25 AM
I read a fanfic about how a group of harmless travelling foxes were brutally butchered by some Long Patrol recruits. It was so sad. I think racism is hugely prevalent in the Mossflower era.
Fanfics are far far FAR removed from the actual thing. Jaques had a specific purpose for each and every beast. Is it racism to defend yourself against an attacker? Absolutely not! That's one of the issues in the here and now, that people will take things out of context just to play the race card. In the Redwall setting, what's happening? Why are the vermin being attacked? They aren't, they're being
counterattacked, the woodlander + whoever else side is somewhere around always responding to a vicious assault from the vermin. If the vermin never attacked to begin with, they could live normal lives. Look at (Swinky?) for crying out loud! He lived a peaceful life because he wasn't aggressive!
I have to agree with danflor on this one. The very first rule of the Redwall universe to go in almost every fan fiction or role play I've ever seen is "no good vermin". Sometimes it can be done well, don't get me wrong, but it's still a big difference from the original portrayal of the series, especially when the author makes a point of having the vermin be completely and obviously pure-hearted. "THE WORST REDWALL FANFIC EVER (https://www.fanfiction.net/s/396199/1/THE-WORST-REDWALL-FANFIC-EVER)" is pretty much the definitive parody of this, with 'Brushslay':
QuoteI am the first verman abbot of redwall. But i am not a verman. I am your allie. I am a good guy.
There's a reason why Blaggut, Romsca, etc. are talked about so much -- it's because almost all the other characters of their species are unashamedly and unalloyedly evil. The few other times they aren't, it's usually when they're dimwitted comic relief. The characters aren't evil because they're vermin, they're vermin because they're evil.
The only trouble came in when the good guys realized that species usually indicates alignment and started mercilessly wiping out vermin later in the series. That's what makes Abbot Mortimer, and other characters like him, so endearing to me -- they legitimately treated everyone with kindness, even those that the reader knows don't deserve it. It's one thing to be nice to your woodlander allies, but it took things to another level when the Redwallers were kind to their enemies, and were reluctant to take life even after they were under attack.
*Reads first chapter of link.*
MY EYES! THEY BUUURRRRN!!!
*Goes to cry. . .*
Good points, you two.
HAHAHAHAHAAHA, That was too good, oh man, I can't stop laughing.
Quote from: danflorreguba on February 02, 2015, 06:52:20 PM
Quote from: Lord_Ashenwyte on February 02, 2015, 08:39:25 AM
I read a fanfic about how a group of harmless travelling foxes were brutally butchered by some Long Patrol recruits. It was so sad. I think racism is hugely prevalent in the Mossflower era.
Fanfics are far far FAR removed from the actual thing. Jaques had a specific purpose for each and every beast. Is it racism to defend yourself against an attacker? Absolutely not! That's one of the issues in the here and now, that people will take things out of context just to play the race card. In the Redwall setting, what's happening? Why are the vermin being attacked? They aren't, they're being counterattacked, the woodlander + whoever else side is somewhere around always responding to a vicious assault from the vermin. If the vermin never attacked to begin with, they could live normal lives. Look at (Swinky?) for crying out loud! He lived a peaceful life because he wasn't aggressive!
I know Fanfic isn't the real thing. But some characters just mistrust innocent creatures and someone pays with their lives.
One badger is worse at this than every other one combined, Lonna Bowstripe
He hunted the remaining vermin down to the very last one because of the death of his friend, no other reason, even after he killed they're leader
Quote from: James Gryphon on February 02, 2015, 07:23:05 PM
I have to agree with danflor on this one. The very first rule of the Redwall universe to go in almost every fan fiction or role play I've ever seen is "no good vermin". Sometimes it can be done well, don't get me wrong, but it's still a big difference from the original portrayal of the series, especially when the author makes a point of having the vermin be completely and obviously pure-hearted. "THE WORST REDWALL FANFIC EVER (https://www.fanfiction.net/s/396199/1/THE-WORST-REDWALL-FANFIC-EVER)" is pretty much the definitive parody of this, with 'Brushslay':
QuoteI am the first verman abbot of redwall. But i am not a verman. I am your allie. I am a good guy.
There's a reason why Blaggut, Romsca, etc. are talked about so much -- it's because almost all the other characters of their species are unashamedly and unalloyedly evil. The few other times they aren't, it's usually when they're dimwitted comic relief. The characters aren't evil because they're vermin, they're vermin because they're evil.
The only trouble came in when the good guys realized that species usually indicates alignment and started mercilessly wiping out vermin later in the series. That's what makes Abbot Mortimer, and other characters like him, so endearing to me -- they legitimately treated everyone with kindness, even those that the reader knows don't deserve it. It's one thing to be nice to your woodlander allies, but it took things to another level when the Redwallers were kind to their enemies, and were reluctant to take life even after they were under attack.
The best redwall fanfic ever....
I'd say yes, at times, but then I'm a softie and open-minded, and a believer that most are capable of being good, if given a chance (there are exceptions, and when a person has proven time and again they're bad, then it's time to give up on them, but be willing to give them more than one "second chance")
An example, near the end of Mattimeo, Slagar tricks his slaver band in turning on each other. These guys are okay with kidnapping kids and turning them over to a life of slavery where they'll be worked to death, and the weasels do kill the stoats (which Matthias and co. witness). But, even if they don't really deserve mercy from Matthias and co.'s perspectives, they had the five remaining weasels (who would've been no threat to an army the size of Matthias') tied up, disarmed, and were going to use them as meat shields when entering Malkariss, and the only reason they didn't do so was because they were convinced the weasels' begging would destroy any attempts at stealth. All things considered, they were being straight-up cold-blooded in this situation (even if they felt the weasels didn't deserve to live).
I think some are, mainly the dumb ones or the good ones, but in general, they are vermin.
I personally don't believe so, at least from what I've read. I haven't read every book, but it seems that more often than not, the woodlanders are simply reacting to how the vermin are treating them. Even if some horde members are forced to join, it doesn't negate that they had no qualms in murdering innocent animals to save their own skins. I know this kinda brings up the question of how vermin are raised and all that, but again, from what I've read, it seems like most vermin aren't even willing to try and play nice unless it's a trick of some sort. I can't blame the woodlanders for giving the vermin a taste of their own medicine.