I'd say Tiria Wildlough is probably one of my favorite characters in the whole series. She had a lot of great character development from an ordinary, somewhat naive abbeybeast to a leader and a queen. I mean, yeah, at first glance she seems like a Mary Sue--and she is to an extent, but not in all respects. She may be able to do things that she probably shouldn't be able to do considering her limited life experience, but she doesn't start out as the perfect queen and leader. She grows as she experiences life and meets new kinds of beasts.
Thoughts? Disagreements? Am I remembering things wrong again? ;D
Eh, I didn't really like her. To each their own.
Didn't think she developed a whole lot either...
Beasts doubted her and she proved them wrong. Every. Single. Time.
That... really doesn't have anything to do with character development? Character development is about overcoming limits a character sets on themself not limits applied to them by others.
She didn't change.
While that may be and I honestly don't remember if it did, I wasn't commenting on Tiria, I was commenting on your characterisation of character development.
I still maintain that most Redwall protagonists are fairly stagnant, so I don't necessarily consider it a legitimate criticism when applied to just Tiria.
I never said "character development is" and then listed what I thought to be the definition of character development.
I gave an example of how Tiria did not develop.
She's right, she's right, she's right. She starts off right and she ends off right. Development is change, and that depicted how there was no change.
Then how exactly is Tiria different to Martin, Gonff and Dinny in Mossflower? They don't undergo any significant personal growth, no one doubts them and they don't doubt themselves. They're right all the time. Is it simply because you like their characters more than hers?
Also being right and changing are not mutually exclusive terms.
Martin, Gonff, and Dinny may not go through much development, but they have destictive personalities and do more than just fight and prove other characters wrong. Martin could be called a Stu, aye, but what struck me about Gonff was that he was a thief and a Woodlander. This was before all the other "Woodlander thrives" appeared in the later books, so that was pretty interesting and made him seem to be in an area of "grayness" in comparison to, say, Matthias.
Even though he is without a doubt good.
Dinny is a mole, and I don't really understand molespeech so I cannot comment on him.
A character in the same book as Tiria that I think was done better was Leatho. He doesn't change much either, but Tiria's level of "sueness" is past Martin's and more onto the "annoying" scale.
Quote from: Ashleg on October 01, 2017, 01:39:24 AM
Eh, I didn't really like her. To each their own.
Didn't think she developed a whole lot either...
Beasts doubted her and she proved them wrong. Every. Single. Time.
personally I don't think a lot of characters develop
That is true.
But believe me or not, unlike Tiria, I actually think Mariel developed. Hear me out. She was much more mature and less annoying in The Bellmaker.
iirc, by the end of her own novel, she is noticeably more well-adjusted. Her excessively independent streak and disregard for others has already tempered. More of a team player, more willing to adjust to other's wants, that sort of thing.
I really liked Tiria Wildlough