Didn't see a topic like this around, so I figured I'd bring it up. I haven't read every Redwall book, so excuse me if I miss something or overlook some character in this. Basically, Brian Jacques does not dapple in "gray" characters in Redwall--its very black and white, good-evil, and its predetermined by your species. There are no evil mice and likewise there are no good foxes. However, there are at least three characters that break this predetermined mold when you read a Redwall book:
Gingivere, from Mossflower
Veil, from Outcast of Redwall
Taggerrung, from Taggerrung
Let's start with Gingivere--he's a wildcat, and if you look at the family, his father and sister, well, Gingivere ought to be just like them. He isn't. He's very different from them, considered weak by both. What makes this character particularly unusual in Redwall (and this could be because this was the second book written and there was no knowing at the time how big this franchise would be) is that Gingivere does not get killed because he's different, and actually survives to the end and doesn't have a change of heart. Why weren't there more Gingivere's in the series that certainly provided more depth and curiosity as you never quite knew if he was going to always be this way, have a change of thought or what have you? Missed opportunity in my opinion, but Mr. Jacques gave us at least two other characters that didn't subscribe to the good/evil species mold.
Next we have Veil, the ferret babe found and raised in Redwall. Veil certainly gets the most attention of the three on the forums, because you're left to question what Mr. Jacques was really after with him. A shadow of a good character in a ferret body? Based on the events of the story, Veil is definitely no "goody-two-shoes" and as such he doesn't fit the perfection sought from Redwall characters. Yet, in the same sense, he's not a truly evil character when you compare him to his father. Veil had opportunities to kill Bryony--the one who always stuck up for him--you think if he was truly evil, he would've been rather annoyed with her stepping in all the time and done away with her. Yet he saves her at the end from a certain death, losing his own life in the process. The reason Veil gets more discussion time than say, Constance, is because he was interesting, and like Gingivere, you didn't always know what was going to happen. You didn't have the sense of predictability, and that's what made Outcast one of my favorites in the entire series.
Finally, the last character I'm aware of that fits this gray mold is Taggerrung, the otter. Here you have role reversal from Outcast...what if the baddies raise a goodie? Will that character be inherently evil as their raising suggests? For a while Mr. Jacques had me really interested because the early part of the story concludes that perhaps, just perhaps, Tagg could be a rogue otter in the series. Of course, once Tagg finds out he's truly Deyna and his whole backstory of how the clan killed his father, well, then Tagg takes his rightful side on the goodies, and the story continues largely as if Tagg was always on the side of Redwall abbey and was never raised by vermin. While I knew that was probably going to happen, given the character's backstory, I wish Mr. Jacques had contemplated what it might've been with an otter on the other side of the line.
So there you have it...at least three characters that didn't follow the typical good-bad speciesism of Redwall. What are your thoughts on the matter? Should Jacques have considered more stories like Outcast to make the later stories less predictable? I'm interested in hearing what you guys feel about this.
Voles are kind of gray creatures all around. Like in Rakkety Tam, yoofus lightpaw. If I had the books with me, I'd give more examples but I don't :-\
I wish Brian had some characters that were a good species, but bad guys. I know theres a few, but those ones are usually either voles, or desperate. What would happen if a mouse was truly a bad guy? I think it'd make things less predictable in the books
First off, Redwall Wiki's list of grey characters: http://redwall.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Grey_characters (http://redwall.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Grey_characters)
The Redwall Wiki's definiton of a grey character is pretty much this: A character that goes against the common mold of their species. Everyone agrees I'd assume
Gingivere Greeneyes is indeed of that category.
Veil is debatable, and the only real gray character in the saga
[[Okay, my views might sound narrow minded, but hang on here and don't reply unless you read everything here. I just see this as being obvious-ish]]
Deyna Tagg isn't gray, as you seemed to point out. He's an otter and goodbeast.
According to Brian Jacques: (all Ask Brian Volume 1)
24. Why do you make mice, squirrels, otters and badgers "good" and foxes, rats, ferrets and such "bad"? How do you decide which are good and which are bad? (Donna Wilson, Seattle, Washington)
The bad creatures are those which are traditionally bad in European folk lore and have come to be regarded as sly or mean or evil.The good creatures are mostly small and defenceless, with the exception of the badgers.
42. Will you ever have any really good vermin or bad woodlanders in any of your stories? (Peter Johnson, Pennsylvania)
No! The goodies are good and the baddies are BAD, no grey areas.
With that last line, I don't see (outside of Veil(quote from BJ coming)) how there is any grey characters. Many exist outside of their species' characteristics, but they aren't both good or bad.
Example: Look at Gingivere in Mossflower. Goodbeast, yes. Respected his father, accused in sense of justice his sister, aided the Corim, and helped overthrow Kotir, and sheltered many woodlanders with his mate Sandingomm in their new farmhouse. He wasn't "grey" as BJ defined the word. Against his species alignment, and thus considered grey, or gray (they're the same word).
Okay, if anyone wants to find where Brian Jacques commented on Veil, and him purposefully not disclosing the true identity of good/evil in his heart, that'd be wonderful -I can't find the quote.
But I've seen it afore, for the record.
@Tammo: On voles, yes, they tend to be quite gray. Most of them were in desperate situations true enough, but reasons don't justify excuses.
And Brian said that wouldn't be Redwall to create such a species, btw.
I think I might well regret this, going into another one of these "discussions".
About Gingivere, an important thing to remember is that at the time
Mossflower was written, there had been only one other cat in the series, who was a good character. So with Squire Julian, his ancestor Gingivere, Lord Verdauga, and Tsarmina, you techncially have an even ratio, two good, two bad, for a balanced species. If you add Sandingomm into the mix good cats actually slightly outnumber bad ones. So while wildcats have become known as an evil species, mostly due to Tsarmina and later Ungatt Trunn's influence, if you look at the numbers, the scales looked a lot more balanced around the time
Mossflower was written, and one could actually make an argument that cats, as a group, were a good species. ;)
Another thing is that Gingivere (and Tsarmina) are both akin to halves of their father -- Tsarmina possessing all of her father's ruthless traits (whether they were latent or visible), and Gingivere all of his good traits -- like the sense of justice and fairness, and the same sort of affection for his family, judging by how Verdauga tries to positively encourage his son to resist his overbearing sister. It's telling that when Verdauga delivers his judgement, to imprison Martin for a short time for carrying a weapon into Mossflower, that it's a balance between two extremes: It isn't nearly as harsh as Tsarmina's order, which was immediate execution, but it's also more strict that Gingivere's, which was to let him get off completely free.
We all know that Gingivere is good, and that Tsarmina is evil. Intuitively, though, if that's the case, then Verdauga could almost be viewed as gray, in the literal sense -- not especially good or evil.
The fact that Verdauga is alluded to and directly shown to have good traits (that his son apparently inherited and predominantly shows) is something of an anomaly among villains, especially a leader of his stature.
Quote42. Will you ever have any really good vermin or bad woodlanders in any of your stories? (Peter Johnson, Pennsylvania)
No! The goodies are good and the baddies are BAD, no grey areas.
To risk focusing on a technicality, I might point out that the question is future-tense, asking Brian Jacques about characters that might show up in the future... it doesn't necessarily preclude the possibility that there might have been gray characters in the past. ;)
That said, I do agree that most every character, with the obvious exception of Veil, can be easily scooped into one category or the other, at any single time.
I might say, though, that just because someone is entirely good at a given point in time doesn't necessarily preclude the possibility that they might have been evil earlier -- while it is true that Graylunk was good at the end of his life, the last thing we see him do before that was murder his co-conspirator for the Pearls of Lutra, and before that, participate in the massacre of the entire holt of Lutra. Somehow I get the feeling that if Grath Longfletch was there after Graylunk was permanently injured, and no longer classifiable as "evil", that she wouldn't care too much about his repentance.
Likewise, while I think everyone would agree that Romsca is good by the end of her life, as far as we know, she was also present at the massacre of Holt Lutra, and participated in many other raids during her corsair career. She was a tough enough and competent enough corsair to rise to the top, and was picked out by Mad Eyes, by name, as the new commander of
Waveworm. When questioned about her criminal past, she said she "likes being a corsair," and that she wasn't ashamed of her life, which very probably included some pretty bad deeds.
So while I'd say that none of the creatures are ever good and bad simultaneously, that their alignments seem to be open to shift during life, which could be considered a type of grayness.
Quote from: James Gryphon on July 21, 2011, 03:47:10 AM
Quote42. Will you ever have any really good vermin or bad woodlanders in any of your stories? (Peter Johnson, Pennsylvania)
No! The goodies are good and the baddies are BAD, no grey areas.
To risk focusing on a technicality, I might point out that the question is future-tense, asking Brian Jacques about characters that might show up in the future... it doesn't necessarily preclude the possibility that there might have been gray characters in the past. ;)
With Verdauga's traits being split between his offsrping you make a fair point, of which I would agree. Very interesting, thank you for saying it!
However, I would not argue him being split as good and evil. For one, Riggu Felis (though very cruel and plotting about it) did the same thing with his sons as Verdauga did with Gingivere.
And with the technicality, I'd say it bears no actual relevancy, as things didn't change with gray characters throughout the series. They appear in similar numbers, ratio (pretty much), and the like.
And also, the question was future-tense, but it also implies that none have so far appeared.
Quote from: Taggerung_of_Redwall on July 21, 2011, 02:17:19 AM
Okay, if anyone wants to find where Brian Jacques commented on Veil, and him purposefully not disclosing the true identity of good/evil in his heart, that'd be wonderful -I can't find the quote.
But I've seen it afore, for the record.
I believe you're thinking of this question:
55. Were did you get the idea for the Wraith in The Outcast of Redwall, and did you see Veil as a good guy in the end? (Peter Verdin, Sioux Falls, South Dakota)
The wraith was another invention (it suited my mood for that part of the story). As to Veil and his final motives, I deliberately left that for the reader to decide. I have had many opinions and the jury is still out. I think Verdauga is still on the evil side of grey. I agree that he shows a lot more good points than most villains, but when Mossflower begins we see that most of the woodlanders have fled their homes to escape his severe tolls and vermin patrols. He forced them to give up their food and to work in his fields. He was a fairer leader than Tsarmina, but he was still evil.
I do like Verdauga as a character. As James said, he is an anomaly among the villains. While most Redwall villains seem to go around killing their own soldiers and ruling by fear, he seems to rule more by respect. I'm sure there's still a great deal of fear there, though!
Quote from: Lily on July 21, 2011, 04:11:41 AM
I believe you're thinking of this question:
55. Were did you get the idea for the Wraith in The Outcast of Redwall, and did you see Veil as a good guy in the end? (Peter Verdin, Sioux Falls, South Dakota)
The wraith was another invention (it suited my mood for that part of the story). As to Veil and his final motives, I deliberately left that for the reader to decide. I have had many opinions and the jury is still out.
I think Verdauga is still on the evil side of grey. I agree that he shows a lot more good points than most villains, but when Mossflower begins we see that most of the woodlanders have fled their homes to escape his severe tolls and vermin patrols. He forced them to give up their food and to work in his fields. He was a fairer leader than Tsarmina, but he was still evil.
I do like Verdauga as a character. As James said, he is an anomaly among the villains. While most Redwall villains seem to go around killing their own soldiers and ruling by fear, he seems to rule more by respect. I'm sure there's still a great deal of fear there, though!
Thank you for providing that, I jumped right over it after reading about the Wraith.
And good points on Verdauga.
Tsarmina at the time had actually begun some decent amount of control, though Verdauga was undoubtedly still behind the woodlanders' plight.
I think that anomaly as James Gryphon called it is why so many, at least me, like him. He seems like a highly respected leader, and a conqueror who provided for his soldiers, to the point where he couldn't and drove off all the woodlanders to go and survive elsewhere. No doubt his vermin patrols were heavily behind that, as you said.
Let's not forget about other species. Captain Snow hunted both mice and shrews, but gave all that up after Matthias killed Asmodeus. Although this could be construed as a kind of "Heel Face Turn" moment.
Lizards and eagles and some other birds are split to this day in an even ratio.
My personal guess is that certain species of lizards are villains, while others are goodbeasts.
^ If we're going to consider a split among some species as some good, some bad, depending on the situation and story, where does that leave Mr. Jacques' comment that the goodies are good, and the baddies are bad? Apparently there are some species that don't follow that rule!
QuoteLet's not forget about other species. Captain Snow hunted both mice and shrews, but gave all that up after Matthias killed Asmodeus. Although this could be construed as a kind of "Heel Face Turn" moment.
Owls aren't really represented in Redwall and the two examples we have--Snow and Sir Harry, these are good owls (Snow after the deal), so does this imply the owls are always on the good side too? You would have to say given the examples, owls are part of the good side and don't munch on mice. :p
This wasn't an easy question to discuss because there's many ways of focusing on who represents which piece of the puzzle. I agree with a lot I am reading. I can see the point that Verdauga might be the better representation of a gray character than Gingivere because he would listen and choose fates between the extreme suggestions by his son and daughter. Its been a while since I've actually read Mossflower, so I only recalled bits a pieces of the whole thing.
Quote from: Lutra on July 21, 2011, 02:29:09 PM
^ If we're going to consider a split among some species as some good, some bad, depending on the situation and story, where does that leave Mr. Jacques' comment that the goodies are good, and the baddies are bad? Apparently there are some species that don't follow that rule!
If you're referring to my comment on lizards and eagles, you did not understand it. I was merely stating that half of the appearances of that species were gray, as in against their alignment. Or that certain sub-species were goodies, and others of the same species, through a different type, are baddies. Or maybe there's just a lot of gray characters amongst them.
Gingivere Greeneyes is clearly a gray character. Wildcats are a bad species, they fit the criteria Brian Jacques said as what he tends to use as a decision between what species are good and what are bad. He said that it's mostly those that cannot defend themselves or are not hunters in nature that are goodies.
Gingivere was clearly not a villain.
Verdaugua doesn't strike me as gray. The good virtues in him are similar to Plugg Firetail, to name at least one villain. But they are far from crediting him as hero or a gray character in the sense of being both good and evil.
Gingivere, ( spelling? ) a gray animal? I always thought he was an orange-ish color......
Then again he's a WILD cat............ ??? strange.
@M#1fan: Try reading the topic creator's post so you don't post spam.
On owls: They seem to be every interesting species. A good deal of them ate creatures such as lizards or weasels. Just as much cannibals as Gulo the Savage, if better desired.
@Lutra: How much of the series have you read?
Oh darn, I didn't know that's what it was about. Sorry!
I consider Tugga Bruster from Doomwyte a truly gray character....at first he appeared just as a bad-tempered protagonist but later on he displayed more negative traits.
He portrayed more negative traits, but I'd say they were already there in him. He was all for slaughtering the Painted Ones near (I'm fairly certain) his original appearance.
The later, and clinching, crime he committed of stealing was done to frame Nokko. If I'm not mistaken, he was doing so for the purpose of pursuits he had already demonstrated his antagonistic characteristics in.
He did manage to (to a degree) control his temper and cooperate with the other characters at the beginning.
His approach towards the painted ones, while certainly brutal, was similar to what some of the badger lords did in bloodwrath, as well as some other non-badger characters (although MOST (but not all) had a reason such as characters killing their family).
The reason he tried stealing the doomwyte eye and framing Nokko, is from what I remember his shameful loss in the "insult contest".
"Battle of Insults" really, as the namesake goes.
But he also injured Aluco and Dwink. Injuring Redwallers beacuse you're humiliated and angry doesn't work well for being a goodbeast.
He wasn't even a Guosim. He cheated his tribe, and forsook all the traditions and honor that made them Guosim.
The effect of that on me when I read it was a strong dislike for Tugga Bruster and his evil nature of discord and disregard for those he was entrusted to lead, including his son in addition to the Guosim.
Is it safe to assume that I'm not the only one who imagined horrible things happening to Tugga Bruster after his crimes had been revealed?
Quote from: Matthias720 on July 21, 2011, 04:34:53 PM
Is it safe to assume that I'm not the only one who imagined horrible things happening to Tugga Bruster after his crimes had been revealed?
Could you elaborate some?
Quote from: Taggerung_of_Redwall on July 21, 2011, 04:39:15 PM
Quote from: Matthias720 on July 21, 2011, 04:34:53 PM
Is it safe to assume that I'm not the only one who imagined horrible things happening to Tugga Bruster after his crimes had been revealed?
Could you elaborate some?
Something along the lines of Laird Bose giving him the same injuries as he'd given to others as a punishment. I know that's rather blood-thirsty, but I really don't like Tugga Bruster.
I always just imagined him getting humiliated and then killed in an undignified manner. Which is what happened really.
No then, I have absolutely no identification with you. Also, that doesn't seem very Bosie-like.
Quote from: Taggerung_of_Redwall on July 21, 2011, 05:09:11 PM
Also, that doesn't seem very Bosie-like.
I know, but I want something bad to happen to him, and bringing in Superman just doesn't fit. :D
I think Chigid's mate killing him is pretty bad.
I think I need to respond to an earlier question, "how much have I read" because I'm seeing characters I don't recognize. :-\
I have NOT read: Rakkety Tam, Eulalia, Doomwyte, The Sable Queen, The Rogue Crew
I read, but hardly remember anything from: The Bellmaker, The Legend of Luke, Lord Brocktree,
The rest I remember bits and pieces here and there.
I'm very rusty on my Redwall. Its what happens when you get out of school and work full-time.
__________________________________________________-
So if I'm reading posts right, there's another owl character somewhere who isn't so nice. Where does that put us with owls in terms of the good/bad species? Are we saying it depends on the owl kind of like those lizards and other secondary characters?
The Redwall Wiki lists 23 owls, though I am not familar with those in The Rogue Crew.
I think owls are only goodbeasts, just with a fair number who practice cannibalism. Not sure how that works, but they were normally very friendly and very hospitable (to goodbeasts) if they were cannibalistic.
What do you all think about the Gawtrybe from Martin the Warrior? They're squirrels, but they certainly don't act like good beasts when we first see them. They would gladly have killed Martin and his friends if Boldred hadn't been there to stop them. Later, though, they join Martin in the battle of Marshank.
What do you think? Are they good characters who don't understand that what they're doing is wrong, or are they grey characters who are just out for a bit of fun, no matter the cost?
^ Ah the Gawtrybe...I don't know why they are the way they are...inbreeding? :P ??? It really isn't explained why they play their "games" but it seemed that they do it to anyone. Evil? They didn't act it. Cruel and unusual? Oh yes!
They do seem to be... uh... of little intellect. I got the impression they were just extraordinarily silly and didn't think about the consequences of their actions at all. They're like naughty children.
That would be a fitting answer for me. They certainly fit the bill on this quote: "Growing old is mandatory; growing up is optional." ;)
Quote from: Lutra on July 22, 2011, 02:36:17 AM
That would be a fitting answer for me. They certainly fit the bill on this quote: "Growing old is mandatory; growing up is optional." ;)
I like to live by that quote. ;)
Check out Tugga Bruster from "Doomwyte", he's a Log-a-log shrew but very rude and heartless, gaining enemies from vermin and goodbeasts alike. Gray characters can make things more interesting. My favorite example is still Blaggut though, for the emotional climax where he believed he deserved death. Tagg didn't seem like a gray character at all, he didn't really have a transition from evil to good. Neither did Blaggut, but he was a vermin so his happy nature could be attributed to blissful stupidity. ...until he started crying.
I agree with Lutra on the behavior of the Gawtrybe squirrels. Makes me wonder if they ever played the mountain game with other Gawtrybe squirrels.
The Gawtrybe beat each other up it appears as much as with travelers. They might not have tried a game like that before, but they might well have played just as dangerous games all the same.
Quote from: Taggerung_of_Redwall on July 23, 2011, 01:06:01 AM
The Gawtrybe beat each other up it appears as much as with travelers. They might not have tried a game like that before, but they might well have played just as dangerous games all the same.
Would that make them "gray" characters or just morons? ;) I go with the latter.
Triggut Frap was definitely a hedgehog villain.
Yeah, he was pretty strange. Like, very strange. And defiantly a villain.
Quote from: daskar666 on July 23, 2011, 05:33:44 PM
Triggut Frap was definitely a hedgehog villain.
I thought Blood Apis was a little more scary. Wait, did you guys notice that both Doomwyte and Sable Quean both have hedgehog villains, and that Doomwyte precedes the Sable Quean? That's rather strange to have hedgehog villains in two consecutive books.
There are alot of similarities between Doomwyte and the Sable Quean (ie the antagonists both try to flee expecting to easily become horde leaders again but get avenged by a character that shows up late in the book). And the antagonists' secret lairs as well.
Quote from: daskar666 on July 25, 2011, 11:10:29 PM
the antagonists both try to flee expecting to easily become horde leaders again but get avenged by a character that shows up late in the book
That happened more than in just Doomwyte and The Sable Quean
And there were malevolent hedgehogs in more than Doomwyte and the Sable Quean.
Interestingly enough, when Vizka Longtooth tries to escape in Eulalia! (the book before Doomwyte) he also plans on going to the south coast and rebuilding his crew, etc. making it 3 in a row.
Quotethe antagonists both try to flee expecting to easily become horde leaders again but get avenged by a character that shows up late in the book
Well, the fleeing does happen in a lot of the books, and the vengeance does also, in a good many cases.
Redwall: One of the exceptions; Cluny doesn't need to rebuild his horde since it's still intact at the time of his final battle.
Mossflower: Kotir is destroyed by a catapult. Tsarmina Greeneyes flees, expecting that she'll finish off the woodlanders (and then presumably come back to rule Mossflower later). 1 out of 2.
Mattimeo: Nadaz hides in Malkariss' statue, expecting that he can emerge after the conflict to build his own empire. Also, Slagar sits up on top of it all, dreaming about how he'll get his revenge on the Redwallers (again). Neither of them are killed by characters that show up late in the book, though, so I'll count this as half a point each for 2 out of 4.
Mariel of Redwall: Shortly before his final defeat, Gabool comes to himself and begins planning out new conquests, with the idea of building an entire new fleet of ships, each one larger and faster than
Darkqueen. He's killed by his own captive Skrabblag. 3 out of 5.
Salamandastron: Klitch manages to crawl out of Salamandastron, expecting that he has enough of the features that won his father's fame that he can build up his own horde. He very well might have, except he never gets the chance because he unintentionally drank poisoned water. 4 out of 6.
Outcast of Redwall: Swartt probably would have tried to build up another horde after his defeat, but in this case we don't hear him mention the idea; his mind is entirely set on surviving the Long Patrol pursuit and killing Sunflash. No extra points.
Pearls of Lutra: Even as late as the Redwallers' assault on the fortress, Ublaz Mad Eyes still has the idea that if only he had the Tears of all Oceans, that all of the wave vermin would bow before him and serve him. Still, this doesn't really count, and Ublaz doesn't have the option of retreating because he's stuck on an island with no ships, so no extra points.
The Long Patrol: Damug Warfang is caught by a maddened badger and killed, never having had his chance to try to rebuild his horde again. No extra points.
Marlfox: Mokkan slips out of his fortress, expecting that with his magic skills he can easily go out into the world and do whatever he wants. Two different characters team up to kill him; a hedgehog, the daughter of a minor character, throws a chain which knocks him into the lake, where he is then devoured by his pikes. 5 out of 10.
Taggerung: The whole point of being known as Taggerung is to use the ensuing prestige to build a horde, so I'd say that practically every character is out for the latter. The vengeance is only fulfilled when Ruggan Bor slices up Gruven, but I think it's fair to say 6 out of 11.
Triss: The main villains still have an empire back home to go to, so they don't have to rebuild anything. No extra points.
Rakkety Tam: Gulo never runs away, and he has a good reason to expect to become leader in the lands of Ice and Snow (being a wolverine, and having their symbolic turtle), so I'd say it doesn't count.
High Rhulain: Pitru runs away with the surviving cats, probably hoping to beat the protagonists and then rebuild the cats' hold on Green Isle. Then every single villain in the book is killed by Cuthbert Frunk. I'd say this counts. 7 out of 14.
So 50% of the books have cases like or similar to this; it's a common literary device in
Redwall, and for good reason, because I expect that's how a major villain's mind usually works. Defeat to them is only temporary, a net placed about them to delay the revelation of their greatness. If they were the type to just give up and quit after one loss, they most likely wouldn't have risen to be a major villain in the first place.
By main villains I meant the main villain of the book.
Also I didn't remember Tsarmina tried to flee, I only thought she planned to get to dry land because Kotir was being flooded.
Other than her only the fox villains, Korvus and Vilaya tried to flee. (and some secondary fox villains like Badredd, Karangool and Slagar in Redwall)
Well if ye have two very irate and armed fatherz coming after ye, and one'z a badger, who wouldnae run, eh?
Does anyone remember the mole called Egbert from "Triss?" He was a real creep. He disdained molespeech, never took a stand against evil or helped those who stood against it, and played both ends against the middle for the sake of gaining an easy living. Yuck!
That doesn't describe him at all. He was a very untraditional chap, and I personally liked him a lot. Regardless, he was clearly a hero, hated the Foxwolf and his hordes, and aided the heroes in numerous ways. No more a gray character than any other beast you could name.
Not every protagonist has to work toward an identical goal you know. Egbert was one of my favorite characters in the book because he was working against Urgan while having his own goals.
Quote from: daskar666 on July 27, 2011, 06:04:44 PM
Not every protagonist has to work toward an identical goal you know. Egbert was one of my favorite characters in the book because he was working against Urgan while having his own goals.
I didn't say a thing along such lines.
Also, a protagonist is not a synonym for a good character, it is exclusively used to describe the main character(s) of a drama or story.
And you are essentially correct with your closing statement, though I have to leave VERY quickly right now...
I was talking to the previous poster, I was just too lazy to quote.
Quote from: brocka on July 27, 2011, 02:45:43 AM
Does anyone remember the mole called Egbert from "Triss?" He was a real creep. He disdained molespeech, never took a stand against evil or helped those who stood against it, and played both ends against the middle for the sake of gaining an easy living. Yuck!
You've got it all wrong. First of all, Egbert was a character in The Bellmaker. Second of all, he did help Mariel and co. and didn't betray the good guys to the bad guys. Finally, his molespeech isn't disdained and he could still speak molespeech, but just doesn't. He certainly did not play both sides against the middle for the sake of gaining an easy living, if he did, he would've just moved out of the castle and not collect any of the valuable books. Egbert is really just a good hearted, non-violent character and I wouldn't call him 'grey' and certainly not 'yuck' because he did help the good guys, just not by taking up a weapon.
Be was a book guy really. That was a major goal of his, and a good deal of his dislike for the Foxwolf and his hordes came in their malicious and uncaring destruction and neglect of books.
Always ready willing and able to apologize when I am wrong. And wrong I was, about the title and the characteristics too. This experience served many purposes: the first, to cause some posters to think about poor maligned Egbert and make a judgement call on how they rate him. Second, it reminded me to post at some time BEFORE I start nodding off in front of the computer. Third, it gives me motivation to re-read The Bellmaker next. Thanks for setting me straight, mates.
I always thought of the foxes as half good and half evil. Like Groddil. I'm sorry, I've always been a fox fan! ;D
Quote from: brocka on July 28, 2011, 11:39:11 PM
Always ready willing and able to apologize when I am wrong. And wrong I was, about the title and the characteristics too. This experience served many purposes: the first, to cause some posters to think about poor maligned Egbert and make a judgement call on how they rate him. Second, it reminded me to post at some time BEFORE I start nodding off in front of the computer. Third, it gives me motivation to re-read The Bellmaker next. Thanks for setting me straight, mates.
No problem dude, we all make mistakes. Besides, Bellmaker' is quite a good book.
I love foxes somehow and I think they'd be 'good' good characters! I wish he made at least one good fox, I think they're pretty cool. :)
Ditto! Well, Groddil from Lord Brocktree is sort of "gray". He never really does anything REALLY bad. I like Skalrag the best. ;D
Groddil did let Fraul run in front of him and be devoured by crabs
Dah, a post of mine disappeared...
I posted after Skalrag...anyone see it by chance?
Quote from: Taggerung_of_Redwall on July 30, 2011, 04:53:30 AM
Dah, a post of mine disappeared...
I posted after Skalrag...anyone see it by chance?
I think I saw Basil eat it. ;) ;D When you see it again, it may not read exactly the same way.
Looks like there's more examples of grayness in Redwall than I was aware of.
No, it was removed or I misposted.
Reposting:
Just because a character is too minor to show any characteristsics isn't an excuse to label them "gray". I'd say if that were the case, it'd be correct to put them in alignment of good or bad along with their species' norm.
And not doing anything "really bad" isn't much. There's a clear line between good and bad, based on species, with a small section of gray characters who except that rule and act as if they were a different species.
Assuming a character gray due to no exclusively bad behavior is pure fanon.
Sorry. I just love foxes, and I've always thought of them as half good and half bad. It sounds weird when I say it, but it's what I think.
Are there any other good vermin in the series besides Blaggut, Romsca, and Grubbage?
I wish they would have just ONE good fox! That's all I'm asking, just one!
Sorry I don't remember any really gray-foxes. Not in the literal sense. ;) Most foxes we see have been seers, which isn't evil in itself, if a bit deceitful. Are they any more evil than your Blaggut, or Romsca that served evil forces, and didn't necessarily murder anyone? Tough call.
Although Blaggut was good in the Bellmaker, who knows what terrible things he did with the searats before the Bellmaker. The same could be said with Grubbage and Romsca
I can't imagine Grubbage doing anything really bad.
I think that Jeefra counts as a neutral character. He wasn't good, but then again, he wasn't bad. Even when he was helping to attack Pandion Piketalon, then he wanted nothing to do with it. He was just too scared of his father to let the bird go.
One Nightfire, I agree that Jeefra was not evil, but he was kindof disgusting. He really was a wimp.
Two Ive noticed how a lot of people confuse evil. Evil does not mean with Cluny, or Sawney, or Kurda, but just evil. So yeah, Id consider the fox in LB evil.
Quote from: Muse on November 09, 2011, 02:28:40 AM
Two Ive noticed how a lot of people confuse evil. Evil does not mean with Cluny, or Sawney, or Kurda, but just evil. So yeah, Id consider the fox in LB evil.
Could you rephrase that?
I'm not understanding it.
I think you're saying something about the nature of evil in Redwall, correct?
^I think what he is trying to say is that you don't have to be some heinous war lord that murders for fun to be considered evil.
Yeah basically Im saying that evil or good for hat matter does not mean on the Abbeys side, pr the vermin horde. Blod Apis? Evil.
^ However, that's not how it appears in Redwall. The good are on the side of the Abbey, rarely ever on the side of the vermin. The evil are on the sides of the vermin, never with the Abbey. While I'm sure some would classify some of those naughty dibbuns as evil ( ;D ) its just not so. The closest you probably ever get to breaking this case is with Veil.
Maybe it's just me, but Deyna and Veil seemed a bit backwards. Deyna was a "goodbeast" raised by vermin, yet he never showed signs of ever being influenced by the evil around him. Veil on the other hand was raised by goodbeast, but just because he was a vermin he was bad.
I know that was a little random.
I think their the same scenario. Both were raised out of their alignment, and both became what they would be.
I think Veil isn't bad because he's a vermin so much as he's a vermin because he's bad. That's the way Snowfur looks at Redwall, and I'd have to concur.
I seriously think Jacques put Redwall (the original book, that is) together on those grounds, though strayed from it with a few characters.
Quote from: Lutra on July 21, 2011, 02:29:09 PM
^ If we're going to consider a split among some species as some good, some bad, depending on the situation and story, where does that leave Mr. Jacques' comment that the goodies are good, and the baddies are bad? Apparently there are some species that don't follow that rule!
QuoteLet's not forget about other species. Captain Snow hunted both mice and shrews, but gave all that up after Matthias killed Asmodeus. Although this could be construed as a kind of "Heel Face Turn" moment.
Owls aren't really represented in Redwall and the two examples we have--Snow and Sir Harry, these are good owls (Snow after the deal), so does this imply the owls are always on the good side too? You would have to say given the examples, owls are part of the good side and don't munch on mice. :p
This wasn't an easy question to discuss because there's many ways of focusing on who represents which piece of the puzzle. I agree with a lot I am reading. I can see the point that Verdauga might be the better representation of a gray character than Gingivere because he would listen and choose fates between the extreme suggestions by his son and daughter. Its been a while since I've actually read Mossflower, so I only recalled bits a pieces of the whole thing.
Two other owls were Boldred (MTW) very good, and the screech owl that lived on mount batpit (well lets just say was not so nice)
Uhhh... What about the searat from the Bellmaker that eventually becomes a carpenter?
Quote from: Lutra on July 21, 2011, 06:47:11 PM
I think I need to respond to an earlier question, "how much have I read" because I'm seeing characters I don't recognize. :-\
I have NOT read: Rakkety Tam, Eulalia, Doomwyte, The Sable Queen, The Rogue Crew
I read, but hardly remember anything from: The Bellmaker, The Legend of Luke, Lord Brocktree,
The rest I remember bits and pieces here and there.
I'm very rusty on my Redwall. Its what happens when you get out of school and work full-time.
__________________________________________________-
So if I'm reading posts right, there's another owl character somewhere who isn't so nice. Where does that put us with owls in terms of the good/bad species? Are we saying it depends on the owl kind of like those lizards and other secondary characters?
its the owl on mount batpit in Mossflower
I think Verdauga was a not-evil-not-good character. He was strict but fair.
Just a thought, in the book "Taggerung" Tagg has never killed a beast even though he was raised by "vermin". Jacques made this clear in the first few chapters. Tagg only kills a beast at the end because the vermin are trying to harm his friend. He is considered the "Hero" in this story, he saves Redwall every one is happy.
Quote from: WildDoogyPlumm on April 02, 2012, 01:22:57 AM
I think Verdauga was a not-evil-not-good character. He was strict but fair.
Yes. Verdauga was one of the nicest vermin.
Quote from: danflorreguba on April 02, 2012, 06:24:24 PM
Quote from: WildDoogyPlumm on April 02, 2012, 01:22:57 AM
I think Verdauga was a not-evil-not-good character. He was strict but fair.
Yes. Verdauga was one of the nicest vermin.
Well, can we even really say that cats are vermin? I mean, about half the cats seem to be good.
Are you kidding! there were SCORES of bad cats in The High Ruhlain!
Maybe, but look at Gingivere and his descendent from the original book and Verdauga.
Maybe cats got worse generally as time went on.
Maybe the Cats That invaded Green Isle were bad and others weren't.
Oh yeah, I also forgot Sandingomm. She was good.
Isn't Ransca from Pearls of Lutra a grey charactor? She is in my opinion, for the fact that she was on the bad side but also helped the good side (if you've read Pearls of Lutra, then you know what I mean).
Yes, Romsca is considered a gray character.
Grubbage was also a gray character. Good rats are interesting. :)
Your right.
Also how about Folgrim in Legend of Luke? I know he was never truly evil in the book but before that he seems to have been more evil than most villains, I mean can you think of any cannibal villains apart from Gulo and Cluny? (yes cluny was a cannibal, he considered eating the voles and Plumpen's family)
Quote from: Jetthebinturong on November 10, 2012, 01:02:16 PM
Also how about Folgrim in Legend of Luke? I know he was never truly evil in the book but before that he seems to have been more evil than most villains, I mean can you think of any cannibal villains apart from Gulo and Cluny? (yes cluny was a cannibal, he considered eating the voles and Plumpen's family)
Good point, but could that really be considered cannabalism? I mean, cannabalism's when you eat your own species, and Folgrim wasn't running around eating other otters (Sorry, that's just been bugging me for a while). Anyways, I also think Folgrim was grey.
In redwall cannibals are any creatures that eat others but for some reason fish don't count in that (why so mean to the fish?)
Funny isint it vermin eat birds and redwallers eat fish.both are animals
I don't believe that there are usually any talking birds in the books where vermin eat birds.
Dont forget Grubbage! He was a good beast trapped in a rat's body....haha, he was hilarious...
And I would say birds tend to vary a lot, in terms of being good or evil, although not so much with crows.
FLIIIIIIIIIINKYYYYYYYY! He's beast.... That's all I gotta say. :P 8)
In Marlfox,I think, a Guosim killed Log-a-Log from behind. Wouldn't that be grey since shrews are classified as good. Also, I think that Guosim helped the Marlfoxes ride the boat.
Old thread but what the ##:1168 why not revive it.
Looking at Taggerung/Deyna specifically Jacques chose to have an otter, who had an extreme aversion to killing- higher than that of many "good beast" warriors, to be a member of a good species raised by vermin. If we look at the Redwall books- we have examples of characters or groups generally considered to be good who are far less averse to killing than Tagg. A case in point would be many of the Rogue Crew otters in particular someone like Kite Slayer, I think her name was. She could be arguably be described as sociopathic along with a number of her crew mates. It is not a stretch to assume that if one of them had been raised by a vermin band, like Tagg was, that they would behave much like the other members of that band/group.
Veil as I mentioned in the Outcast thread seemed to be mentally ill.
So I find it weird how Jacques chose to handle these 2 opposite and unique scenarios.
I would say there are some more:
Blaggut is one example. He used to be a searat, but he became nice at the end of The Bellmaker.
King Araltum is another. He's not really evil or anything, but he is extremely arrogant and doesn't care much for his people.
I can't remember her name, but the queen of the "squidjees" in Martin the Warrior could be considered one. She enslaves other beasts, but eventually helps Martin.
Whenever there's a tyrant, their common horde beasts follow their orders, because they are too scared to not do so. They are just doing what they're forced to do, which is why usually the heroes let them go in the end, if they promise to not pick up a weapon or hurt anyone.
Martin's spirit is also a "gray" character in Loamhedge. The plot of the book had some problems, which if you read it you can find out. Other than that, he's a good guy in all the other books.
I always wondered: how come (with the exception of Gulo and company) all the vermin eat the same fare as Redwallers? They're from carnivorous species, but they aren't "bad" because they devour other creatures; they're "bad" because they're vermin, period.
From what I remember, Redwallers eat fish - Vermin eat fish and birds. Maybe that has something to do with it? We weer shown multiple times throughout the books that the Redwallers were friends with the birds. (Although not all of them appeared to be as advanced as the Redwallers, which was rather annoying to me. Either they can talk, appreciate candied chestnuts and other Redwall fare, and be good strategists - Or they can't. Make up your miiiiiind, Mr. Jacques.)
.
Pokes
@Cléo with a stick. Not a robot are ye?
Regarding fish, birds and vermin- well the fact that they eat flesh doesn't make or break villainy because a) Jacques himself was most likely not vegetarian and more importantly b) they all fall in different places along the Sliding Scale of... Of... Anthropomorphism? I dunno if that's right but let me explain. Vermin and woodlanders are to some extent Funny Animals- some are closer to Civilized Animals but they all fall between those two tropes.
Birds and fish however fall between Civilized and Talking Animals on this scale- ie, they aren't as advanced as the mammal's and are therefore 'edible'. This may seem rather cruel- but keep in mind that fish and birds are just as likely to view them as lunch in turn. They are all Animals- but different enough I guess that eating across isn't cannibalism- whereas a mammal eating another mammal would fall under cannibalism and therefore lead to the character involved being a villain. At least in Redwall there's no way I can see the good guys commiting cannibalism (Fanfiction can obviously blur the line but I don't think I've ever seen something as brutal as that in canon or fan-made media).
Very well put Grey.
I think I also noticed something. Are Redwall pillows full of feathers? Because I think in Pearls of Lutra Tansy breaks a pillow and feathers are said to go out.
So where did they get the feathers from? Did they just collect it out of a nest? Because I'd like to point out that there are a lot of pillows in Redwall so either they're invading a lot of nests (cleaning them out) or something else is going on...
Lol, never thought of that. So many instances in the books, when you really think about them, are so much more simple in real life than it would be there. Cheese, for example. . .
They have greensap milk. And there are a lot of vegan milks (none of which are as good for cheese as good old cow juice) made from nuts and grains (oats and I think barley milk was a thing I once saw). So cheese isn't *that* big a deal.
Oh, well, I'm not saying it would be impossible. I'm just saying the way we do things and what we use makes tasks like making cheese, baking, making soap, etc. all the more simple, rather than having to go through a process to make something to make something.