How anthropomorphic are the animals to you?

[Mara the Wolf]

Just a little something that bugs me - one of the books mentions hares having paw pads. Lapines (hares and rabbits) don't have paw pads in real life (also, if the illustrations are anything to go by, they have the noses completely wrong too - lapines have hairy, black, v-shaped noses. Squirrels too). It's such a minor little quibble, and you could say, "Well, in real life, they don't talk either," but still.

[Ripred the Gnawer]

I know what you mean.

[lass of something much]

Just a little something that bugs me - one of the books mentions hares having paw pads. Lapines (hares and rabbits) don't have paw pads in real life (also, if the illustrations are anything to go by, they have the noses completely wrong too - lapines have hairy, black, v-shaped noses. Squirrels too). It's such a minor little quibble, and you could say, "Well, in real life, they don't talk either," but still.

They do have something similar, however..
So the mistake is forgivable.

Not just Gabool. Boar the Fighter is the first creature (publication-wise) to be mentioned having a beard. Personally, I find these animals having facial hair (or hair on top of their heads that isn't fur) to be weird. It's one thing to do it over in Sonic, where the animals are so anthropomorphic they're more like (mostly) small humans with fur and tails (and hair-like quills for hedgehogs and echidnas), but in Redwall? The animals seem more like animals standing on their hind-legs, body-wise.

Then again, it depends on the artist. Troy Howell's cover art looks a bit too much like regular animals, with no human elements, while Gary Chalk's illustrations look way too much like humans with fur, human-ish heads, and tails. My reaction to Mattimeo's picture in Chapter 5? "Whoa, no! Nononono! This is Redwall, not Wind In the Willows!"

Thing is, are you meaning redwall, or how you imagined it.. Judging by how they're described in actual books, I'm guessing Garys' depiction was quite accurate..