Overly powerful woodlanders...

[Ungatt Trunn]

Of course the good guys have to win most of the fights if they are defending Redwall. If they lost, the abbey would fall, and the series would basically be over.

Not if its along the lines of, per say, a really long Redwall book that tells about Redwall being captured, and after a long, hard fought battle, Redwall returning back to the good guys.

[WildDoogyPlumm]

Of course the good guys have to win most of the fights if they are defending Redwall. If they lost, the abbey would fall, and the series would basically be over.

Not if its along the lines of, per say, a really long Redwall book that tells about Redwall being captured, and after a long, hard fought battle, Redwall returning back to the good guys.

I wonder if Brian ever planned to include that kind of thing in a RW book...

[Ungatt Trunn]

Of course the good guys have to win most of the fights if they are defending Redwall. If they lost, the abbey would fall, and the series would basically be over.

Not if its along the lines of, per say, a really long Redwall book that tells about Redwall being captured, and after a long, hard fought battle, Redwall returning back to the good guys.

I wonder if Brian ever planned to include that kind of thing in a RW book...

Its possable.

[Rusvul]

I know this discussion was on the first page, but, I would like to add to it.
Redwall is great, but very black and white.

Woodlander: Good
Vermin: Bad

Vermin attack, woodlanders fight back, after long battle hero kills villain and good guys win.

That's basically a template for quite a lot of Redwall. While that would be good in real life, good always beats bad, without any real doubt, it doesn't make for a very good plot line, in my opinion. I'd have liked to see a book where it goes more like this:

Vermin attack, woodlanders have every advantage. Vermin undermine woodlander advantages, levelling the field, and then win the fight and kill the hero and his allies. Villains reign supreme, but rebellion is in order. Rebellion has every disadvantage- no weapons, and only one hope, in the form of a fighter or somesuch. Some sort of hero. Hero gets behind enemy lines, is almost killed, but manages to kill the villain- whether in honorable combat or with a knife in the back, as long as it doesn't raise attention or call the guards. Hero wins, and cuts off the head of the viper, but is then killed by the thrashing and quickly fading tail. Hero becomes martyr, good guys win. The end, happily ever after life the hero's family.

A while ago, Dann asked "What villain is worth a hero?"
My answer to that question is, an interesting one who is more than a brute, or an ill-tempered and not very good strategist.

Just my personal thoughts.

[Osu]

There are a lot of good posts in this thread, guys! *passes out cookies to everybeast*

Rusvul, excellent points. There is a lot of what you describe present in the Redwall books to a much smaller degree, but rather than focus on the entire epic journey of the heroes (from loss, struggle, then victory), Jacques kept the focus on the struggle to overcome and eventual victory. It's not that the elements aren't present, they just aren't as important to the underlying message of the story as something that focuses wholly on the heroes and the triumph over evil. Since the Redwall series is about friendship and growing up, the storylines reflect whatever will best get that point across.

I think what you're describing is a genre other than children's literature, one with a more complex moral message that focuses on themes of what good and evil are, rather than "good triumphs over evil." Different genres, and fanfiction. There's always fanfiction for your epic story lines, guys. *slyly implies there are extra cookies for those who write fanfiction* *....slides the plate of cookies closer to the thread* The whole black vs. white plot is just the trope, how the story is told, people just gravitate toward that sort of thing. It's present in just about everything, but is especially prevalent in children's lit because the target audience is just too young to be able to contemplate or be interested in contemplating the deeper meaning.

Compare, for example, The Hunger Games to Lord Brocktree. All of the same basic good vs. evil elements are present, but THG, being written for older readers, does not skimp on the more mature aspects of warfare and having a small force go up against a large one; whereas LB, being directed at younger children, gives a broader, "big picture" view of the whole thing and leaves the more mature stuff to the imagination.

I would also argue the Redwall villains are more than worthy of their heroes. If I may put forth Ungatt Trunn and Rigu Felis as top notch commanders, excellent strategists, and characters so delightfully evil I thoroughly enjoyed hating them. I think a lot of you guys in the thread just aren't giving the baddies enough credit.

Anyway, I'm rambling, long post is long, what the ultimate point I'm trying to get at is this: if all y'all write more Redwall fanfiction, I will give you cookies. Keep up the great posting, everyone!

[Ungatt Trunn]

Those are some good thoughts, Osu and rusvul. Oh, and Osu, I really like cookies, so two-dozen Fan-Fictions coming up! XD

[Dannflower Reguba]

     I think you guys mistook my quote. What I meant was not that villains are stupid, or not interesting, but a good book puts more emphasis on the Hero. Why? Because the Hero is the one meant to be used as a reference point in the readers mind, someone that the reader can look up to, or use to help make decisions. The villain is the image of what a person shouldn't be. Plus, the Hero IS generally a bit more interesting than the villain. I like a good villain (no oxymoron intended) as much as the next guy (or gal), but the hero should not be thrown away for the sake of the villain, I'm okay with the very occasional sacrificial death of the hero for everyone else's sake, but the hero should never die without accomplishing something, that sends a bad message.

[HeadInAnotherGalaxy]

Aye, good pointz from av! 'ere'z zome brovniez tae gae viz Osu'z cookiez! *Pazzez oot brovniez tae everybeazt* An' aye, ze good guyz uzually zeem to triumph more only becauze, like zomebeazt before me zaid, zey more focuz on ze triumphz o' ze good guyz an' lezz on zeir failurez. Zey ztill focuz a bit on zeir failurez, but overav zey focuz mainly on zeir triumphz.

[Rusvul]

Hrmm. Everything comes to an end- all good and evil are balanced by one another. Good is accomplished at least partially by evil, and evil is accomplished at least partially by good. Rome is a good example- Astounding everything, one of the greatest civilizations ever- One of the ways they made money and built structures was with slave trading. And, if a villain only ever punished their army, with no promotions or rewards, it would be a small reign indeed.

Redwall doesn't reflect this.

This is an interesting idea, I think. However, since I have things I need to do, and I'm not sure how this directly relates to the conversation, I'm going to leave it at that.