Romance in Redwall

[The Skarzs]

Or, you know, there's always the answer that needs less explaining.

Completely platonic best friends.

Yes.

[Blaggut]

That's not really a good bit of logic, and I did say Brian /possibly/ did that, not that's what he surely meant.

Anyways, it's more of a headcanon that I share with some LGBTQ+ Redwall friends of mine, not something I believe Brian did intentionally. Btw, I don't want to sound rude, but it's rly not-cool to deny LGBTQ+ their LGBTQ+ headcanons and character theories unless there's actually something that makes it really, really wrong and/or has legit no basis. And there's plenty of basis for Rakkety x Doogy (x Rakkety's Wifey?)

Of course if one doesn't like the poly bit, they can always be headcanoned as former boyfriends who still platonically love each other, as opposed to their former romantic feelings.

[Blaggut]

To clarify, it's not-cool because LGBTQ are ignored so often in such things, and headcanons, theories, and ships are good ways for us to provide ourselves with our own representation and a good coping mechanism for us. It gets annoying when so many cis-hetero people constantly shoot us down when we're trying to do such things. It's also a big part of our modern online 'aesthetic genre' community.

[The Skarzs]

Um. . . Okay?

[Wylder Treejumper]

Personally I do not see anything that could possibly indicate the ships that you speak of, Blaggut. For one thing, Brian Jacques was a pretty traditional guy, as far as that sort of thing goes (he literally imitated the ideals of "courtly romance" in Redwall)- so the idea that he intended any such thing is pretty much out of the question. As far as subtext goes, I still fail to find anything supportive. Doogy and Tam's relationship is equivalent to pretty much all the warrior camaraderie we see throughout the entire series.

[Blaggut]

If by traditional you mean he wasn't supportive of LGBTQ+ people, I disagree. Are you using "traditional" to sugarcoat beliefs that are anti-LGBTQ? Just say homophobic or anti-LGBT or LGBT-hating or something. And saying that because some or most romance in Redwall is 'courtly' or old timey doesn't mean it can't be LGBTQ, because Redwall constantly takes historical inspiration but heavily changes it. You don't see the Redwallers or Salamandastron doing Inquisitions or talking about sins. The point is invalid. To say that he "intended any such thing is out of the question" is quite silly in my opinion.

And anyways, it is a headcanon for me. I think potential LGBTQ+ representation in Redwall is most likely found somewhere else in the series, but I find this headcanon and ship quite nice.

Anyway, can we not have a debate every time someone mentions LGBTQ+ stuff in Redwall or even in general? Its quite a pestilence.

This image describes what I'm trying to say about how people always decide to debate or share opinions or argue when LGBTQ+ stuff is brought up, and moderators of forums treat it like it's some sensitive, argument starting content and delete or attach warnings to it despite 12 percent of the population being LGBTQ+

https://68.media.tumblr.com/b58878643a5e94e7cf5b44761632bb50/tumblr_orxugbZ8sU1tpmf3mo2_500.jpg

[Wylder Treejumper]

Yes, I mean traditional in that way: I doubt Brian even considered the idea when he was writing. This is not a stretch of the imagination. You said Brian could have possibly intended it, I am merely saying that is highly unlikely. You brought up a possible ship, I am discussing the merits of it. Namely, the lack of evidence to support it.

[Jetthebinturong]

While I don't particularly care to imagine romance in Redwall, as it wasn't something Brian was all that good at, I don't see what benefit begrudging people their headcanons has to anyone.

As to the issue of Brian's stance on LGBT issues, we have literally no idea. He was Catholic and old, so it's possible he was against that sort of thing. On the other hand, there are plenty of old Catholics who have no problems with LGBT issues, so it is impossible to determine on which side he fell without explicit confirmation from him. And since that isn't going to happen, it's better to drop the issue entirely because speculating on someone else's beliefs holds no purpose.

Also, Brian's stance on LGBT issues is 1. completely irrelevant, and 2. a veil for your own personal objection to the topic, and it is disingenuous to pretend otherwise.

If someone wants to headcanon LGBT relationships in a ridiculous fantasy series about talking British animals, then they should be allowed to do so without conservative Christians jumping on them just because the idea makes them uncomfortable.

That is what happened here. It is ridiculous, it is rude, and it is petty.

[Wylder Treejumper]

*Exercises extreme willpower to avoid continuing an obviously unproductive discussion*

Returning to the main topic of discussion. Personally, I always like the understated way Brian did romance in Redwall. I particularly liked the "courtly romance" style he used in Redwall. The tying of the handkerchief to the arm, for example is a practice rich in symbolism, and while it is unlikely to happen in this day and age it is good to see it again in a more modern work. I also think the minimal portrayal of romance allows us to appreciate the characters more fully individually, whereas in many works we consider characters with their relationship status as a main facet of their identity.

[Ashleg]

What do you mean by the handkerchief thing?

[Blaggut]

While I don't particularly care to imagine romance in Redwall, as it wasn't something Brian was all that good at, I don't see what benefit begrudging people their headcanons has to anyone.

Also, Brian's stance on LGBT issues is 1. completely irrelevant, and 2. a veil for your own personal objection to the topic, and it is disingenuous to pretend otherwise.

If someone wants to headcanon LGBT relationships in a ridiculous fantasy series about talking British animals, then they should be allowed to do so without conservative Christians jumping on them just because the idea makes them uncomfortable.

That is what happened here. It is ridiculous, it is rude, and it is petty.

// slams the recorded clapping track button //

[Wylder Treejumper]

In Redwall, Cornflower tied her handkerchief to Matthias' arm. This is a practice from Mediaeval times:

[Ashleg]

Oh, I thought she just did that 'cause he was injured. What does it signify? Is it like an ancient wedding ring or something?

[Wylder Treejumper]

Not quite. The practice stems originally from tournaments, where the champion would receive a "favor" from the from the Princess- the most beautiful noble lady in attendance- as a reward for his prowess. Later, the receipt of the handkerchief moved from designating the winner of a tournament to the other meaning of champion: a martial representative. In effect, the lady claimed the knight as her own personal warrior. The knight was expected to perform honorably in her name, and carried the handkerchief as a physical reminder of her affection. It was also a very personal gift, in that the lady usually embroidered her own handkerchiefs. Thus, she gave him what is in effect a piece of herself. The practice of keeping the handkerchief tied on the arm was the knight announcing that he was fighting "in the name" of someone else.


Of course, a large amount of this is literary and may or may not reflect actual practices in Mediaeval society, but it is beautiful nonetheless.

[Ashleg]

Oh, so Maid Marian and stuff. Got it.