Unpublished Work

[daskar666]

I really hope that nobody else continues the Redwall series, it would just ruin the legacy of Brian. Even if somebody did, I would never read it.

I REALLY hate when people immediately assume that different=bad, everything in ruins, etc. Particularly with REDWALL which had many of its fans BEGGING for something different.
Come on, not all series are ruined when someone else works on them.
Look at the PSP game Daxter for example, the previous games were amazing and made by Naughty Dog, this one was made by Readyatdawn and it was equally amazing.
Same with the outsourced Ratchet and Clank games. Give it a chance instead of shunning it before the experience.

It is easier to duplicate the magic of a video game (or lack of it) than to duplicate the magic of a book.

Does it really need to be duplicated instead of modified?

Which, if twas modified, would be saying that Redwall wasn't perfect the way twas and needed to be improved. I'm sure many people on here would like that, hmmm?

Are you implying that redwall is perfect? That's just arrogance and fanboyism.

[HeadInAnotherGalaxy]

I never said that twas perfect, I'm just saying that it's fine the way it is. What it seems like you're implying is that it needs to be changed.

[daskar666]

I'm simply stating that different=/=bad.
I'm not denying that there would be drawbacks, but there are plenty of benefits as well.

[HeadInAnotherGalaxy]

The thing is, as someone else has stated, the great thing about Redwall is that you can easily recognise who is good and who is bad. If their was a mouse leading an army to conquer Redwall it make the line between good and bad more blurred than it needs to be.

[Tiria Wildlough]

Yes I heard that there was going to be another series which he wrote years ago but never published
Where the good characters are the bad(exp.Malkariss) and the Redwallers are evil

Whaaat? I don't think anyone would stomach that! (no offense, of course)

[daskar666]

The thing is, as someone else has stated, the great thing about Redwall is that you can easily recognise who is good and who is bad. If their was a mouse leading an army to conquer Redwall it make the line between good and bad more blurred than it needs to be.

No it wouldn't. If he were clearly leading an army then it would still be perfectly obvious that he were the antagonist. The difference would be that you wouldn't be immediately able to tell that just because one is a fox they're bad and a badger is immediately good. When you see their actions in the story it would quickly become evident tho.
Also what do you mean by "more blurred than it needs to be". What's so great about the lack of moral ambiguity. In real life people aren't simply good/bad so why should the Redwall universe be simplified?
BTW I'm reading Rakkety Tam right now and I gotta admit it's much better than the previous two books, including with moral ambiguity (Yoofus).

[Wot Wot!]

The thing is, as someone else has stated, the great thing about Redwall is that you can easily recognise who is good and who is bad. If their was a mouse leading an army to conquer Redwall it make the line between good and bad more blurred than it needs to be.

No it wouldn't. If he were clearly leading an army then it would still be perfectly obvious that he were the antagonist. The difference would be that you wouldn't be immediately able to tell that just because one is a fox they're bad and a badger is immediately good. When you see their actions in the story it would quickly become evident tho.
Also what do you mean by "more blurred than it needs to be". What's so great about the lack of moral ambiguity. In real life people aren't simply good/bad so why should the Redwall universe be simplified?
BTW I'm reading Rakkety Tam right now and I gotta admit it's much better than the previous two books, including with moral ambiguity (Yoofus).

Seems like everyone want to make it more like a modern/contemporary series than what BJ intended...

[Lily]

Redwall.org had a contest that they called "Ask Brian" where you could write in and ask him questions. He dealt with a few of the issues that have been raised in this thread, I thought you guys might like to read what he had to say on the subject.
Here is the original page. Horray for the Wayback Machine!

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.

[DanielofRedwall]

Redwall.org had a contest that they called "Ask Brian" where you could write in and ask him questions. He dealt with a few of the issues that have been raised in this thread, I thought you guys might like to read what he had to say on the subject.
Here is the original page. Horray for the Wayback Machine!

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.

And that is the way Brian intended it, so don't wreck it!

[daskar666]

It doesn't matter if that's how he intended. Some people prefer moral ambiguity, and a different opinion from a dead author won't change their opinion just because it's theirs.

[HeadInAnotherGalaxy]

It doesn't matter if that's how he intended. Some people prefer moral ambiguity, and a different opinion from a dead author won't change their opinion just because it's theirs.

And you were talking about arrogance before...

[daskar666]

It doesn't matter if that's how he intended. Some people prefer moral ambiguity, and a different opinion from a dead author won't change their opinion just because it's theirs.

And you were talking about arrogance before...

Dismissing someone's opinion based on the opinion's content is not arrogance.

[Wot Wot!]

It doesn't matter if that's how he intended. Some people prefer moral ambiguity, and a different opinion from a dead author won't change their opinion just because it's theirs.

Yes, but the "dead author" in question is the one who created the world in the first place.  The stories still belong to him regardless, and a change in the stories won't make them Redwall, just a sham imitation using his imagination instead of whoever decides to try to "improve" the stories.

[martins#1fan]

You wouldn't say that if one of his sons were writing the stories.

[Galedeep]

You wouldn't say that if one of his sons were writing the stories.

I don't know how they would write it, there is the good possibility that they knew Brian's vision for the books, but what I think is there is too many ways this "passing the torch" idea could go really wrong.