Redwall (Book)-Should it be revised?

[Ungatt Trunn]

If you look at Redwall (The Book), its evident that its different from every other book. The differences are, just to name a few:
1. Names- There are more biblical names here than in any other Redwall book.
2. Basil Stag Hair- Instead of saying "Wot" like most hairs do, he pronounces it "What". This habit changes in Mattimeo.
3. The Food- There are several types of food, such as Goats milk, that, according to all the other Redwall books, don't exist in that land.
4. The Creatures- Several species of creatures that appear in Redwall don't appear anywhere else in the series.
5. The References- There is at least 1 reference to Humans living in that world.

So, with that summed up, here is my question- Can Redwall be revised (Re-Written, in a way) To Mach the rest of the series? I mean, it wouldn't really hurt it much, would it? Just change the spelling of some of the words, Re-Wright certain parts that have references to Humans, stuff like that, but not ruin the book itself? Can't that be done?

[Tam and Martin]

It could be possible to do that. I don't really mind it being there but that is one of the book Redwall annoys me.

[Leatho Shellhound]

Hmm, Well since it was the first, it makes it special. So, it that way, no. Another thing, I still like that a horse is a Redwall animal. 

[Maudie]

Some things may need to be revised, but it is still good the way it is.

I don't think having more biblical names is a problem.

[Tam and Martin]

Some things may need to be revised, but it is still good the way it is.

I don't think having more biblical names is a problem.

Me neither I like the names!

[Ungatt Trunn]

Some things may need to be revised, but it is still good the way it is.

I don't think having more biblical names is a problem.

Me neither I like the names!

I didn't say that it was a problem, heck, I don't think that theres any need fir those names to be revised! All I said was that some of the names in Redwall are different from other Redwall books.

[Maudie]

Oh, whoops! I got that wrong

[Tam and Martin]

I didn't say that I didn't like the names but that I like them in the book. YOu didn't say anything wrong Ungatt.

[Ungatt Trunn]

I didn't say that I didn't like the names but that I like them in the book. YOu didn't say anything wrong Ungatt.

None of us did. It was just a small misunderstanding.

[Tam and Martin]

Okay 

[Ungatt Trunn]

Okay 

So this all leads back to the original question: should Redwall be revised?

[VedCassib]

While I agree that there are things that seem out of place with the rest of the Redwall universe. I don't think it should be revised. It's the first book. After it was published Brian Jacques learned what the majority of people preferred and thought that some things should be slightly different in the future. Revising it would be like an artist painting over the top of his original painting years later because he it wasn't as good as the ones he is now painting after he has perfected his technique. Without the original the rest would never have existed. Why alter the first work? It shows where he began.

[Romsca]

Okay... WHEN WERE HUMANS MENTIONED? I think if they kept everything else the same, but just changed that part, that would be fine

[Ungatt Trunn]

Okay... WHEN WERE HUMANS MENTIONED? I think if they kept everything else the same, but just changed that part, that would be fine

There was one part were they are talking about Cluny, and it is said that a Town Dog said something about cows, pigs and a farm, but for the creatures in the Redwall world, that would be virtully inpossable for them to have a farm with cows and pigs.
Also, I think that it would be alright for some light revising, like revising Basil's  common hair actsent  and little stuff like that.

[rachel25]

No I like it as it is because it was the first Redwall book ever I think it should stay the way B.J. first wrote it