News:

Cheers to an Auspicious Autumn, Ev'rybeast! Enjoy a hot cider and the cool breezes, as the year dwindles to its end. . .

Main Menu

TV Series Talk: Winifred

Started by Lutra, July 27, 2011, 02:04:29 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

321tumbler

I see what you're saying, but please don't post more than once in a row.

General Ironbeak

#76
OK.

TW

There are any number of simple explanations as to why some animals wear clothes and others don't. The animals could be wearing clothes for practical reasons such as warmth or protection. There are also a number of narrative reasons Brian chose to have the animals to wear clothes. He chose to leave a many things such as the characters' sizes and whether they walk on two legs or four. Maybe this is something he left up to the reader's imagination.

Considering the animals in Redwall have fur that covers anything that needs covered, whether they wear clothing or not is irrelevant. It's probable that Brian had the characters wear clothes as a method of humanizing them. This was repeated the TV series and some otters wore clothes and others didn't based on the reasons other people have already stated.

Another thing to remember, Redwall has it's roots in archetypes and legends (foxes are cunning and demonic snakes). Many stories contain a common fault in humanity that humans are the only species to be vain enough to see themselves as naked. I'm not saying that Brian was directly referring to this, just that the characters aren't that concerned about wearing clothes for the same reason we are.
"In my books there is life and death. Goodies get killed as well as baddies. It's not like Walt Disney where there are singing teapots and we all go over the hill singing bobbidy-bobbidy-boo at the end so goodies get killed as well as baddies." -Brian Jacques

General Ironbeak

Hmm...I'm still curious though. I've never seen Ironbeak, my favorite, as wearing clothes, but could he be and Jacques just didn't specify?

TW

Quote from: General Ironbeak on January 01, 2014, 10:51:44 PM
Hmm...I'm still curious though. I've never seen Ironbeak, my favorite, as wearing clothes, but could he be and Jacques just didn't specify?

I don't think any birds have worn clothing, but they aren't anthropomorphic like the mammals and some reptiles are. Unlike the Matthias, for example, who has a more human shape, a bird like Ironbeak wouldn't fit into a shirt or tunic. It would probably restrict their flight, too.
"In my books there is life and death. Goodies get killed as well as baddies. It's not like Walt Disney where there are singing teapots and we all go over the hill singing bobbidy-bobbidy-boo at the end so goodies get killed as well as baddies." -Brian Jacques

General Ironbeak

#80
And now that I think about it, the birds COULD wear clothes...I mean, the crows in "Dumbo" wear clothes without a problem, so why couldn't the ones in Redwall?

Starla1431

^ Redwall and Dumbo are two different universes. Some wear clothes while others do not. It's just how you imagine the animals, really. I don't really care if they wear clothing or not.

General Ironbeak

#82
I'm not saying they're the same universe. I'm just saying TW made it sound like clothes would be IMPOSSIBLE for a bird to wear.

Shadowed One

I think it's just a matter of opinion. If it specifically says someone had clothes, then they obviously did. If it doesn't, you can decide whether or not they are when you imagine them.
Martin the Warrior is way more epic than Mickey Mouse. Anyone who says otherwise is insane, or just wrong.

"I'm languishing in heroic obscurity!"-Doc

Gonff the Mousethief

I always thought they had a cool tunic or a long habbit on
I want the world of Tolkien,
The message of Lewis;
The adventure of Jacques,
And the heart of Milne.
But I want the originality of me.