|
Post by Linx Exotic on Oct 21, 2007 16:46:30 GMT -5
Yeah, I can see one just getting a bit delusional with it, but genuinely bad? Going off the Redwalliverse badger, impossible.
|
|
|
Post by Auric Ashtongue on Oct 21, 2007 16:51:45 GMT -5
I think it's supposed to be destiny or something. Badgers and foxes are celestial foes or something, given the amount of mysticism involved. They predict the future, are complete opposites, are always major characters, etc. Jedi vs. Sith tyoe of situation.
|
|
|
Post by Linx Exotic on Oct 21, 2007 16:53:11 GMT -5
Do we need something that saturated in plot devices here? Not that I don't think it should be ignored, but...
|
|
|
Post by Auric Ashtongue on Oct 21, 2007 16:56:58 GMT -5
I agree. They should be reserved as NPC Quest characters. Badgers are obvious, but a fox, I could just invent some invisible scheme and simply type "Aha!" and entrap you with one post.
|
|
|
Post by Linx Exotic on Oct 21, 2007 16:58:04 GMT -5
Which is one of the reasons I said in the Captain thread that I'm not in favor of dishing out such characters.
|
|
|
Post by corsair on Oct 21, 2007 17:04:39 GMT -5
I think that BJ needs an evil badger in fact I wrote him a letter about it. I think that its time that a so called goodbeast goes evil and a so called evil beast goes good. I wrote him telling him he should write a book centered around a evil badger and a good wildcat which we have already seen but another one would be cool.
|
|
|
Post by Auric Ashtongue on Oct 21, 2007 17:06:24 GMT -5
We already have good wildcats in the books.
|
|
|
Post by Linx Exotic on Oct 21, 2007 17:07:11 GMT -5
Well, that would totally defy the archetypes he's implemented as of now, which would seriously damage their integrity if not shatter it. How either of those would even occur is beyond me, the characters tend to be just born the way they are.
|
|
|
Post by Auric Ashtongue on Oct 21, 2007 17:26:43 GMT -5
In Mossflower, Gingivere Greeneyes the wildcat assists the heroes against his sister then raises a vegetarian family.
In Joseph the Bellmaker, there is a searat named Blaggut who strangled his companion for murdering an elderly badger and was very fond of children. He becomes a boatsmith for the rest of his life and lives peacefully in Redwall.
In Martin the Warrior, there is a tribe of warrior squirrels, though only the chieftain is evil. After he's dead, the tribe helps Martin. In The Outcast of Redwall, we have a ferrett raised in Redwall. He poisons and murders another Redwaller, then is outcast and does more bad things on the outside. Gives up his life for the maid who raised him, even though that mousemaid later declares him truly evil.
In The Pearls of Lutra, we have a ferrett corsair who gives her life to save a kidnapped abbot from her own crew. In the same book, we have a weasel who repents his evil ways and returns the stolen pearls before dying.
In Taggerung, we have Tagg, an otter raised by vermin. Though he's pretty much Martin the Warrior with tattoos as far as ambiguity goes.
In Triss, we have deaf rat whom the Redwallers were quite fond and accepted into their group.
In Rakkety Tam, we have a pair of corrupt squrrel monarchs and their spoiled son.
Voles and shrews are ambiguous throughout the series.
In case anyone wanted a list of precedents... Yes, I know, I must obssess too much over the books to have them all memorized like that.
|
|
|
Post by Linx Exotic on Oct 21, 2007 17:39:38 GMT -5
That about sums it up. You don't see any of the extreme species there, though.
|
|
|
Post by Finnerator Rudderbow on Oct 21, 2007 18:57:02 GMT -5
I believe that the stereotype of vermin and woodlander was created by Brian Jacques for the simplicity of it all. It makes things a lot easier to grasp and understand for the younger readers of his books. However, the ROC has taken things to a new and higher level and has expanded BJ's ideas to make them a bit more realistic and realistically, everyone has the potential for evil and everyone has the potential for good. That's why I don't require members to be "goodbeasts", they just have to be "good" whether they're rats or mice or whatever. So I voted for the fifth choice.
|
|
|
Post by Linx Exotic on Oct 21, 2007 18:58:32 GMT -5
I probably would have, but as has been previously discussed the extreme cases that go beyond moral alignment and into personality itself stick around to some degree.
|
|
|
Post by Clearbrook on Oct 21, 2007 19:01:20 GMT -5
Some woodlanders can be a bit wicked, but it's usually Dibbuns playing tricks. And some vermin can be good. Auric has all of the examples I can think of.
|
|
|
Post by Linx Exotic on Oct 21, 2007 19:03:04 GMT -5
That list is pretty thorough as far as BJ's own deviations from the species stereotypes, yeah. Not much else to say there.
|
|
|
Post by corsair on Oct 21, 2007 19:33:10 GMT -5
I have an example of a wicked goodbeast. Abess Meriam from outcast of redwall. I think she was wicked by kicking veil out. They treated him wrongly. Just because of the creature they are does not mean that they are bad. I feel that if the creatures thought better of him he would have been better.
|
|