Socialism, Female Characters in YA, and Redwall

[twirlynoodle]

A few years ago, when Occupy was doing their thing and their grievances and agenda were in the news, I had this thought:

These are clever, resourceful, idealistic, fit young people in their prime, who evidently don't mind a bit of discomfort to prove a point. If they want to reject the system, why don't they pool their resources, launch a

Comments

[furtech]

I never thought of looking at the characters that way ( "you are an otter because you are good, not good because you're an otter"). Huh. That kind of characterization reminds me more of C.S. Lewis's "The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe" -- but he was very much into the metaphysical stuff you talk about.

Even a child, though, I was attracted to the trope of "the redemption of evil", where for one reason or another a villain is redeemed. At that age, I made up stories where I would, for instance, I would find a dying (evil) dragon, defeated by a knight: I would heal it and we would be pals. I kept hoping for *something* like that in the Redwall books: vermin saved/shown-mercy/etc. by kind Redwall person...and becomes a good guy. But it became clear that would never happen.

The idea that the later books were ghost-written is intriguing! I had never considered that! I wonder if the details will ever come out? (Not holding my breath though.)

I agree with you wrt Harry Potter in that the later books were not necessarily -better- books (totally agree that they needed editing-- but that wasn't going to happen). But the issues and characters did get more complicated/sophisticated. To be honest, the first book will always be my favorite: it was exactly what it needed to be.

[twirlynoodle]

Lewis did the metaphysical and so did Grahame (Wind in the Willows), and Jacques is definitely following in their footsteps (especially Grahame's) even if he keeps clear of the metaphysical in his own writing. There was a little more of that in his non-Redwall books, if I recall, but not as well-developed. I wonder if the class associations made him uncomfortable swimming in that pool, or if leaving school at 15 he just didn't get exposed to the sort of stuff that would have brought greater philosophical depth to his writing. We may never know.

It surprises me that for all the people who raise the same objections you do to the 'speciesism' - especially ones in my generation - no one has looked at it from the other angle. Surely they all grew up with the same animated films I did? It's not like I'm applying some esoteric logic to it, I was just assuming it worked on the same basis as Robin Hood and The Lion King.

I hear you on the redemption thing, but, well ... not every story can be a redemption story, I suppose. I wonder if that aspect, not being able to change those in power, has anything to do with the rigid class structure ... Can't talk to the boss, all you can do is stand up to them and maybe turf them out if you're lucky. The idea of being able to turn someone over is very egalitarian when you look at it, and starts with the assumption they'll listen to a word you say ...

[furtech]

You are clearly more studied on Jacques than I: the rigid societal classes and the war probably had significant influence on his writing.

WRT the speciesism, if there were fifteen sequels to TLK or Robin Hood and -no- sympathetic "evil" characters/species or genuinely "good" ones-- I would have the same criticism. In most animated series there is usually at least one episode that either features sympathetic bad guys or sheds insight/empathy for the main villain. Rowling handled Snape and even Voldemort very well (IMO) that sense. I'm not looking for a major shift in the series-- just -one- instance would have made me happy.

I wonder if the European folktale tradition-- with it's wise and resourceful women-- has something to do with how they treat female characters. Wise and practical mothers/grandmothers and plucky, resourceful princesses. America-- melting pot that it is-- does not have that sort of foundation for its storytellers.

[twirlynoodle]

OK, I get your point, yes. Considering how long the series went on after I stopped reading it's definitely a lost opportunity.

I personally think the war and post-war years were what informed his 'women can do anything' attitude, because they would have - they worked and kept things running when the men were away, took bombs and food shortages in their stride, still kept everything running when he was off earning a paycheque, and some of the men didn't come home at all. The stereotypical '50s American housewife would have collapsed in the rubble of post-war Liverpool.

That's just my theory, though, maybe it was an attitude that came up later as the social movements of the later 20th century made their mark.

Funny, I was talking with someone a few months ago (he of Spanish extraction) who raised the same point about America not having that folkloric base, which is true. I wanted to know why, as a melting pot, with not just one but ALL folkloric traditions to draw from, it ended up with NONE. I suppose Disney movies are as close as you get to a common folk tradition, but only if you really stretch the definition.

[ardys_the_ghoul]

I think there WAS one instance.

As I recall, in one of the Redwall books (I want to say it was "The Bellmaker," but my memory is hazy on that), there was a crew of pirate rats, and one of them turned out to be Not Such a Bad Guy After All and became friends with the animals of Redwall. It was kind of a, "We did a terrible thing to these people, and now I have to make it right," kind of situation.

I have the same problem as you do with good and evil being specific to species in those books, so I think that's why that one character stands out in my mind. He was the one instance of a GOOD rat.