Redwall Abbey

Brian Jacques' Works (Spoilers) => General Discussion => Topic started by: a crumb on October 09, 2017, 04:27:10 AM

Poll
Question: Do you visualize Redwall's animals as operating on two or four legs?
Option 1: All species on four legs votes: 0
Option 2: All species on two legs votes: 9
Option 3: Most species on four legs votes: 0
Option 4: Most species on two legs votes: 19
Option 5: Other votes: 1
Title: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: a crumb on October 09, 2017, 04:27:10 AM
Oddly, I found no previous topic, let alone poll, to this perennial question.

Brian Jacques was of course himself ambivalent, repeatedly preferring to allow room for a given fan's own imagination to decide the question.
I do wonder about a couple things in regards to his writing, though. I am unsure of the exact timeline of Jacques' comments, so I wonder whether he himself had a preference in mind, and if so, if it changed over time, specifically after the first few books. In other words, I have previously had the impression that certain passages in the first few books implied a certain method of walking for different animals.

The main reasons I can think of against either visualization is that for two legs, it comes across as very awkward to imagine a cat or fox walking about on just two legs. But how does a cat fight with a sword if on four legs? Just one oddly forward, walking on the other three?

Now, as far as my own visualization goes, I have tended to think of cats, foxes, pine martens and sables as being defaultedly traveling on four legs. Which is odd, since I definitively saw Gulo as a two-leg guy, even though a wolverine would seemingly fit well into the same category as those other bigger creatures.
I make little real visualization of Redwall characters besides the most vague details, so this has always been rather important to my total seeing of the characters.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Ashleg on October 09, 2017, 04:56:45 AM
To me, everything walked on two legs unless it was something like the Gloomer (mindless and written as if it were on all fours) or certain kinds of lizards and whatnot.

Other species can go on all fours but it's not the default, otherwise the mechanics of the world do not work. Sword fighting, using arrows, holding maps, writing.

It is always said that the objects are held in the paw, not the mouth.

And the graphic novel, TV series, book covers (with Slagar as an exception on ONE book cover), and the chapter drawings within the books show the majority of characters on two legs.

I am sure if that was not how Brian envisioned it he would have asked for different art.
The quote may have just been to please the readers who pictured it differently.

(Re: pine martens on four legs. Whaaa? Ashleg's peg leg is made a big deal of and he's shown hopping when forced to run, which wouldn't be a problem if he was on all fours. And Ublaz...is definitely not the kind of guy to get his front paws dirty. Heck, he has painted nails.)
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: The Skarzs on October 09, 2017, 06:01:35 PM
Aye.
My visualization is always two legs, except on rare occasions. Lizards and frogs seemed like they would be on both two or four, depending on what they're doing, because they're  less advanced/savage species.
A couple other cases might be Gloomer, like Ash said, and the ermine from The Bellmaker.

Sunflash being forced to walk on all fours seemed like a mockery and humiliation.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: MeadowR on October 09, 2017, 06:13:52 PM
What they said.

Not much else I can add. Four legs just... no.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Krantor the Brutal on October 09, 2017, 06:42:45 PM
I agree.
Next question: Are they humanoid? I don't think so.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Maudie on October 09, 2017, 07:20:52 PM
I'd say they're probably partially humanoid. I don't imagine them with headfur or anything like that, but if they weren't at least a little bit humanoid they'd look pretty awkward walking around on two legs.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Krantor the Brutal on October 09, 2017, 07:37:05 PM
Maybe something like this (https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQqbp502teFAwSx43XOxLQuB9_JquagoRrQjyzIecnILJ_9e66jnQ)
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Ashleg on October 09, 2017, 07:38:52 PM
Yeah.

Here's pretty much my mental image (Disney's Robin Hood).

Except less size differences between mice and other creatures.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Maudie on October 09, 2017, 07:41:16 PM
Aye.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Krantor the Brutal on October 09, 2017, 07:43:19 PM
I imagine them more CGI like in a live action movie.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Maudie on October 09, 2017, 07:50:09 PM
Like Reepacheep in the most recent Prince Caspian movie?
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Ashleg on October 09, 2017, 07:52:34 PM
CGI. *cries*
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: The Skarzs on October 09, 2017, 08:07:08 PM
Quote from: Krantor the Brutal on October 09, 2017, 07:37:05 PM
Maybe something like this (https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQqbp502teFAwSx43XOxLQuB9_JquagoRrQjyzIecnILJ_9e66jnQ)
Pretty much.

The one thing that changes in my mind is the upper body and arm structure.
Animals have pretty narrow fronts proportional to their heads, as well as small front legs and paws. This picture is a good example of that.
In my drawings the body is probably the most human thing about them. The legs are pretty much animal, and the head I base off of pictures I look up for each species. The eyes can be a challenge since animals don't have human eyes, which convey a lot of emotion and intelligence. So I also change that from animalistic to human-like.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Maudie on October 12, 2017, 05:43:19 AM
It's interesting how our imaginations differ when it comes to just what level of human-ness the animals have.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Ashleg on October 12, 2017, 05:47:26 AM
What if I voted "other" and commented "all species on no legs".

Imagine that.

Redwall characters either float or slither.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Krantor the Brutal on October 13, 2017, 12:50:21 AM
Like snakes?
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: The Skarzs on October 13, 2017, 05:14:35 AM
Quote from: Maudie on October 12, 2017, 05:43:19 AM
It's interesting how our imaginations differ when it comes to just what level of human-ness the animals have.
Indeed.
I think of it as more of physically practical. Most animals would not be able to function if they were stood on two legs with the bone structures they have. Human bodies are the most adapted for vertical standing, mostly with the spine, so if an animal were to walk on two legs with much effectiveness they would have to have some human characteristics.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: MeadowR on October 13, 2017, 05:36:03 PM
Yeah.

When it comes to the hares I tend to think of their long feet being flat on the ground rather than kind of tip-paw like some people tend to draw them. I just can't see how they could balance comfortably stood like that. The thought of those long feet on the floor seems clumsy, but they would just have to adapt by picking their paws off the ground more when they walk or so.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Krantor the Brutal on October 13, 2017, 05:37:05 PM
(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/narnia/images/9/9e/Chm.png/revision/latest?cb=20170521115333) THE BADGER!
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: The Skarzs on October 13, 2017, 05:50:39 PM
You also see how fat, or wide-hipped they look like that.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: MeadowR on October 13, 2017, 06:10:41 PM
How I tend to view a lot of the animals, trying to keep a bend in the legs more akin to the animal than to a human's, then it does mean they go wide at this hips (which is fine, okay D:, boohoo). But it is getting that tricky balance. Give a mouse that and then you're tempted to make them tip-paw, but they tend to be described as wearing sandals - at least those in Redwall - keeping their feet flat which might make it more awkward with the more animal-like bend. Or maybe it does work okay. And I just said flat-pawed would work for hares, so... I'm overthinking it. I'm not sure anymore...

I just looked at the UK cover of The Rogue Crew and an otter drawn wearing shorts looks pretty awkward, like the illustrator couldn't quite work out whether drawing the legs like that to enable shorts really worked or not.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Ashleg on October 13, 2017, 10:27:15 PM
Ah mean...

(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/b1/21/e6/b121e6b4b785652702a6b0da66287c16.png)

Because sandals.
You just need to throw their anatomy out the window and alter it to be more cartoony. Once done, it's not awkward for them to be flat-footed an' as you see, John here's not wide at the hips or anything.

Also, you can (gag) look at Zootopia or the Secret of NIMH (especially--because mice) and see how they drew the feet.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Krantor the Brutal on October 14, 2017, 12:03:37 AM
Weren't footwear dropped?
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Captain Wortshire on October 14, 2017, 12:36:57 AM
Quote from: Krantor the Brutal on October 14, 2017, 12:03:37 AM
Weren't footwear dropped?
Nope, some vermin wear boots.

Heck even Gurgan Spearback the hedgehog from Long Patrol wore boots
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Ashleg on October 14, 2017, 12:46:58 AM
Even in the last book there is Log-a-Log Dandy Cloggs, named after his shoes.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: The Skarzs on October 14, 2017, 12:58:09 AM
It's all in the way we visuallize it, I guess.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: MeadowR on October 15, 2017, 05:18:43 PM
Yeah, but the Robin Hood characters are more humanised (and of course cartoony) in their bodies than I tend to picture the Redwall characters. I know flat-pawed can work in certain ways!
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Ashleg on October 16, 2017, 05:10:36 AM
(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/characters/images/5/5c/Mrs._Brisby.jpeg/revision/latest?cb=20140118213336)

Better example for the mice.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: The Skarzs on October 16, 2017, 01:50:59 PM
Ah.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Krantor the Brutal on October 16, 2017, 02:07:39 PM
Can't see it, Ash.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: MeadowR on October 16, 2017, 05:07:39 PM
Yeah, that's a better example to show!

Quote from: MeadowRabbit on October 13, 2017, 06:10:41 PM
I just looked at the UK cover of The Rogue Crew and an otter drawn wearing shorts looks pretty awkward, like the illustrator couldn't quite work out whether drawing the legs like that to enable shorts really worked or not.

Just to quote myself, because it dawned on me a few hours ago that it was the High Rhulain cover, not The Rogue Crew I was looking at, in case anybody had a look at the cover and thought, 'what on Earth is she on about?' ;D
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Ashleg on October 16, 2017, 05:23:46 PM
This one?
(https://pictures.abebooks.com/isbn/9780141319605-us-300.jpg)

This is the copy I have, and yeah, that otter with the karate pants pants looks wonky.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Krantor the Brutal on October 16, 2017, 05:28:25 PM
Aye. I don't think most creatures had pants at that time... if it is a medieval setting.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Ashleg on October 16, 2017, 05:31:25 PM
I don't remember many characters written with pants.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: MeadowR on October 16, 2017, 05:36:25 PM
Yep! That's the version I meant! It doesn't look right even in thumbnail form.

That's one argument against trousers in the Redwall universe!
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Ashleg on October 16, 2017, 05:40:13 PM
It can be done, but again with a more cartoony style.

If yer gonna draw 'em realistic like that, maybe...lay off the pants. Because it looks awkward.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: MeadowR on October 16, 2017, 05:47:48 PM
^ Yeah, exactly to both.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: a crumb on October 16, 2017, 05:55:32 PM
There's also the Winifred principle from the tv series. Just randomly don't give any clothes to otters.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Krantor the Brutal on October 16, 2017, 06:00:35 PM
I guess it has to do with the otters swimming...
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: MeadowR on October 16, 2017, 06:38:41 PM
That was an odd decision. The fact the animals are wearing clothes at all means that the otter would be considered naked. (And that will just simply not do. Hem hem. !) She should at least have had a thin tunic suitable for diving into the water.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Krantor the Brutal on October 16, 2017, 06:47:10 PM
Aye, that makes sense.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: The Skarzs on October 16, 2017, 07:51:31 PM
Artistic liberties. :P
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Krantor the Brutal on October 16, 2017, 08:24:56 PM
Consider that the show was for kids who don't understand those things...
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Ashleg on October 16, 2017, 11:40:01 PM
Ashleg is having flashbacks to the character he drew that y'all said needed clothes.

Personally, I think clothes are optional for animals.
Most of them don't even wear pants. And sometimes ones that 'do' wear ONLY pants.

So...
Don't see why it's okay to only have one but neither would be taboo.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: The Skarzs on October 17, 2017, 01:26:23 AM
Why? Because people visuallize things differently. :P
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Ashleg on October 17, 2017, 04:53:59 AM
That's true, but then why'd it be okay for Mr.Otter there to not wear pants?
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: The Skarzs on October 17, 2017, 06:04:22 AM
I believe that was actually Winifred in the series. . .
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Krantor the Brutal on October 17, 2017, 08:45:41 AM
I guess kids before weren't as "dirty-minded". Just saying...
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Ashleg on October 17, 2017, 01:10:48 PM
That's what I'm trying to say, though, which is that there's nothing 'dirty' about it and the other characters didn't react as if something was wrong with her.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: MeadowR on October 17, 2017, 06:23:20 PM
I tend to think of these characters as having long tunics or/and other clothes that would go a bit - or longer - over their thighs.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Krantor the Brutal on October 17, 2017, 09:05:03 PM
Same here. But I still have difficulty visualizing footwear.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: The Skarzs on October 17, 2017, 10:55:45 PM
Footwear just seems awkward.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: sunflashtheace on February 16, 2018, 03:45:13 PM
I would say two because thats how they are pictured
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Ashleg on February 16, 2018, 07:27:13 PM
Quote from: The Skarzs on October 17, 2017, 10:55:45 PM
Footwear just seems awkward.

I don't know why, but I can see footwear working so long as it's like Scrooge McDuck where it doesn't cover the whole paw and is basically useless...
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: The Skarzs on March 02, 2018, 05:55:34 PM
I suppose. More of fashion than anything.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Ashleg on March 03, 2018, 12:23:28 AM
Aye.

((Well, in my head, they don't really need clothes and it's all just for expression.))
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: The Skarzs on March 03, 2018, 04:48:26 AM
There is a certain amount of decency they feel the need for, though. Like in the Rogue Crew and the hedgehog whose spines and fur were falling out.
Title: Re: Visualizing Redwall animals on two or four legs
Post by: Ashleg on March 16, 2018, 03:57:19 AM
Spines and fur falling out, yeah, cover that, nobeast wants to see you because you look like you have a disease even if you don't and that's not the case.

'Tis still unpleasant to look at.

Otherwise, though?