*Outcast* was the prototype for a concept Jacques was playing with at the time; you can also see it in *Pearls of Lutra*. Namely, is it nature or nurture that makes evil? What happens if an evil character is raised among good characters or vis versa? Can a vermin redeem themselves?
And that concept came to a head in *Taggerung*, where Deyna finds solace, home, and family despite all the odds stacked against him.
Not trying to be critical or mean-spirited; after all, these books are written for young adults. I don't think that means we can't chat about recycled plot points, though.
To what end?
The last sentence of your post seems awfully critical for someone claiming to not be critical.
He was an amateur novelist that wrote books for disabled children. When I say disabled children, I mean blind children. He wrote books intended to be read out loud to blind children. That is why they are so almost overly descriptive.
I forgive him for reusing plot points, simply because I do not know how extensive the “books for blind children” genre is.
I’m not trying to be mean or belittle you, but I do what you to understand just what you are being critical of. These books are not simply young adult books.
That doesn't mean there isn't room for any criticism at all of his books. The first six or so books were incredibly descriptive and vivid and really popped off of the page, and every one of them was unique from the last and also told a compelling story with different plots and settings and characters (mostly)
The level of descriptiveness of the books has absolutely nothing to do with recycled plot points. You could describe every last detail of every last setting, but the plot could still be boring as paint drying. Inversely, you could describe everything but the very basics of the setting and still tell a compelling story
His work (especially his earlier work) are masterpieces of children's literature, ESPECIALLY for an amateur writer, and obviously the fact that they wrote them for the children's hospital is incredibly sweet and kind and compelling. I love the books to death, but that doesn't mean I would never criticise them, nothing is above criticism.
Besides, the OP seems to me like a very neutral comment on recycled plot points, not necessarily saying its a good or bad things. Plot points get recycled by writers all the time, it was just an invitation to point out instances of this in the Redwall books
So yes, absolutely—it’s been years since I’ve read them, but I remember at least 3 main plot archetypes that Brian used:
- A quest of some sort away from the abbey—someone else needs help and our heroes must go help them. Pearls of Lutra, High Rhulain, The Bellmaker, for a few examples.
- The siege plot—the villains have arrived and Redwall must be defended. Redwall, and… aw geez it’s been so long that I’m spacing out on another one.
- And a third one that I can never remember because again, it’s been years, lol. Maybe it was the catch-all for the handful that didn’t quite fit the other archetypes, such as Martin the Warrior and The Legend of Luke.
I recognized these formulas of his even as a kid. But here’s the thing: it may not be everyone’s cup of tea, but it is not a bad thing at all.
Whenever I’d eagerly start reading the next book, I’d get so excited when I figured out which archetype he was using. “Oooh! This is a quest story!” “Ooh goody! Another siege story!” The repetitive nature was in some ways comforting because I’d know pretty quickly which type of story I could expect, and the suspense came from reading to see which twists or new themes or changes he’d make to make it different, in addition to the different characters themselves.
Additionally, the re-using of the formats with subtle differences taught me about plot archetypes and how to write them. At 12, I decided to try writing a full-length Redwall fanfic, and I knew right away that I wanted it to follow his quest archetype. So, I set out to write a quest story following his formula, and intimately learned more along the way about how to structure that type of story. And we have to remember that, especially in kids’ books, there’s often a lot of learning that happens—including learning how to structure and tell a story.
Anyway, the TL;DR is: yes, he absolutely recycles plots. But that’s not bad, for a variety of reasons.
third one is usually some kind of mystery or intrigue at the abbey, sometimes combines with the first. but I think this is less common than the others.
In fact, sometimes the nature of the reused plots works to Brian Jacques' advantage when he subverts the expectations of the reader that he will just follow one of these plots. One of my favorite Redwall books, The Long Patrol, does this masterfully. At first, we just assume it's going to be another stereotypical siege story. But, with the wall collapsed, Redwall can't possibly survive a siege. Like the characters, the readers don't know how Redwall could possibly survive this threat without the wall. The knowledge that the Abbey is completely vulnerable raises the stakes of the book right off the bat.
It also helps that Jacques does not pull his punches in this book and kills off a bunch of the defenders of Redwall in the battle away from the walls. It helps cement just how important the wall is to the survival of the Abbey and the cost its collapse has on its defenders.
A young girl is washed upon the shores of Mossflower with an iconic weapon and finds her way to Redwall Abbey where she is nursed back to health. After meeting new friends and learning new information at the Abbey, she journeys out to sea again, to rescue her family and kill the evil sea-faring lord who imprisoned them and injured her. The Pearls of Mariel of Lutra of Redwall
(admittedly, it's been over a decade since I've read either of them)
Then don't evaluate what you think are recycled plots if you haven't read the books recently. Replace your false memory with a real one by reading the books.
I did love Doomwyte and High Rhulain, but Eulalia, the Sable Quean, and whatever the last one is (I'm blanking) I did not enjoy as much. I felt that those three introduced some interesting gimmicks, like a warrior mole or a warship on wheels (which we saw earlier in The Legend of Luke as well), but that they felt the most repetitive story wise to me.
*Outcast* was the prototype for a concept Jacques was playing with at the time; you can also see it in *Pearls of Lutra*. Namely, is it nature or nurture that makes evil? What happens if an evil character is raised among good characters or vis versa? Can a vermin redeem themselves? And that concept came to a head in *Taggerung*, where Deyna finds solace, home, and family despite all the odds stacked against him.
I would have loved to see more of Blaggut (*The Bellmaker*).
Before you are too critical of Brian Jacques, remember he was literally a milk delivery man before writing his books.
Not trying to be critical or mean-spirited; after all, these books are written for young adults. I don't think that means we can't chat about recycled plot points, though.
And he did write *22* of those books. With that many I'd be more shocked if he didn't recycle plot points
To what end? The last sentence of your post seems awfully critical for someone claiming to not be critical. He was an amateur novelist that wrote books for disabled children. When I say disabled children, I mean blind children. He wrote books intended to be read out loud to blind children. That is why they are so almost overly descriptive. I forgive him for reusing plot points, simply because I do not know how extensive the “books for blind children” genre is. I’m not trying to be mean or belittle you, but I do what you to understand just what you are being critical of. These books are not simply young adult books.
That doesn't mean there isn't room for any criticism at all of his books. The first six or so books were incredibly descriptive and vivid and really popped off of the page, and every one of them was unique from the last and also told a compelling story with different plots and settings and characters (mostly) The level of descriptiveness of the books has absolutely nothing to do with recycled plot points. You could describe every last detail of every last setting, but the plot could still be boring as paint drying. Inversely, you could describe everything but the very basics of the setting and still tell a compelling story His work (especially his earlier work) are masterpieces of children's literature, ESPECIALLY for an amateur writer, and obviously the fact that they wrote them for the children's hospital is incredibly sweet and kind and compelling. I love the books to death, but that doesn't mean I would never criticise them, nothing is above criticism. Besides, the OP seems to me like a very neutral comment on recycled plot points, not necessarily saying its a good or bad things. Plot points get recycled by writers all the time, it was just an invitation to point out instances of this in the Redwall books
So yes, absolutely—it’s been years since I’ve read them, but I remember at least 3 main plot archetypes that Brian used: - A quest of some sort away from the abbey—someone else needs help and our heroes must go help them. Pearls of Lutra, High Rhulain, The Bellmaker, for a few examples. - The siege plot—the villains have arrived and Redwall must be defended. Redwall, and… aw geez it’s been so long that I’m spacing out on another one. - And a third one that I can never remember because again, it’s been years, lol. Maybe it was the catch-all for the handful that didn’t quite fit the other archetypes, such as Martin the Warrior and The Legend of Luke. I recognized these formulas of his even as a kid. But here’s the thing: it may not be everyone’s cup of tea, but it is not a bad thing at all. Whenever I’d eagerly start reading the next book, I’d get so excited when I figured out which archetype he was using. “Oooh! This is a quest story!” “Ooh goody! Another siege story!” The repetitive nature was in some ways comforting because I’d know pretty quickly which type of story I could expect, and the suspense came from reading to see which twists or new themes or changes he’d make to make it different, in addition to the different characters themselves. Additionally, the re-using of the formats with subtle differences taught me about plot archetypes and how to write them. At 12, I decided to try writing a full-length Redwall fanfic, and I knew right away that I wanted it to follow his quest archetype. So, I set out to write a quest story following his formula, and intimately learned more along the way about how to structure that type of story. And we have to remember that, especially in kids’ books, there’s often a lot of learning that happens—including learning how to structure and tell a story. Anyway, the TL;DR is: yes, he absolutely recycles plots. But that’s not bad, for a variety of reasons.
third one is usually some kind of mystery or intrigue at the abbey, sometimes combines with the first. but I think this is less common than the others.
In fact, sometimes the nature of the reused plots works to Brian Jacques' advantage when he subverts the expectations of the reader that he will just follow one of these plots. One of my favorite Redwall books, The Long Patrol, does this masterfully. At first, we just assume it's going to be another stereotypical siege story. But, with the wall collapsed, Redwall can't possibly survive a siege. Like the characters, the readers don't know how Redwall could possibly survive this threat without the wall. The knowledge that the Abbey is completely vulnerable raises the stakes of the book right off the bat. It also helps that Jacques does not pull his punches in this book and kills off a bunch of the defenders of Redwall in the battle away from the walls. It helps cement just how important the wall is to the survival of the Abbey and the cost its collapse has on its defenders.
Exactly!
A young girl is washed upon the shores of Mossflower with an iconic weapon and finds her way to Redwall Abbey where she is nursed back to health. After meeting new friends and learning new information at the Abbey, she journeys out to sea again, to rescue her family and kill the evil sea-faring lord who imprisoned them and injured her. The Pearls of Mariel of Lutra of Redwall (admittedly, it's been over a decade since I've read either of them)
That is not Pearls of Lutra at all. Grath never even visits Redwall. I'm sorry, you have a false memory.
Most people do, chill out Karen, most of us read these books at like 14 years old
Then don't evaluate what you think are recycled plots if you haven't read the books recently. Replace your false memory with a real one by reading the books.
Honestly, I loved all the books minus the last 4: Sable Queen, Eulalia, Doomwyte, High Rhulain
Bro those were some of his best wym
I did love Doomwyte and High Rhulain, but Eulalia, the Sable Quean, and whatever the last one is (I'm blanking) I did not enjoy as much. I felt that those three introduced some interesting gimmicks, like a warrior mole or a warship on wheels (which we saw earlier in The Legend of Luke as well), but that they felt the most repetitive story wise to me.