The Bellmaker

As a direct sequel to Mariel of Redwall, Mariel and Dandin’s story continues in The Bellmaker. When Mariel and Dandin come upon endangered creatures in Mossflower Woods, they immediately jump to save them. Upon doing so they discover Gael Squirrel King has been besieged by the foxes Silvamord and Urgan Nagru. Meanwhile, in Redwall Abbey, Mariel’s father Joseph the Bellmaker dreams of Martin the Warrior. Warned of the danger his daughter faces, Joseph gathers a team of Redwall creatures to aid Mariel.

Brian Jacques introduces new twists on villains in The Bellmaker. Foxes are a known adversary of Mossflower creatures, but never before has a Foxwolf appeared. Urgan Nagru thrills in the hunt. His blood-curdling howls he unleashes strike terror into his prey. A chill raced down my spine hearing it on audiobook. The Foxwolf prides himself on tactics and his determination to win. Mariel, Dandin and their companions will be hard pressed to escape Urgan Nagru’s clutches. Readers will be pulled into the challenges Nagru and his mate throw at the heroes.

Another known adversary to the creatures of Mossflower Woods are sea rats. When their pirate ship is stolen, sea rats Slipp and Blaggut find themselves wandering Mossflower Woods. When they stumble on two lost dibbins, they find themselves escorted to Redwall Abbey. No one is happy about their presence, but the creatures of Redwall are willing to give them a chance. While the two plot and plan to steal treasure from Redwall, readers will be surprised by the actual outcome of their endeavors. Brian Jacques deviates in a way I never would have expected.

The Bellmaker is a tale to be enjoyed by all ages. While there are battles, Brian Jacques writes in a way that minimizes the details and yet still engages readers. There is no doubt creatures fall in battle, but the story doesn’t focus on these moments. Instead, Brian Jaques allows readers to understand how the heroes feel about their actions. They do not enjoy the act of violence, but when there is no other choice they must defend themselves.

Each Redwall book explores what it means to be a hero. And each hero finds themselves aided by wonderful creatures they call friends. Despite the hardships that are present within The Bellmaker there is also a healthy dose of humor, friendship, and action. Lives may be lost, but there is always the presence of hope coursing through the story. I enjoyed the new take on different creatures, showing that despite all the lore and worldbuilding present in the Redwall series, there is still much left to discover.

I don't like Redwall books as much as I did the first time I read them.I don't like the “speciesm”, you know, all rats are bad, all badgers are good. Also, he has this “predators are bad, herbivores good”, but then some predators aren't bad. Like badgers and otters. I would prefer [b:The Animals of Farthing Wood 183742 The Animals of Farthing Wood Colin Dann https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1300273261l/183742.SX50.jpg 177574] kind of thing... like most carnivores eat a lot of insects. And, sure, that is speciesm, too, but that would be an acceptable explanation to why all carnivores aren't evil, because they eat mice, voles, squirrels, rabbits... the main heroes of your stories. I also don't like the way these “good” animals go on behaving as if killing other animals is a good thing. “They killed a lot of rats, but rats are evil, so that's a good thing.” “they killed all these animals, but those animals started, so it's a good thing.” “Oh, you killed your friend, but he was a bad guy, so good for you!” Anyway, a lot of killing and no emotions wasted on “bad” characters dying. Or on good characters either. “Oh, your best friend (whom you have known a couple of weeks) got killed defending you, snap out of it. He wouldn't want you to waste your life in mourning.” “OK! (lol)”Or... “X didn't come back! X's dead!”“Oh, no, X just stayed back for a reason.”“Oh... what a relief. Well, let's eat.”“It was so kind of you to have a feast for us”“Oh, no, it's not for you, it's a memorial feast to one of us who died.”“What? Someone died? Who?”“Z”“Z IS DEAD! O ve!” [weeping, and gnashing of teeth]This didn't actually happen. Z died and nobody of the animals who just found out reacted in any way. Or the children... I don't expect children to be obedience robots, but I hate children who disobey just because and are rewarded for it. Intelligence, curiosity, courage, gumption are all great qualities, but being sassy, callous, selfcentered brat is not having those qualities. Little kids talking back to adults they don't know, being rude and impertinent... well... sure, if you are a street urchin and seriously harmed by adults, and there is a reason you hate them, sure. Then you would talk to strangers like that. But there's way too many “sassy” pups being “cheeky” in Redwall series, and none of them has a reason other than that Brian Jacques didn't know any other way to show that this is a brave pup.... Frankly, ANYONE being rude and impertinent, “sassy” to “show how the character has gumption”, is irritating, and makes me dislike the character. This isn't really relevant to this book, but a lot of YA with a sassy MC. It makes it hard for me to believe the character is more than words. I don't believe they have “noble” motivations for anything they do, I believe their motivations are mostly selfish and their most important motivation is what people might think about them. Usually they end up “sacrificing” themselves for someone they have a crush on, in a showy manner, that's really not in any way harming them or depriving them of anything important, and it always pays back by giving them everything they could possibly want and more. It's so fake... makes me hate the character, the author and despise the people who buy that crap.Also - when these stories ARE speciest, and there are no evil mice, hedgehogs, moles, otters, badgers, hares, squirrels... there is also no explanation to why when these animals meet other animals like these show any kind of hostility. It doesn't make any sense to show so many animals being suspicious of others of their kind, when others of their kind has NEVER IN ANY WAY done anything to warrant such suspicions. And when animals of certain other kinds has NEVER IN ANY WAY done anything but bad things, there is no acceptable explanation to why the “good” animals would show no hostility and suspicion toward them. The squirrel king would have offered the foxes and rats food outside the castle and told them to eat and leave the country, if they wanted to live.