|
Post by sailearss on Jun 29, 2024 14:41:54 GMT -5
I think about this everrrry time I reread but there’s a feeling of nostalgia the first series has that the others don’t. Here’s a few reasons:
- Characters in general function more as symbols and archetypes. Their personalities are one-dimensional and based on the role they have in the clan. Bluestar, Whitestorm and Lionheart are painted as noble, loyal warriors. Graystripe is the best friend, Tigerstar is the big baddie, Barley is the Helpful Loner.
——> in future series, characters are not just ‘good’ and ‘evil’, but a mix of both. They may at times be background characters, but later break this mold (such as Ashfur or Onestar in AVOS). I would argue this differs from a minor character receiving a SE or novella, because they might play a larger role in the main series when they have never been a main character.
- the series has a sense of mystery and power that surround the older warriors as compared to apprentices, and the same with the ‘lore’ or worldbuilding in TNP and on. This is lost as we learn more about the clans’ origin, and as leaders later get nerfed into being foolish, stubborn, losing the aura that separates them from regular warriors and apprentices.
- Language use is initially way more formal and stereotyped according to a character’s role, especially by older warriors and Starclan whereas now it is more casual and even involves slang. Ex: “Easy prey for Yellowfang!” vs. whatever the crap is going on with apprentices these days.
Further thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by moongloweevee on Jun 29, 2024 14:57:53 GMT -5
Because Into the Wild/The Prophecies Begin was supposed to be a stand alone or 6 series books. I don't think they had plans to continue the series until they realised they can make money off it and made future books.
|
|
|
Post by wygolvillage on Jun 29, 2024 15:11:14 GMT -5
Definitely agree. I find all the "early installment weirdness" to be extremely charming... It feels more like a story than a franchise/property.
|
|
|
Post by asrise on Jun 29, 2024 15:11:49 GMT -5
Having a single, newcomer protagonist probably has a lot to do with it.
Firestar had a lot more time to flesh out, more than any other protagonist since, so the first arc is about the protagonist far more than the others after it. Also, he's a newcomer, so everything already seems more mysterious.
I'd be curious to see how a single protagonist arc would be handled now, but I think it would feel a lot more like TPB than the others, even with all the changes to the writing style since then.
|
|
|
Post by dandelions on Jun 29, 2024 15:19:45 GMT -5
I think the size of the cast has a lot to do with it. The first arc was very sparing with its named characters, so it makes sense the ones we got often had a clear archetype. Meanwhile the later series have such a massive background cast, spread across multiple POVs, so a lot of them don't even have an archetype to fall into.
I actually have the opposite take on portrayal of good and evil, I think the first arc did a better job with nuance there. Later villains feel like they're framed as entirely and inevitably evil (Darktail is probably the best example, holding judgment on ASC until Star is out), but I don't know, maybe it's just because Tigerstar did it first that he doesn't feel so exaggerated to me. The ultimately good-aligned characters of the first arc (Bluestar, Blackstar, and Leopardstar especially) seem to make more mistakes that don't get overwritten by their past/future heroism than someone like... I don't know, Rowanstar, who they one day decided was a complete failure of a leader and that seems to be his legacy at this point.
|
|