User blog comment:Zego the Scar/Essay: Rose's Fate./@comment-1859920-20120818003448

There are some points of interest here, but I think there should possibly be either a third category or the "pro death" group should be defined better. For instance, although I dislike Rose's death, and wish she hadn't've died, I accept her death as something that already has happened(in the past) and as an inevitable occurance, especially from BJ's perspective. As you probably know, Martin the Warrior was written after Redwall and came beforehand genealogically. So it follows that the Redwall book would be somewhat lacking in material if it didn't Martin marrying Rose and a potential seed(which there would doubtlessly be if they were married). BJ had to line up Martin the Warrior with facts from the other books he'd already written.

Another interesting point relating to this subject, is the statement that BJ made when asked why he had Rose die. He said "Such is life". You might feel indignant upon reading that statement, but if you ponder it for a while, you'll find it shockingly accurate. I know this sounds cruel to say, and its not politicaly correct, but in retrospect what made Martin the Warrior such a good book, was how realisticly it represented a possible real scenario. However unapealing Rose's death was to "kids", it's no use crying over spilt milk and I think BJ's decision was for the best. I mean, he's the seasoned book author and who are we to challenge his logic? I hope my discussive rant was to your liking.