Real World Allusions in Warriors by Dewtail

Dewtail analyses real world allusions and parallels in the universe of Warriors.

Hello everyone, it’s Dewtail!

[I have a topic today that is a bit more speculative than most other things I write about, so proceed at your own discretion.]

One of the things most people enjoy while reading Warriors [even if they don’t realize it] is the very immersive world in which the stories take place. Other groups of cats are treated the same way they would be in the fact that the Clans are a quite isolated social group, and that’s great. The problem is the Clans’ intolerance for other ways of life.

The first thing I want to discuss are the way rogues are treated by the narrative and, by extension, the Clans. Most rogues, loners and other cats just passing through are indiscriminately treated as dangerous since they’re different, but is that actually fair of the Clans? The list of villains and antagonists is as follows [note the absence of all the random Dark Forest cats since they’re not that important]:

The Prophecies Begin:

-Brokenstar [ShadowClan] -Tigerstar I [ThunderClan/ShadowClan] -Scourge/BloodClan [Rogue/Kittypet]

The New Prophecy:

-Hawkfrost [RiverClan]

Power Of Three:

-Sol [Kittypet/SkyClan/Rogue] -Ashfur [ThunderClan]

Omen Of The Stars:

-Mapleshade [ThunderClan] -Thistleclaw [ThunderClan] -Hawkfrost [RiverClan] -Brokenstar [ThunderClan] -Tigerstar I [ThunderClan/ShadowClan] -Sol [Kittypet/SkyClan/Rogue]

Dawn Of The Clans:

-Clear Sky [Settler/SkyClan] -One Eye [Rogue] -Slash [Rogue]

A Vision Of Shadows:

-Darktail/The Kin [Rogue] -Sleekwhisker [ShadowClan, Rogue]

The Broken Code:

-Ashfur [ThunderClan]

According to these numbers, the ratio of Clan-born [note the term Clan-born since exiled villains still belong to their clan] to rogue villains is 9:5. [not counting Sleekwhisker as a rogue since she is Clan born] So according to statistics, Clan cats are nearly twice more likely to become antagonistic toward the Clans than rogues [and most rogue villains have histories of terrorizing different groups of cats prior, not just the Clans.] So why are rogues described as dangerous disproportionately? To hide the fact that clan cats are just as bad, if not worse? Perhaps.

Personally, I theorize that this is one of the allusions made from our world to the world of Warriors about the media portrayal of African Americans [particularly males] in comparison to rogues. Now, you’re all saying, ‘Dew, this is a big stretch,’ but I shall prove it to you. There are several [albeit unspecified] ways in which Warrior expresses themes from the real world, including religious intolerance, forbidden love [everyone knows about this one], good vs. evil, and acceptance.

Now the ‘acceptance’ aspect of the themes is somewhat questionable, considering the way cats who are different [disabled cats, outsiders in general] are treated in a bad way by both the society and the narrative]

The way rogues and loners are disproportionately treated as dangerous is evident throughout the books. Consider the following information:

“In the Clans’ point of view, rogues are usually depicted and thought of as being selfish and aggressive. They do not respect the warrior code or the cats who follow it, unlike loners. Cats who are banished from their Clan usually live as rogues.They occasionally trespass on Clan territory to steal prey, but if a patrol finds them, they will chase him or her back over the border. Even when they live in a band, they aren’t afraid to turn on each other. They are very violent and are known to not have any qualms about attacking the elderly and very young cats. They sometimes kill without having a good reason. Rogues have also abandoned their kits in the past.” -Warriors Wiki

[mind, I am not criticizing the writing here but the Clan’s view of rogues, which I feel this passage summarizes excellently]

This information is from the official Warriors Wiki, and it summarizes the Clan’s view on rogues well. Now that we have an established argument, we can begin to deconstruct it.

‘Rogues are usually depicted as being selfish and aggressive.” This is quite the blanket statement, but are Clan cats as a whole any better? No. Clan cats have willingly picked fights with each other, turned against their Clans for power, and even tried to wipe out whole Clans by themselves. No, this doesn’t describe all Clan cats, but the above statement doesn’t describe all rogues either.

“They occasionally trespass on Clan territory to steal prey, but if a patrol finds them, they will chase him or her back across the border.”

Clan cats also regularly ignore boundaries to steal prey or to meet with each other, so this argument against rogues is still fragile.

“They are known to not have any qualms about attacking the elderly and very young cats.”

Brokenstar mercilessly exiled ShadowClan elders and killed many kits. Alternatively, Onestar purposely attacked a camp he knew contained mostly elders and kits. Even Tigerstar starved and nearly murdered two half-Clan apprentices. Then, bringing into account all the leaders that willingly made their cats attack kits too young to be apprenticed before Daisytail made a stand, it’s still not a statement that can be applied exclusively to rogues.

“They sometimes kill without a good reason.”

The statement is still reiterated: So do Clan cats. Tigerstar didn’t need to kill Runningwind by the Thunderpath, or publicly execute Gorsepaw. Ashfur didn’t need to help kill Firestar or attempt to kill the Three. [note the usage of the word ‘need’ since a lot of cats strategically murdered so they could attain power]

“Rogues have also abandoned their kits in the past.”

I’ll say it again: So do Clan cats.
Clear Sky disowned and abandoned his only surviving son. Rainflower, while not abandoning her son completely, disowned him only for his looks and neglected him. Onestar disowned and abandoned Darktail when he found out Smoke had his kits.

In a nutshell, rogues are usually wrongly described by the Clans to be malignant forces existing only to be antagonistic toward the Clans. Not only is this a rather self-centered outlook, the amount of evil rogues doesn’t match or outnumber the amount of evil Clan cats. I feel this mirrors the portrayal of African Americans in American media.

This is an unpopular outlook but yes, American society is structured to be centered around one group of people, specifically the people who were not originally native to that area. [the lake was initially vacant as far as we know, but the forest was not] The narrative makes it very clear that rogues are not to be trusted, although, similarly as in real life, most crimes against the Clans are committed by cats that have been wronged by the Clans or Clan cats themselves.

Out of all the major rogue/kittypet-born villains, Scourge, Sol, Darktail, and I suppose One Eye if you count him, half of them [and three of them if you count Sol] were wronged by Clan society.
As a contrast, African Americans are portrayed systematically to be more likely to hurt other ethnic groups [mostly Caucasians] although the majority of crimes with a victim are done to people of the same race, hence why black-on-black crime is a moot point: white-on-white crime exists as well and to a much greater extent. It goes the same for rogues and Clan cats, since rogues rarely attack the Clans for no reason. Every rogue villain has had a reason [not necessarily a moral one] to antagonize the Clans. Scourge was nearly killed as a kit by a young Tigerstar, and Darktail felt resentment towards Onestar for abandoning him and his mother. Sol wanted revenge because SkyClan snubbed him and One Eye wanted the settlers to leave the land to him and his rogues. Additionally as mentioned before, all the rogue villains except Darktail [and including Darktail if you count him destroying SkyClan as a separate crime] had gone around subjugating other groups of cats prior to the Clans [Scourge with the Twolegplace cats, Sol with the random group of Twolegplace cats that never gets brought up again, One Eye with the forest cats]

In conclusion, Warriors may be even more realistic of a world than anyone anticipated, as societal observations lay deep within the text.