In some of the topics that I have posted in the issue of canon has come up and Ithink we should all sit down and decide as Browncoats at large what canon means to us here in the verse and how much we shall heretofore adhere to it's meaning in discussing the BDS and BDM.

canon

Definition #1:general rule: a general rule,principal,or standard.

#2:religion:religious decree a decree issued by a religious authority,especially one ruling on religious practices

#3:religion:body of religious writings:a set of religious writings regarded as authentic and definitive and forming a religion's body of scripture.



Okay now that we have the dictionary definitions to aid us in our basic understanding of what "canon" is as an idea we can begin to debate what is to us.

Over in Star Trek Gene Roddenberry(the Graet Bird of the Galaxy),Trek's creator(duh) eventually decided that he basically had too many cooks in his kitchen and laid down a semi-official rule stating that Trek stories were not considered as being an actual part of the "real" Trek Universe unless they were either an episode or a movie.His big thing was that it was just getting kinda confusing as to which stories were "official" and so therefore actually had any bearing on the characters,the universe itself and all of their combined backstory.

Gene wanted to protect the integrity of his intellectual baby and still allow people to romp and play in his sandbox too.At present,as far as I know,as good as many of the novels have been,and continue to be,they don't "count".They are just speculation and have no bearing at all on the lives and histories and etc. of the characters.
This is nice for the writers of Trek since they don't need to know what the novelists have done with the characters,but it stinks sometimes since the best of the novels are ultimately just throw ways in that the producers do not have to consider them as integral to the plots of the movies and episodes.

So with the definitions and a working example in hand how do we judge canon in relation to our 'Verse?
Do we care at all?Maybe just not yet?Do all of the novels,comics,unproduced scripts count?

A few of you have vehemently argued with me regarding this issue so I expect to hear some interesting stuff.

My goal here is just to open a dialogue about a topic that may(or may not)need to be addressed.
I figure if we're all on the same page with regards to what is allowed in as a part of the greater story then we will all have the same reference point for discussing some things.New ideas are always welcome but if it's speculation and not fact then we should all be on the same page about this stuff.

Let's talk shall we?? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/icon_twisted.gif)

To me, the official canon is Firefly the series and Serenity the movie. That's it. I don't read comics. I'd play a video game based on the universe if there was one and it was genuinely good, but I wouldn't consider it official canon. TV and movies appeal to virtually everyone where as comics, novels/books, and video games don't. So, I only consider Firefly the series and Serenity the movie as official canon. The Matrix video game a few years back was supposed to be a prequel to the Matrix Reloaded. It was utter crap in my opinion, and even if it was good I still wouldn't consider it official canon. That's the way I see it.

Not only that, but if I were to have a marathon, I wouldn't want to read books, comics, novels, play the video games, and watch Firefly and Serenity, and consider all that official canon in the Firefly/Serenity mythology. It'd just be too much.

I consider anything stamped with Joss's approval regarding The 'verse is cannon ... krads novelization passed the Joss test Joss himself is involved with the comics so these are cannon , IMHO ... These are given authority regarding history and progression within the franchise.

I'm more in line with silence20,but I'll gladly accept anything that Fearless Leader says is legit.
But like silence said it gets dicey later on when stuff is unavailable to you for review,if I can't see it then it isn't real fair to make it an integral part of the story.

Joss has said that he hasn't even read the novel. He did write the comics though.

Personally, I consider the series, the movie and the comics as canon.

I consider the series, movie and comics canon, too. The Official Visual Companion, too (Joss did the list of worlds and universe history in that book, if anybody is interested). The forthcoming Titan books should be more or less canon, too, as Joss and Tim (Minear) have some involvement in them (there's a section in the first about unfilmed stories from Tim).

The RPG hasn't had any approval, as far as I know. They had a copy of the Serenity script during development (before the movie came out). Therefore I wouldn't use it as canon in my world.

The novelisation was based from the script, with some notes tossed between Joss and krad on it. I don't think he's actually read it, though. Although there's nothing in the novelisation which would fall outside of plausible, I'd have thought.

Novelizations as a rule are based on an earlier version of the screenplay/script and as a result often contain massively glaring errors in what they present to us.One example of this type of situation is in the novelization
of Star Trek:Generations,there is a scene in which many of the characters gather for Kirk's funeral,in the final cinematic release there was no such sequence.
And,if I remember correctly,there's also a sequence where Kirk goes on a sub-orbital sky-dive,also not in the film.
So as I said novelizations are notoriously bad sources for the "official" version of a film.I haven't read krad's take on Serenity so I'll rely on others to tell me if there were any errors of that sort in it.
This by no means is an attack on writers of these things,they must rely on what they are given and Hollywood definitely enjoys changing things around so I can see how mistakes are made.

Serenity's novelisation was based on the final green-lit version of the screenplay. It did have some editing changes during production (eg Inara's part was pretty much cut to shreds in the movie, more or less), but in this case it just makes the novelisation more interesting.

My point still stands,but I thank you for the info. I'm not attempting to cut on krad's novelization any,just talking about them very much in generalizations is all.

And now, a few sweeping generalizations:
I think canon is a kind of straightjacket that paralyzes the aspects of SereniFly we love.
Commentaries and the source material lead me to believe that an original vision of the story formed
in the mind of a certain visionary several years ago. In bringing that vision to the rest of us, several
compromises had to be made. The deleted scenes on the DVD reflect a variety of decisions based on one
collaboration between visionary and editor, but before the vision reached the screen, an untold number of choices and compromises had to be made.
Budget, studio, distribution and the availability of key marketing participants in the process...
all contributed to the creation of a commercially viable work of art.
Firefly, in my opinion, breathes more than the film does. It's more layered and complex than the cinematic sequel to the series.
BUT network tampered with every phase of the television production, from the initial pitch to cancellation (and beyond).
So "canon" based on the product of one man's vision processed by a battery of corporate machines
may well be very different from the darker television show that was originally conceived.
(I'm not asking anybody else which version is The Holy Grail. I just long for the unadulterated original.)
The movie extends the canon of the series to an incredibly diverse audience ranging from starving Brown Coats, desperate for more,
to the uninitiated who STILL have no clue to the ecstasy they've missed or ignored.
I think it's right to pay tribute to the integrity of the visionary who brought an idea to life,
and wrong to suggest that there's only one page onto which all of us cats should be herded.
The aspect of SereniFly I most admire is its stunning availability to reinterpretation.
I really doubt that any two of us have seen the same movie,
nor that any one of us has seen the same movie twice.
Rooted in the reality of real people's lives, it ignites imaginations like a holy book.
If Michael Shaara's book inspired both Joss and Ken Burns to their respective works of art,
then what SereniFly inspires deserves an audience that isn't fixated on finding a single consensual page.

I still think that canon matters.You were lovely and eloquent and even poetical in your posting Believe but even though we may not need an "official guideline" for what is a part of the great tapestry that Joss and company have woven now, we will.Especially if we want our corner of the 'verse to expand and draw in more and more new Browncoats.

Thanks wolf,
I think canon exists mostly as a direction.
Inventive speculation goes another way.
Everybody strikes a unique balance between the two.
So polling for consensus leads inevitably to war.
I'm not saying NO CANON, just
let's respect each others' point of balance, no matter what happens next.

Canon is just a ruler so that we all can play fairly.Nothing to be afraid of,just setting the stage for our adventures.

I don't intend to inhibit anyone's creativity I just want us all to be on the same page in the same 'verse.

What If...
(here comes an inventive speculation)
Joss is so discouraged by the standards established by fans like us that he abandons the 'verse altogether.
There are already lots of people standing between the writer's vision and cinematic realization.
I think writers become directors and executive producers in order to maintain creative control of the finished product,
then millions of fans hold them accountable for minute inconsistencies in characters, set design, makeup...
and establish standards for evaluating the consistency of the world the fans didn't create.
I'm not surprised that Ridley Scott never repeats himself,
and doesn't feel particularly confined to follow exactly the canon of recorded history.
Whedon and Scott invent on The Day, with text and canon as a breathing thematic basis for improvization.

People will insist on consensual canon, and smack others down for deviating from it.
Creators set a better example than that.

I like that, Believe. It's a very nice and eloquent way of saying what I was going to say:

Whatever Canon is, it's best to let Joss define it. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/icon_smile.gif)

"But, in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate--we cannot consecrate--we cannot hallow--this ground."

Lincoln addressed Gettysburg, Joss addressed Serenity Valley.
The right to be wrong
may be a paraphrase. I don't remember hearing it in the text.
Fits pretty well, though.

I'd just like to be able to definitively know what is & Is not "Real" in our Fictional 'Verse..

For the most part, we're forced to believe all of the official material untill we run into something contradictory.. Then we have ot Pick & Choose.

I'd really like it if Joss could come in here and say "Episodes, Movie, Comics, KRAD's Novelization and the Upcoming (hopefully) original Novels are ALL consisdered 'Canon' "

Of course I'd also like to hear "New Scripts in the works for Serenity 2 & 3, and of course, these too will be canon"


(I do think he'll try again.. I have that feeling) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/icon_wink.gif)

Amen!

You said precisely what I meant Foxtrot!! Canon isn't about creativity it's about enjoyment and knowing waht's what!! At this moment with no "official" ruling on this concept I can start writing stuff and demand that you all consider it to be gospel.None of us wants that so,hence,canon!

As I said it's not a leash just a ruler.(okay maybe yardstick)

You did notice I said "Official" material, right, Wolf?
As in written by those in employ of the Licence holders?

Ever the fan of simplicity, I think this is a perfect definition of "Canon", per Our needs as Browncoats.

Someone with pull needs to get Joss to out-and-out define what is what in our 'Verse. Joss is Boss, and his word is good enough for me. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/icon_smile.gif)

Joss or whoever can say comics, video games, novels, or whatever is canon. To me, it's the TV show and the movie. Canon, what is it to us? Again, to me, it's the TV show and the movie. If I have a marathon, personally, it's going to be TV show, then movie. That's where it ends for me until live action continuations are made. That's what's canon to me. I personally liked the series because of the live action version of the characters and atmosphere of the show and movie which can't be duplicated in other mediums. That's just my opinion of course. If you guys want to consider other stuff as canon, go right ahead. Nothing wrong with it of course. I suppose it's kind of subjective and only matters to one's personal tastes.

I think I'm very much in your camp silence20,your opinion and mine go together nicely.

I will concede that since Joss is "Boss" that his word is "law" and we should certainly listen to him but at teh same timeI sure hope he takes a while to consider what he wants to be canon before he makes a binding declaration of what it should be.

It's scary how just 14 episodes and one movie plus a few other bits and pieces can cause debates over canon.

Try 28 series (plus specials, plus spin-offs, plus books, plus audios, plus comics, plus movies) of Doctor Who, then you can see how hideous arguments about canon can get.

Ultimately we all believe what we want to believe, even if it is that Serenity is from a parallel universe to Firefly, hence Book and Wash are alive and well and drinking cocktails on some dusty planet out there in the verse.

Trek has it figured out.No arguments about what is and isn't canon until Enterprise.

At least we don't have that problem to deal with....

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/icon_lol.gif)

You actually think that's the case with Star Trek?

What canonical controversy could I start with...?

Okay: Is Star Trek: The Animated Series canon or not?

Well, I'm not debating. To me, it's the tv show and the movie. That goes for Trek as well. all the tv shows and all of the movies. That's it. I don't need to debate what is canon to me because what is canon to me just is.

No the animated series isn't canon.That was out of Gene's own mouth that the decision on that one came!!


Originally,when it was airing,Gene said that he wanted it to be but later on, after it went off the air, he decided against that.
I don't remember/know the precise reason why but that is the case.Look in the Trek encyclopedia,no animated show entries.Also there isn't an episode guide for the cartoon and teh official Trek timeline book even though it's very outdated now has no mention of the cartoon either.

So no the cartoon isn't canon.Not even close.Controversy,for now,averted!

According to Roddenbury ONLY the TV Series' and Movies are considered "Canon"
(Enterprise included by those rules.)

This leaves everything else... the comics, comic strips, books and the cartoon all out in the Dust.

Is it just me that thinks Andromeda should NOT have been changed from a Star Trek Spinoff in it's conceptual stages to a Stand Alone series??
Same Storyline, just featuring Vulcans instead of Magog, Klingons instead of Nichians, Phasers instead of force lances and substitute Federation wherever "Commonwealth" is used



Star Wars is the Big Canonical controversy..
Fans of the EU (Expanded Universe) would argue that ALL of the Books & Such are "Canon", even though Lucas Himself has stated they're Not (Example: Lucas says Boba Fet DIED in RotJ but in the EU, he's still around many years after)
I won't even go into the inconsistancies in the "Facts" shown in the Films (And the Changes to the films at Lucas' whims) so which is Canon? SW? (original Version) or SWIV A New Hope?
(Really, the Greedo Firing first thing in the remastered is the only bit that I can complain about)

One consistancy that's always bugged me.. We have in our library the Star Wars Novelization, penned by Lucas himself, that came out immediately after the first release of the film.. It states that Threepio is some 400 years old and Artoo is a relatively NEW droid. (I liked the Irony that the Young droid is more level headed and resourcefull than the older, more experienced Droid)
Then in Episode 1, we find out that Artoo has been in service for some time and Threepio is brand new. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/icon_rolleyes.gif)
(I found it annoying, that's all)

...except that some of the episode writers (particularly on DS9) would sometimes sneak in references to the animated series (e.g. the name of the ship Kor commanded in the TOS era).

They, at least, were willing to consider some of it canon.


...except for the details about Spock's childhood provided in the animated episode "Yesteryear."

And the numerous references to Robert April, first captain of the Enterprise, who has never even been mentioned in any live-action incarnation of Star Trek.


I wouldn't be so sure, especially given that TAS involved all of the main creative forces behind TOS...

Think of it this way: If Joss Whedon suddenly came along and said, "You know what? Season 4 of Buffy just doesn't count. Pretend it never happened," don't you think there would still be controversy, especially if there didn't seem to be any particular reason for excluding it? It would still be out of the series creator's mouth, but that doesn't mean people wouldn't disagree...