Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
General Trek
»
$$$$ Klingon Ship "Unexpected" $$$$
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ryan McReynolds: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Siegfried: [qb]They are both a source where some information can be gleaned from, but to consider the whole canon when just tidbits are pulled into episodes and movies is illogical. It matters not that one is a book and one is a cartoon. Only the parts that appear in the episodes and movies are canon, everything else is still non-canon and subject to change on the whims of the writers.[/qb][/QUOTE] Indeed. The problem with canon is that people mistake it for a criterion for what's "real" and what is "fake," relatively speaking. As such, canon has become something that the [i]fans[/i] use, when it's really just a tool for the producers. Canon only tells what [i]must[/i] be considered, it says nothing about what [i]must not[/i] be considered. The route that the producers have chosen is that only live-action [i]Star Trek[/i] is canon. That is a perfectly reasonable (if frustrating for some) path for them to follow, because it provides the smallest data set without excluding anything the average viewer may have been exposed to. But it doesn't mean that the animated series didn't happen, nor the novels... it merely means that they didn't [i]have[/i] to happen. What we need is another word for "accepted by an individual as accurate." [i]Canon[/i] is roughly defined as "sources that must be considered for continuity," but that is really only relevant for the producers; we don't make the continuity, so we don't need to consult anything. [i]Personal canon[/i] works, but it causes problems because people inevitably drop the [i]personal[/i] part and then you have conflicts between each person's view, with each claiming this and that to be canon. So we need a word, distinct from [i]canon[/i], that covers this concept of "personal canon." As an analogy, consider the original use of the word [i]canon[/i]: those texts that the Church consideres to be authoritative. Many Christians believe in many things that aren't ever specified in the Bible (Satan being the infamous tempting serpent from Genesis being an obvious one, ignoring most of the Old Testament except for the Ten Commandments being another). This doesn't make them part of the [i]canon[/i], it's just something that they accept for one reason or another. We could just use the word [i]accepted[/i] (as in "I accept the animated series, but it isn't canon"), but this causes problems, too, because everyone accepts some things and not others. Suggestions, anyone? Maybe [i]personal canon[/i] is the best way to go afterall, as long as we are careful not to drop the [i]personal[/i]. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3