The official discord link if you wish to join the discord: https://discord.gg/j5RKwCvAFu
Support the wiki on our official Ko-Fi page or Patreon page!
Canon: Difference between revisions
m |
|||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
'''Canonicity''', as it applies to television series, is substantially different from its literary counterpart. For example, there is no question of which Sherlock Holmes stories (the first non-biblical literary works to which the term was applied) are canonical: those written by Doyle are, everything else isn't. | '''Canonicity''', as it applies to television series, is substantially different from its literary counterpart. For example, there is no question of which Sherlock Holmes stories (the first non-biblical literary works to which the term was applied) are canonical: those written by Doyle are, everything else isn't. | ||
Television canonicity works much differently, as there are many authors involved. Works not officially sanctioned are generally outside of canonicity, but what remains inside is more nebulous | Television canonicity works much differently, as there are many authors involved. Works not officially sanctioned are generally outside of canonicity, but what remains inside is more nebulous. | ||
The primary issue is that canons for completed works (especially with a single author) are descriptive, whereas fans' attempts to define canonicity for ongoing works are prescriptive. If a fact is canonical, you are not allowed to contradict it. | The primary issue is that canons for completed works (especially with a single author) are descriptive, whereas fans' attempts to define canonicity for ongoing works are prescriptive. Fans typically follow "If a fact is canonical, you are not allowed to contradict it", though this argument in itself ignores the concept of a [https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Retcon retroactive continuity (retcon)]. | ||
The concept of canonicity is almost entirely an invention of fandom. The writers will generally ignore, include, or change whatever facts they like. This is not to say that the writers totally lack a sense of continuity, but it is a much weaker concept than "canonicity" as presented by fan communities. Writers can tweak continuity quite a lot without actually breaking it by using Broad Strokes (where the writers pick and choose what elements of an older story they want to accept into a more recent story). | The concept of canonicity is almost entirely an invention of fandom, which is normally handled poorly. The writers will generally ignore, include, or change whatever facts they like if they want something to fit within a story. This is not to say that the writers totally lack a sense of continuity, but it is a much weaker concept than "canonicity" as presented by fan communities as writers understand that fiction is flexible, while fans attempt to treat it as an impossible constant. Writers can tweak continuity quite a lot without actually breaking it by using Broad Strokes (where the writers pick and choose what elements of an older story they want to accept into a more recent story). | ||
In fan communities based on very loose continuities, what is "canonical" can sometimes boil down to "[https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Fanon the bits we like]". Fans will attempt to find any excuse to "de-canonize" facts that they personally find inconvenient. Under this wiki this is unacceptable, the only cases where one can “de-canonize” something is if it’s a direct statement from the author | In fan communities based on very loose continuities, what is "canonical" can sometimes boil down to "[https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Fanon the bits we like]". Fans will attempt to find any excuse to "de-canonize" facts that they personally find inconvenient. Under this wiki this is unacceptable, the only cases where one can “de-canonize” something is if it’s a direct statement from the author or if the author themself has retconned something. If the author does directly contradict themself however to the point that their own media does not match what they are saying (this normally aligns with concepts such as the author claiming something that is not at all presented within their story, normally an answer they make up on the fly in order to appease a fan that they do not think much of), then this will be regarded as [[Death of the Author]]. | ||
==What’s Accepted As Canon== | ==What’s Accepted As Canon== | ||
The idea followed on this wiki is an idea that most authors themselves would naturally follow about properties, the material is canon until it's shown not to be. While this seems very lax and too accepting, it's in reality, a very simple premise. As an example, let us take a manga and have that as the original source material, now someone has made a movie for that manga, the typical fanon idea would be that the movie is non-canon until proven otherwise, however this doesn't really make much sense. What makes more sense is the movie is considered canon until a feature contradicts that belief, the most famous examples in the manga/anime spectrum being the ''[[Dragon Ball|Dragon Ball Z Toei Movies]]'' which are directly noted by the series creator to take place in another dimension. However, funnily enough, not even this statement is saying that material is non-canon as fans believe. | |||
This boils down to a typical mistake that the overall fanon of media has with the term "canon", they believe this applies to a singular reality, when in essence canon can apply to the entirety of the media franchise. Going back to the Dragon Ball example, while it's noted the movies take place in a different dimension, this does not mean they are non-canon, this means the events within the movies are not in the manga timeline, but it's apart of the overall canon of Dragon Ball as this just simply notes there's a ''[[Multiverse]]''. | |||
What one instead means when they claim the Dragon Ball Z Toei Movies are non-canon is actually that they are not apart of the manga continuity. As it would still be apart of the overall canon of ''Dragon Ball'' as the events of the movies did objectively happen within Dragon Ball media unless ever given a retroactive continuity. | |||
*Spin-Offs: Spin-Offs are when part of a successful franchise, usually characters, but sometimes a general concept, are taken and given a series of it’s own. Generally spin-offs are considered canon and can be used to | ==How to Decide Continuity== | ||
For things that can stop a media being apart of the original source material's continuity, it would require the following: | |||
*'''The media contradicts events within the original source material:''' In events like this, the media cannot be considered apart of the original source material's continuity as is messes with important events. This can normally be something like a character being alive during an arc where they're dead, there being no feasible way to explain how the event happened within the timeline of the original source material, etcetera. | |||
*'''Direct statements from WoG:''' If you have a direct note from the author or the Word of God that the media is not within the main source material, it is not within continuity, though there can be some things to contradict this, as an example, if the author says this, but then the source material directly acknowledges the events or has guidebooks/databooks that directly link the events apart of them then this would be considered as [[Death of the Author]]. | |||
*'''Spin-Offs:''' Spin-Offs are when part of a successful franchise, usually characters, but sometimes a general concept, are taken and given a series of it’s own. Generally spin-offs are considered canon and can be used in the main continuity. Though any spin-offs that are directly shown to not follow the main continuity and have events that don't fit with it would be considered outside of the main continuity. | |||
== | ==Guide Books/Databooks== | ||
Guide Books or Databooks are normally the official material that explains a series, usually to apply more information, backstory, etcetera for a character. Though these normally have varying contradictive information unlike other forms of media thus they are held under more scrutiny. An accepted rule here is that guidebooks/databooks are essentially a "tetriary canon" in which they can be used if nothing within the main source material contradicts what's being said. Note too this applies to each statement the guidebook/databook says and doesn't universally sanction or de-sanction the guidebook/databook. | |||
==Handling Adaptations== | |||
Adaptations can be canon depending on how they’re treated by the author. Generally it’s allowed to use an adaptation of a scene if it matches the original source scene due to sometimes giving a more clearer image. For example, animes are generally an adaptation of a manga, using an adaptation scene of the anime that perfectly matches the manga’s to get a visual representation is considered canon and fine to use. When an adaptation strays from the original source material is when it’s not considered apart of the source materials continuity. Normally if an adaptation has an author do their own interpretation on said adaptation or goes in a completely different direction then the original source material, it would be considered a seperate continuity. | |||
''' | ==Non-Canon== | ||
As we defined canon and continuity differently here, when is something not even considered a canon part of a franchises overall series? The easy answers would be when a piece of media is made that's completely separate from anything else within the franchise, and is essentially never acknowledged by the author. A pretty famous or infamous example of this would be ''[[Dragon Ball|Dragonball Evolution]]'', which took an Eastern made media and adaptated it within the West with a far different story, where the no piece of Dragon Ball media ever even acknowledges it. It should be noted cases like these are very rare and usually when an author is saying something isn't canon, they mean it isn't canon to the original source materials continuity and not that it's not canon to the overall franchise. Another example of this would be media such as ''Archie Sonic'' and ''Game Sonic'' where [https://youtu.be/8FIGLrhV8kY?t=1398 it was directly noted that the multiverses are completely separate and not canon/connected to each other]<ref>BumbleKast Live Q&A Stream for January 1st, 2022</ref>. | |||
==Crossovers== | |||
A crossover is the placement of two or more franchises and merging them into a single story. Normally for fanservice reasonings. There are different levels of continuity and canon to crossovers. Crossovers hold the same level of canon scrutiny as everything else. Normally for a crossover to be accepted as canon it needs to be that the characters have a reason for being in the situation that doesn't contradict any of the original source materials of each media, have no contradiction regarding timeline placement, and normally a canonical reason for why they're back after the end of the crossover. Supporting evidence will also be that characters recall or reference said media, though this is not explicitly needed. There are sometimes one-sided crossovers, these are crossovers officially take place within one continuity, but not the other. | |||
==Public Domain== | |||
Public Domain are works not protected by [https://www.copyright.gov/what-is-copyright/#:~:text=U.S.%20copyright%20law%20provides%20copyright,rental%2C%20lease%2C%20or%20lending. copyright law], these normally apply to works that are very old to the point that they lose their copyright, or works made that are essentially on the same tier as fan-fiction works. For example many vampire stories reference [[wikipedia:de:Dracula (Roman)|Dracula]] as the original vampire, without the vampires in the franchise following the same rules as those of Bram Stoker. Another common example would be the Cthulhu Mythos, for which characters appear in many franchises, sometimes even explicitly with similar backgrounds, without displaying remotely the same degree of power as the authentic versions. The same applies to mythological beings. These are obviously most of the time never canon to the original source material unless somehow confirmed in some way, though this is very rare. | |||
For unofficially licensed non-canon crossovers, please read our [[Rules for Fanon Profiles]]. | |||
==References== | |||
{{scroll box|content={{reflist|2}}}} | |||
[[Category:Important]] | [[Category:Important]] | ||
[[Category:Terms]] | [[Category:Terms]] | ||
{{Discussions}} | {{Discussions}} | ||
Revision as of 01:56, 2 January 2024
Background
Canon is that which counts, in terms of continuity.
Canonicity, as it applies to television series, is substantially different from its literary counterpart. For example, there is no question of which Sherlock Holmes stories (the first non-biblical literary works to which the term was applied) are canonical: those written by Doyle are, everything else isn't.
Television canonicity works much differently, as there are many authors involved. Works not officially sanctioned are generally outside of canonicity, but what remains inside is more nebulous.
The primary issue is that canons for completed works (especially with a single author) are descriptive, whereas fans' attempts to define canonicity for ongoing works are prescriptive. Fans typically follow "If a fact is canonical, you are not allowed to contradict it", though this argument in itself ignores the concept of a retroactive continuity (retcon).
The concept of canonicity is almost entirely an invention of fandom, which is normally handled poorly. The writers will generally ignore, include, or change whatever facts they like if they want something to fit within a story. This is not to say that the writers totally lack a sense of continuity, but it is a much weaker concept than "canonicity" as presented by fan communities as writers understand that fiction is flexible, while fans attempt to treat it as an impossible constant. Writers can tweak continuity quite a lot without actually breaking it by using Broad Strokes (where the writers pick and choose what elements of an older story they want to accept into a more recent story).
In fan communities based on very loose continuities, what is "canonical" can sometimes boil down to "the bits we like". Fans will attempt to find any excuse to "de-canonize" facts that they personally find inconvenient. Under this wiki this is unacceptable, the only cases where one can “de-canonize” something is if it’s a direct statement from the author or if the author themself has retconned something. If the author does directly contradict themself however to the point that their own media does not match what they are saying (this normally aligns with concepts such as the author claiming something that is not at all presented within their story, normally an answer they make up on the fly in order to appease a fan that they do not think much of), then this will be regarded as Death of the Author.
What’s Accepted As Canon
The idea followed on this wiki is an idea that most authors themselves would naturally follow about properties, the material is canon until it's shown not to be. While this seems very lax and too accepting, it's in reality, a very simple premise. As an example, let us take a manga and have that as the original source material, now someone has made a movie for that manga, the typical fanon idea would be that the movie is non-canon until proven otherwise, however this doesn't really make much sense. What makes more sense is the movie is considered canon until a feature contradicts that belief, the most famous examples in the manga/anime spectrum being the Dragon Ball Z Toei Movies which are directly noted by the series creator to take place in another dimension. However, funnily enough, not even this statement is saying that material is non-canon as fans believe.
This boils down to a typical mistake that the overall fanon of media has with the term "canon", they believe this applies to a singular reality, when in essence canon can apply to the entirety of the media franchise. Going back to the Dragon Ball example, while it's noted the movies take place in a different dimension, this does not mean they are non-canon, this means the events within the movies are not in the manga timeline, but it's apart of the overall canon of Dragon Ball as this just simply notes there's a Multiverse.
What one instead means when they claim the Dragon Ball Z Toei Movies are non-canon is actually that they are not apart of the manga continuity. As it would still be apart of the overall canon of Dragon Ball as the events of the movies did objectively happen within Dragon Ball media unless ever given a retroactive continuity.
How to Decide Continuity
For things that can stop a media being apart of the original source material's continuity, it would require the following:
- The media contradicts events within the original source material: In events like this, the media cannot be considered apart of the original source material's continuity as is messes with important events. This can normally be something like a character being alive during an arc where they're dead, there being no feasible way to explain how the event happened within the timeline of the original source material, etcetera.
- Direct statements from WoG: If you have a direct note from the author or the Word of God that the media is not within the main source material, it is not within continuity, though there can be some things to contradict this, as an example, if the author says this, but then the source material directly acknowledges the events or has guidebooks/databooks that directly link the events apart of them then this would be considered as Death of the Author.
- Spin-Offs: Spin-Offs are when part of a successful franchise, usually characters, but sometimes a general concept, are taken and given a series of it’s own. Generally spin-offs are considered canon and can be used in the main continuity. Though any spin-offs that are directly shown to not follow the main continuity and have events that don't fit with it would be considered outside of the main continuity.
Guide Books/Databooks
Guide Books or Databooks are normally the official material that explains a series, usually to apply more information, backstory, etcetera for a character. Though these normally have varying contradictive information unlike other forms of media thus they are held under more scrutiny. An accepted rule here is that guidebooks/databooks are essentially a "tetriary canon" in which they can be used if nothing within the main source material contradicts what's being said. Note too this applies to each statement the guidebook/databook says and doesn't universally sanction or de-sanction the guidebook/databook.
Handling Adaptations
Adaptations can be canon depending on how they’re treated by the author. Generally it’s allowed to use an adaptation of a scene if it matches the original source scene due to sometimes giving a more clearer image. For example, animes are generally an adaptation of a manga, using an adaptation scene of the anime that perfectly matches the manga’s to get a visual representation is considered canon and fine to use. When an adaptation strays from the original source material is when it’s not considered apart of the source materials continuity. Normally if an adaptation has an author do their own interpretation on said adaptation or goes in a completely different direction then the original source material, it would be considered a seperate continuity.
Non-Canon
As we defined canon and continuity differently here, when is something not even considered a canon part of a franchises overall series? The easy answers would be when a piece of media is made that's completely separate from anything else within the franchise, and is essentially never acknowledged by the author. A pretty famous or infamous example of this would be Dragonball Evolution, which took an Eastern made media and adaptated it within the West with a far different story, where the no piece of Dragon Ball media ever even acknowledges it. It should be noted cases like these are very rare and usually when an author is saying something isn't canon, they mean it isn't canon to the original source materials continuity and not that it's not canon to the overall franchise. Another example of this would be media such as Archie Sonic and Game Sonic where it was directly noted that the multiverses are completely separate and not canon/connected to each other[1].
Crossovers
A crossover is the placement of two or more franchises and merging them into a single story. Normally for fanservice reasonings. There are different levels of continuity and canon to crossovers. Crossovers hold the same level of canon scrutiny as everything else. Normally for a crossover to be accepted as canon it needs to be that the characters have a reason for being in the situation that doesn't contradict any of the original source materials of each media, have no contradiction regarding timeline placement, and normally a canonical reason for why they're back after the end of the crossover. Supporting evidence will also be that characters recall or reference said media, though this is not explicitly needed. There are sometimes one-sided crossovers, these are crossovers officially take place within one continuity, but not the other.
Public Domain
Public Domain are works not protected by copyright law, these normally apply to works that are very old to the point that they lose their copyright, or works made that are essentially on the same tier as fan-fiction works. For example many vampire stories reference Dracula as the original vampire, without the vampires in the franchise following the same rules as those of Bram Stoker. Another common example would be the Cthulhu Mythos, for which characters appear in many franchises, sometimes even explicitly with similar backgrounds, without displaying remotely the same degree of power as the authentic versions. The same applies to mythological beings. These are obviously most of the time never canon to the original source material unless somehow confirmed in some way, though this is very rare.
For unofficially licensed non-canon crossovers, please read our Rules for Fanon Profiles.
References
- ↑ BumbleKast Live Q&A Stream for January 1st, 2022
Discussions (Link For Mobile Users):
| Discussion threads involving Canon |
