Joran, in Trek "canon" actually has an official definition.
It's what's appeared on TV or in the movies. That's it. Yes, that means fiction I strongly approve of, like Ford's Klingon stories or Duane's Rihannsu novels, are noncanon, while fiction I strongly disapprove of but which has been filmed, like STV or Insurrection, are canon. It doesn't always make me happy, and I also have my headcanon which differs in certain respects from official canon, but it is what it is.
SW used to have a much looser definition, but in the fairly recent past (I'm unclear on whether this came before or after the Disney purchase) it was tightened to coincide with the Trek policy. (And each has one exception - most people from whom I've heard have officially stricken "Threshold" from Trek canon, and even Lucas disavowed the Star Wars Holiday Special.)
Joran, in Trek "canon" actually has an official definition.
It's what's appeared on TV or in the movies. That's it. Yes, that means fiction I strongly approve of, like Ford's Klingon stories or Duane's Rihannsu novels, are noncanon, while fiction I strongly disapprove of but which has been filmed, like STV or Insurrection, are canon. It doesn't always make me happy, and I also have my headcanon which differs in certain respects from official canon, but it is what it is.
SW used to have a much looser definition, but in the fairly recent past (I'm unclear on whether this came before or after the Disney purchase) it was tightened to coincide with the Trek policy. (And each has one exception - most people from whom I've heard have officially stricken "Threshold" from Trek canon, and even Lucas disavowed the Star Wars Holiday Special.)
Not to say you are wrong, but do you have any kind of official source that spells it out that clearly? Because that is the only thing that can actually "prove" how canon works, when debates arise.
Not to say you are wrong, but do you have any kind of official source that spells it out that clearly? Because that is the only thing that can actually "prove" how canon works, when debates arise.
Pulling up the reference is going to take me a little while - I was going to quote the official site, StarTrek.com, but it appears to have been taken offline in '07.
Not to say you are wrong, but do you have any kind of official source that spells it out that clearly? Because that is the only thing that can actually "prove" how canon works, when debates arise.
You can find it right here with regards to Star Trek. Due to a number of factors - Enterprise's cancellation and the continuity reset caused by the 2009 film - what precisely is and is not canonical is in much more of a state of flux than it used to be.
Still, until we are provided soemething more concrete, I choose to stick to the definition that was on the Trek website until recently: Canon is all the TV series (including the animated series as per Trek.com until, again, it was removed) and all the movies. Books and other publications provide a fertile ground for ideas but until they make it to screen they are only ideas.
You can find it right here with regards to Star Trek. Due to a number of factors - Enterprise's cancellation and the continuity reset caused by the 2009 film - what precisely is and is not canonical is in much more of a state of flux than it used to be.
Still, until we are provided soemething more concrete, I choose to stick to the definition that was on the Trek website until recently: Canon is all the TV series (including the animated series as per Trek.com until, again, it was removed) and all the movies. Books and other publications provide a fertile ground for ideas but until they make it to screen they are only ideas.
Wiki is great and all, but it is not an actual source that proves anything. The ST.com website would be(as it is the official Trek website) although as you say that article apparently is gone for some reason. Even what Roddenberry said is no more of a source than what George Lucas says at this point, because neither of them own their respective franchises. The person who currently owns each franchise is the one who gets to decide canon at this point. In GL's case, I'm glad :P
Wiki is great and all, but it is not an actual source that proves anything.
That's fine, you can use any of Wiki's own references found in the footnotes section of the article I linked.
In any event, it is still useful to establish certain things as canon and not canon when having an internet debate, if only to keep the conversation from spiraling out of control, and the original definition used by StarTrek.com seems like the best.
That's fine, you can use any of Wiki's own references found in the footnotes section of the article I linked.
In any event, it is still useful to establish certain things as canon and not canon when having an internet debate, if only to keep the conversation from spiraling out of control, and the original definition used by StarTrek.com seems like the best.
I agree, it is the sources at the bottom that matter. Unfortunately the ST.com source no longer exists, and anything said by anyone who does not actually *own* the ST franchise is also just an opinion. I wish the ST and SW websites would have a simple statement about this on each, but maybe they don't want to get involved in the debates :P
Just my two cents. But I liked all the 'soft' canon that SWEU created. Because some of it eventually made it into the films or shows and became 'hard' canon. 501st Legion, The Vader / Obi Wan fight over lava, etc.
Meaning the fan writing can be mined for cool ideas.
Originally Posted by pwlaughingtrendy
Network engineers are not ship designers.
Nor should they be. Their ships would look weird.
But I liked all the 'soft' canon that SWEU created. Because some of it
That's kind of the rub. For every 501st Legion you get Beldorian the Jedi Hutt. For every Thrawn Trilogy you get The Crystal Star. For every Aayla Secura, you get an Abeloth. For every Mara Jade, you get a moon dropped on Chewbacca.
You embrace the entire EU, and you embrace every storyline people hated, you embrace every stupid character that was completely unnecessary and cheapened the magic of Star Wars.
People like to think about the really cool stories and characters that people came to love, and hate Disney for not trying to put them on the silver screen.
But then they don't think about (or try to mentally block out) every story that was just about as bad, if not worse than anything George Lucas came up with.
If people thought Jar-Jar Binks was bad, just wait until JJ Abrams brings Skippy the Force-Using Droid to theatres.
Also, the fight with Darth Vader vs. Obi-Wan Kenobi over lava was not established in the EU first. That was George's idea.
However, we do have Timothy Zahn to thank for Corsucant, which was his idea.
That's kind of the rub. For every 501st Legion you get Beldorian the Jedi Hutt. For every Thrawn Trilogy you get The Crystal Star. For every Aayla Secura, you get an Abeloth. For every Mara Jade, you get a moon dropped on Chewbacca.
You embrace the entire EU, and you embrace every storyline people hated, you embrace every stupid character that was completely unnecessary and cheapened the magic of Star Wars.
People like to think about the really cool stories and characters that people came to love, and hate Disney for not trying to put them on the silver screen.
But then they don't think about (or try to mentally block out) every story that was just about as bad, if not worse than anything George Lucas came up with.
If people thought Jar-Jar Binks was bad, just wait until JJ Abrams brings Skippy the Force-Using Droid to theatres.
Also, the fight with Darth Vader vs. Obi-Wan Kenobi over lava was not established in the EU first. That was George's idea.
However, we do have Timothy Zahn to thank for Corsucant, which was his idea.
Ok, I'll bite. First off, people really need to stop bringing up Skippy as that was considered non-canon from the very beginning. Secondly, I can understand why people don't like Chewie dying but IMO that was probably one of the best moments in the EU (the death of Mara Jade on the other hand . . . That could have been handled better).
You state that if one embraces the EU they have to take all of it, good and bad. I could not agree with you more. However, the same holds true with ANY long running franchise: Doctor Who had quite possibly some of the worst sci-fi episodes in the world during the 5th7th doctors, yet all of that is part of what makes the series what it is. With the reboot, the directors didn't say: well there were some real stinkers back there, so we'll go and retcon those. Instead they embraced it as part of the legacy.
With the slate wiped clean Lucasfilms is now free and clear to make brand new worst stories ever, and believe me they will. Only this time, considering there aren't varying levels of canon like before, once it's been published it's going to be really hard to backpedal.
once it's been published it's going to be really hard to backpedal
Give James Luceno a big enough check and he'll fill any plot holes Episodes VII+ creates. And you can pick it up at the bookstore just in time for Christmas.
Personally I like the concept of the Yuuzhan Vong and I have no problem with Vector Prime, up to and including Chewie's death. Every book after that, somewhat less so - but Vector Prime is just dandy.
That's kind of the rub. For every 501st Legion you get Beldorian the Jedi Hutt. For every Thrawn Trilogy you get The Crystal Star. For every Aayla Secura, you get an Abeloth. For every Mara Jade, you get a moon dropped on Chewbacca.
You embrace the entire EU, and you embrace every storyline people hated, you embrace every stupid character that was completely unnecessary and cheapened the magic of Star Wars.
People like to think about the really cool stories and characters that people came to love, and hate Disney for not trying to put them on the silver screen.
But then they don't think about (or try to mentally block out) every story that was just about as bad, if not worse than anything George Lucas came up with.
If people thought Jar-Jar Binks was bad, just wait until JJ Abrams brings Skippy the Force-Using Droid to theatres.
Also, the fight with Darth Vader vs. Obi-Wan Kenobi over lava was not established in the EU first. That was George's idea.
However, we do have Timothy Zahn to thank for Corsucant, which was his idea.
But again this is why I like the idea and use of 'soft' canon. This is stuff we allowed to be printed but it has no bearing on canon history unless we cherry pick the parts we like The cherry picking is what I think makes he soft canon so good. Sure people throw stuff a the wall. It is the stuff that sticks that count.
Oh and I was informed the volcano battle was a fanfic from 1978. My sources are word of mouth I would love to tell them they are wrong. So can you give me your source?
Originally Posted by pwlaughingtrendy
Network engineers are not ship designers.
Nor should they be. Their ships would look weird.
Comments
It's what's appeared on TV or in the movies. That's it. Yes, that means fiction I strongly approve of, like Ford's Klingon stories or Duane's Rihannsu novels, are noncanon, while fiction I strongly disapprove of but which has been filmed, like STV or Insurrection, are canon. It doesn't always make me happy, and I also have my headcanon which differs in certain respects from official canon, but it is what it is.
SW used to have a much looser definition, but in the fairly recent past (I'm unclear on whether this came before or after the Disney purchase) it was tightened to coincide with the Trek policy. (And each has one exception - most people from whom I've heard have officially stricken "Threshold" from Trek canon, and even Lucas disavowed the Star Wars Holiday Special.)
Not to say you are wrong, but do you have any kind of official source that spells it out that clearly? Because that is the only thing that can actually "prove" how canon works, when debates arise.
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
You can find it right here with regards to Star Trek. Due to a number of factors - Enterprise's cancellation and the continuity reset caused by the 2009 film - what precisely is and is not canonical is in much more of a state of flux than it used to be.
Still, until we are provided soemething more concrete, I choose to stick to the definition that was on the Trek website until recently: Canon is all the TV series (including the animated series as per Trek.com until, again, it was removed) and all the movies. Books and other publications provide a fertile ground for ideas but until they make it to screen they are only ideas.
Wiki is great and all, but it is not an actual source that proves anything. The ST.com website would be(as it is the official Trek website) although as you say that article apparently is gone for some reason. Even what Roddenberry said is no more of a source than what George Lucas says at this point, because neither of them own their respective franchises. The person who currently owns each franchise is the one who gets to decide canon at this point. In GL's case, I'm glad :P
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
That's fine, you can use any of Wiki's own references found in the footnotes section of the article I linked.
In any event, it is still useful to establish certain things as canon and not canon when having an internet debate, if only to keep the conversation from spiraling out of control, and the original definition used by StarTrek.com seems like the best.
I agree, it is the sources at the bottom that matter. Unfortunately the ST.com source no longer exists, and anything said by anyone who does not actually *own* the ST franchise is also just an opinion. I wish the ST and SW websites would have a simple statement about this on each, but maybe they don't want to get involved in the debates :P
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
Meaning the fan writing can be mined for cool ideas.
Originally Posted by pwlaughingtrendy
Network engineers are not ship designers.
Nor should they be. Their ships would look weird.
That's kind of the rub. For every 501st Legion you get Beldorian the Jedi Hutt. For every Thrawn Trilogy you get The Crystal Star. For every Aayla Secura, you get an Abeloth. For every Mara Jade, you get a moon dropped on Chewbacca.
You embrace the entire EU, and you embrace every storyline people hated, you embrace every stupid character that was completely unnecessary and cheapened the magic of Star Wars.
People like to think about the really cool stories and characters that people came to love, and hate Disney for not trying to put them on the silver screen.
But then they don't think about (or try to mentally block out) every story that was just about as bad, if not worse than anything George Lucas came up with.
If people thought Jar-Jar Binks was bad, just wait until JJ Abrams brings Skippy the Force-Using Droid to theatres.
Also, the fight with Darth Vader vs. Obi-Wan Kenobi over lava was not established in the EU first. That was George's idea.
However, we do have Timothy Zahn to thank for Corsucant, which was his idea.
Ok, I'll bite. First off, people really need to stop bringing up Skippy as that was considered non-canon from the very beginning. Secondly, I can understand why people don't like Chewie dying but IMO that was probably one of the best moments in the EU (the death of Mara Jade on the other hand . . . That could have been handled better).
You state that if one embraces the EU they have to take all of it, good and bad. I could not agree with you more. However, the same holds true with ANY long running franchise: Doctor Who had quite possibly some of the worst sci-fi episodes in the world during the 5th7th doctors, yet all of that is part of what makes the series what it is. With the reboot, the directors didn't say: well there were some real stinkers back there, so we'll go and retcon those. Instead they embraced it as part of the legacy.
With the slate wiped clean Lucasfilms is now free and clear to make brand new worst stories ever, and believe me they will. Only this time, considering there aren't varying levels of canon like before, once it's been published it's going to be really hard to backpedal.
Give James Luceno a big enough check and he'll fill any plot holes Episodes VII+ creates. And you can pick it up at the bookstore just in time for Christmas.
http://www.starwars.com/news/swca-one-big-story-star-wars-canon-panel-liveblog
The-Grand-Nagus
Join Date: Sep 2008
But again this is why I like the idea and use of 'soft' canon. This is stuff we allowed to be printed but it has no bearing on canon history unless we cherry pick the parts we like The cherry picking is what I think makes he soft canon so good. Sure people throw stuff a the wall. It is the stuff that sticks that count.
Oh and I was informed the volcano battle was a fanfic from 1978. My sources are word of mouth I would love to tell them they are wrong. So can you give me your source?
Originally Posted by pwlaughingtrendy
Network engineers are not ship designers.
Nor should they be. Their ships would look weird.