Continuity is Stupid · 10:58pm May 4th, 2014
Another entry in the 'Eakin is agitated about life and taking it out on his followers in the form of blog posts' file. Which is a really long name for a file to have. But rather than just go dump a couple more hours into Child of Light on Steam (micro review: a pretty solid JRPG. The storybook-style constantly rhyming aesthetic alternates between charming and infuriatingly twee. Game play is a pleasant challenge so far on Hard difficulty. And I'm always happy to see more games ape the Grandia series, which I'm a fan of. But I digress. Are parenthetical digressions objectionable? Isn't that the point of them? Is asking whether parenthetical digressions are objectionable too meta?) I decided to vent my aggression by typing up a long winded and barely comprehensible rant.
This has been building since the announcement that the Star Wars extended universe is being decanonized. Which some nerds on the internet (Full disclosure: I write MLP fanfiction. I'm not pretending I'm not a member of that particular demographic. I also read a ton of those EU Star Wars novels. When I was nine. I even inflicted them as 'recommendations' on the greatest teacher I've ever had. So on the off chance you're reading this, Ms. Betsy? Sorry about that) became infuriated by. Nerds being angry at something Star Wars related? I am shocked, shocked, to discover that happening.
So let me say this again: The entire idea of 'canon' is stupid. And not just the ignorable kind of stupid that I can't be bothered to engage with. It's the actively harmful kind of stupid that poisons otherwise enjoyable stories. Exhibit A? Comic books. God, I despise superhero comic books. It's so incredibly telling that more people have seen and enjoyed the stories of these legitimately interesting characters via film than on the page. Because there are interesting stories to tell about the characters that many talented people have had a hand in creating. And it's not like the format destroys any potential for creative expression. I mean, Watchmen? Maus? Gorgeous, but the exception rather than the rule.
'But Eakin!' I hear you cry in my imagination, 'how can you object to canon? To internal consistency? To rewarding longtime fans of a series with little rewards that validate their devotion to the series with the barest acknowledgement?' And those are legitimate points. But they don't address my central concern.
Every choice an author makes constrains future possibilities. Now, on a certain level that's a good thing. Every story is, ultimately, a single path. Oversimplification, I know, and some stories allow for multiple interpretations of the events contained within. But for the most part a good story is self-contained. And let me point out here that 'story' in this instance doesn't have to mean a single book, or film, or... uh... story here on Fimfic. I would classify sequels as part of a single overarching story when they're written as parts of the same narrative. Let's focus on the 'self-contained' bit.
But what happens when someone wants to tell an otherwise-compelling story, with the same characters, that contradicts or is trivialized by something another author wrote? Well, either there's a half-assed explanation for why Character A can't use his/her Super Awesome Power of Awesomeness to resolve the conflict the author wants to explore or the character in question will conveniently forget they have that ability Think 'teleportation' during the climax of 'Feeling Pinkie Keen' as an example. And frankly? That's what they should do. Because the power of any story isn't in 'Good guy beats bad guy,' but rather the exploration of the conflict between them. There isn't any narrative weight to 'bad guy mugs helpless individual. Satellite disintegrates mugger from orbit. Helpless individual goes about his day.' So if you have to ignore the the Orbital Disintegration Satellite for the story to work then you absolutely should.
People will bitch about it. Oh yes, you can be sure of that. It's tempting to respond to their objections with a 'shut up and sit down' reaction, but I do get where they're coming from. They've put a lot of time and effort to learning the ins and outs of a particular universe. And authors have told amazing tales in this universe with this character before, so why can't you? Answer: Because that's not the story I'm trying to tell. And more importantly it doesn't break verisimilitude. 'Fluttershy is shy and Twilight likes books' is useful characterization. 'In episode #912 Rarity clearly demonstrated that she's incapable of the feats she preformed in episode #299' is not. One informs our basic understanding of the character while the other is trivia.
Because the story being told is what's important, way more so than whether this fictional story you're reading is compatible with the other fictional story you might have read a day, a month, a decade ago. I'm not saying you should forgive authors who totally ignore the most fundamental aspects of a character. For example, if a bad guy shoots Superman with a regular bullet and he dies, that's a problem. Because it breaks suspension of disbelief, not because 'well, in issue #47 he got shot and was totally okay.' As long as the story is internally consistent, honestly, the rest of the canon can go hang.
My TL;DR? If an author ever has to say some form of 'I'd like to tell this story, but I can't with this character because of something that another author penned a decade ago' then your canon is more trouble than it's worth. Just let writers tell the stories they want to tell; arguing how well they 'fit' with 'canon' is the height of uselessness.
So if you feel inspired to write a story but worry that you can't make it work with the canon as it exists right now? Write it anyway. A good story is a good story.
Weeeellll I mean yeah you don't want canon and continuity to be a bar to telling a good story. You don't want anything to be a bar to telling a good story. But you also need to factor in that keeping things like that straight is like basic Plotting 101. And like all writing rules it can be broken with good results, but you should take the time to seriously weigh whether contradicting a part of the story your fans may well really like is worth whatever story it is you're trying to tell, and whether it really has to be told that way and with that change. Every writer or artist has to work within some limitations; otherwise you get the uncensored Ren and Stimpy episodes they finally let the creator make years later.
You have to know you fans man. Because let's face it, generally speaking the kind of person who reads comic book stories a lot is also the kind person who likes them in part because of all the tangled soap opera history and continuity.
That is what the [Alternate Universe] tag is for. And similar ways in which other media handle this kind of parallel continuity.
BTW, I'm not taking in arms about the Star Wars incident, but I've decided to mostly stop following the universe. I followed Star Wars due to a combination of good stories and my investment in a developing universe; that announcement just wiped the second part, which puts Star Wars on equal footing with other stories that didn't spend that kind of effort in a connected, consistent universe.
In other words, I will still read/watch/etc Star Wars stories, but I will look at, and evaluate, them as mere stories, without any benefit from being Star Wars anymore.
To offer a counter argument, comics have a number of ways round this very issue. New imprints, parallel worlds, 'What If?', so on and so on and so on. There is something to be said for tight continuity as well - Sandman, for example, is all the stronger because it tells a greater overarching tale over its entire run.
Furthermore, one runs into the issue of 'This new story cheapens the old' - what does it matter if Jean Grey Dies (again), when you know she will not stay dead (again)? What makes tight canon a good thing is that it ensures those stories have weight behind them; knowing that that weight can be swept away by the next writer diminishes its value.
That said, Star Wars benefits from this, because the EU is so filled out in so many ways. Just as with Abrams-Trek, this is more about establishing new than repudiating old; Disney, perhaps, made a marketing error in simply failing to say 'The stories divulge at this point', which would have been the better choice; everyone paying attention knew there was no way episode VII was going to follow the EU, because where the hell would it fit?
Amen.
I wrote my own stories knowing they would more than likely be destroyed further down the track.
This reminds me of a video that CartsBeforeHorses did last week about all the inconsistencies present in Inspiration Manifestation. Of course, a lot of his work is parody, but that doesn't mean that he was joking about everything. One thing it talked about was Twi using her "noclip" spell to phase those ponies through solid crystal. Why could she not have done that in other episodes when it would have been useful if even Pumpkin Cake is capable of doing it? That was just one of his points.
On short, this video pretty much refers to
I get so annoyed when people do that.
to every idea that is before canon I say: constants and variables.
Some things have happened like the canon things. and those that are headcanon have happened too, in another telling of the story. The same world, a different perspective/ a different side.
I SO agree with this. I've seen MLP writers pitch fits when a new episode "ruins" the canon of their story, and then stop telling the story because it no longer fits the sacred
cowcanon. It drives me up the WALL when people treat canon as though it were somehow holy. It's not. The things done by other writers, whether official show writers or just other people here on FimFic, is a starting point, a place to draw inspiration from, and not the Holy Truth From On High.I read comic books occasionally, and half the time whatever I've picked up is complete trash in the story department. Yeah, the comics where there's some 'big event' will feature characters being thrown around (and getting killed) haphazardly, but there's some bigger problem than just the big soap opera impression where terrible writing is everywhere. I don't read enough comic books or know enough to really say why though.
And this is why I treat the official show as "the (group of) universe(s) most of the reading audience is familiar with", and not "the One True Universe" of Equestria. Season 4 contradicts an idea you wanted to write? Ignore it as needed. The comics gave you an idea, but the latest episode contradicts the comics? Ignore it. You like your headcanon on issue X better than the show's vague hints about it? Run with it. Twi's wings completely ruin your story's climax? Write her as a unicorn. And don't whine about it in the comments when the author does so!
Not sure why you think you're 'taking it out on' us. On the contrary, I love these sorts of insights into your mind.
On the whole, I agree with you - very thoughtful ideas. Certainly, to use a pertinent example, fanfic authors should never let canon constrain them.
However, in the case of Star Wars, I feel that there is legitimate criticism even by your standards. Personally, I don't care - I'm happy to have some 'official' canon, short and manageable enough to digest without dropping another hour of sleep per night.
But that's the thing - 'official'. The common understanding of official canon is having a single, definite, de facto canon. One to rule them all. (Not that contrary stories cannot be written, but they would be, by definition, Alternate Universe.) It is its own internal self consistency. That is, perhaps, even the definition of canon.
These new movies are going by VII, VIII, and IX, not I, II, and III. They are assumed to take place in the same, non-alternate universe. They are, as you pointed out in your sequels point, expected to still maintain internal self-consistency.
I am unclear on whether official sources even commented on the canonity of the Extended Universe. However, I think, given all this time, regardless of factuality, people view it as such.
By your own definitions, and assuming certain things about their mind states, I feel that the fans that are in uproar are justified in their upset. Not that I think anything should be done - I'm sure the decision was for the best - but I can understand and appreciate their pain in this. That's a very big thing to kill. Suddenly, their whole world comes crashing down. There's really no compromise to be had, but I don't think sympathy hurts.
This is the wrong place to ask this, but what does "TL:DR" stand for?
2077552
"Too Long, Didn't Read". It's either a saying for someone who can't be arsed to read the whole thing, or a summary of the paragraph for those who can't be arsed to read the whole thing.
2077559 thank you.
2077552 "too long; didn't read"
And for the record, this is approximately my view of canon as well.
I agree, a good story is the king of storytelling. If that isn't your primary concern, then your priorities are out of whack. That said, I don't think canon, even petty minutia, can simply be told to go hang. I say this because issues of canon are ultimately issues of respect.
To elucidate, canon is only an issue when working with a pre-established series. Comic books are an excellent example, where writers change but the series stays the same. In such an environment, you are using the name of the character to hawk your own writing. People like spider-man, for example, so writing a story for spider-man hooks in these people. This is the entire premise for fanfiction.
Now, canon, even minutia like "that chia pet he bought in issue #27" is important in this context. Canon is the work done by others, which you are now inheriting in order to further your own ends. When you write spider-man, you are standing on the shoulders of writers before you, writers that thought that the chia pet in issue #27 was a good idea, and decided it should be there.
Ignoring canon amounts to ignoring those that came before. If you want to write a good story, fine, but if you're going to ignore canon, then write your own story. I don't think you have any right to appropriate the good name of those who spend time developing a character, only to hawk what you consider to be a "good story" that happens to be ruined by the decisions of those before you. At the very least, they deserve a hand-wave out of respect, because there is every chance that without them, you would not be enjoying the automatic attention that the name of their series implies.
That said, ignoring canon because it's stupid and the writer in question should be shot is totally acceptable. Just be clear that you are essentially launching a direct attack on their credentials and character. What isn't acceptable is ignoring canon because you couldn't be bothered to pay attention to the source material, the source material that you are using to further your own ends.
In short, if you're gonna borrow from someone, show some respect, both to those who have written before, and those who have enjoyed that writing. Your success hinges upon them.
2077446
I don't entirely disagree. For example 'What if Twilight had been born an earth pony?' is a potentially rich story idea that entirely disregards and negates show canon. And I won't deny that limitations breed creativity. But
is why the comic book industry is going to die within the next couple decades unless they majorly reinvent themselves. If you leave the lunatics in charge of the asylum, you're gonna have a bad time.
2077461
I guess I just don't understand the benefit of a 'single connected universe.' I cannot imagine supporting a work just because it took place within a universe that contained a work I liked previously.
2077463
I'd say that the 'What Ifs?' are the exceptions that prove my rule. Authors want to tell stories that disregard continuity, so they do. And you get things like 'Red Son' and 'Kingdom Come' which don't fit into the canonical mold, but are awesome. So... why is the mold there at all? And with all the dead/revived characters within comics, it isn't like the writers respect canon as anything more than a vague suggestion.
2077465
That coin just keeps coming up 'heads,' doesn't it?
2077516
That's mostly how I feel too. What inspires you, well, inspires you. Go with it. Much as
2077489 said, there's no legit reason to treat canon as something holy an unimpeachable.
2077526
Feels like I'm taking it out on somepony, because I'm typing these things up in a petty little fit of consternation. And do you really care if the EU Star Wars stories fit with the universe? Isn't it enough that they're good stories? You enjoyed them for what they were; why does it matter if somebody later puts their foot down and says 'no, this work of fiction never really happened?'
Bullshit it doesn’t. Separate continuities need not be consistent with one another but consistency within a continuity is paramount. Write yourself into a corner and have to pull shit out of your arse to get out of it? Fine, but don’t you dare get self‐righteous when somebody notices your inability to plan ahead.
When you have "Using orbital weaponry on unarmored on-foot targets" as a reference point in any place, something, somewhere has gone horribly wrong.
Unless the mugger was wearing power armor, then it's perfectly ok.
I disagree because it's just so nice when everything fits together according to one perfect canon. When everything fits together, there are no inconsistencies, and no contradictions, it's just so wonderful. Extremely difficult to do, but that's one of the things that make it so amazing when it happens properly.
2077594
See, I can't get on board with that. You use Spiderman as an example. Hey! I'd like to write a Spiderman story. It's a great jumping-off point. Those who are familiar with that character will be instantly at home.
But uh oh! I haven't read issue #27 where he bought the chia pet. So what? The chia pet is more or less superfluous. Perhaps it served issue #27's story, but it's hardly essential to the story I'm telling. I don't give a damn what other writers have done with the character I'm working with, though, so I ignore it. And that's the right way to go about things.
I'm not sure why I'd treat a previous writer's work as inherently inviolable or untouchable. If overwriting their 'canon' is what I have to do to tell the story I want to tell, then tough bucking luck.
Continuity works in stuff like serialized TV or in books penned by a single author, because it's essentially telling one long story. Babylon 5 or Battlestar wouldn't have been nearly as good as they were without continuity building history and character development.
But yeah, whenever you're floating a property from one writer to the next, it's a pain, and it's limiting, and it trends to stand in the way of a good story. The only two Superman comics I've ever read were All-Star and Red Son, and both were great, because neither required that I know a thing about any previous Superman story.
For Star Wars, I never followed the EU, but the idea of setting up this huge extragalactic invasion and having writers set stories WITHIN that vast event seemed like a nice way of going about continuity, because (asduming they avoided the main cast) you could tell any Star Wars story you wanted within that larger arc.
Are they just dumping the stuff after episode 6 or are they also dropping the pre episode 1stuff, those were the ones I found interesting.
OT: I feel that a fictinal universe needs to have consistency, basic rules should be followed by all instances, sequels should acknowledge previous work and prequels should line up with what is going to happen later. If the new movies follows what's happens before it I'll be fine. I had no investment in anything post 6 so I have no strong opinions on it being nudged to the side. At least Disney is still going to print the novels for those that still want to read the "new" AU.
2077595 From what I can tell it's not so much that there aren't enough people who like that sort of thing as that the powers that be in the major comic book companies have made it clear that they don't really WANT fans out of a certain very narrow demographic.
Which I know sounds batshit crazy, but the proof keeps adding up.
Like, I’ve known a lot of girls who love superheroes in general and comics in particular. Including the part where they like the detailed and convoluted continuity! People like them are eager to dive into comic book fandom and they get driven out of it by a combination of the creators’ attitudes and the way existing fans treat them.
You know that old Teen Titans cartoon? Well I’ve only seen a little of it but it seemed great. And the cartoon version of Starfire was this totally sweet and naïve girl who charmed viewers with her hilariously earnest attempts to live in an alien culture she didn’t fully understand. And awhile back DC comics rebooted all of their comics to let them start from a fresh slate picking and choosing from their old continuity as they saw fit to tell exciting new stories that would bring in new readers. So naturally one would assume they would make the new Starfire closer to the cartoon version that most non-comic book fans are familiar with so as to draw in those people you mentioned who love superheroes on films and TV but have never read a comic in their lives, right?
http://i.imgur.com/h0voFzY.jpg
That’s just one example, but stuff like it happens again…and again…and again. Continuity and canon is not holding comic book writers back from telling great original stories. Comic book canon and continuity bends around itself like a fucking pretzel when it gets in the way of a story the current writer in charge wants to tell. And that’s assuming the writer can’t tell their radically different new take on the character and his history in one of the many, many alternate universe comics. They have Elseworlds and the Marvel’s Ultimates and All-Star series and alternate futures like The Dark Knight Returns. They totally have the tools to tell new and different stories that appeal to huge untapped demographics while maintaining the convoluted mainline continuity that comic book fans can’t get enough of.
But by and large they don’t seem to want to. They want to stay in their narrowly defined conception of what comic book superhero stories should be like and to hell with the money they could make by pandering to women and blacks and gays or whatever by not operating on the assumption that that their fans are all geeky white males who agree with Frank Miller’s politics and think Rorschach is a totally awesome character who should be admired. The invisible hand of the market my ass.
And now I will leave you with your moment of zen:
i.imgur.com/bzoUwMb.png
2077619
That's what's called original writing. If you're going to ignore everyone who came before, then write your own story. Don't freeload off the success of other people you couldn't be bothered to pay attention to.
We're already assuming a violation of canon here, such as "X does Y, but it was already established that..." And in such a scenario, the continuity error appears because it WOULD be relevant to the situation. Let's look at the chia pet. This would only appear in, say, a description of X's room, which I should hope was serving some function such as establishing character. In such a case, the chia pet (I again hope, assuming the writer of it was not themselves engaged in idle fappery (seeing as I already addressed ignoring stupidity)) would have its own back story and thus be A PART of the character you're establishing, and thus not superfluous.
In brief, if a thing is superfluous, it won't be missed, yet our entire discussion centered around canon deletions that were missed, in which case they are by definition not superfluous.
Since when do 8 paragraphs count as TLDR? I know the internet is the realm of the lazy, but still.
I wonder why canon wars only seem to come up on the English-speaking parts of the WWW. Because you have a good word for it? Because most works of fiction that get serialized long enough to make canon relevant are made in North America? Because of the franchise culture that prevails there?
So many questions, and so little motivation to answer them. This is the internet after all.
2077691
Oh, you don't have to convince me that comic companies are a mismanaged train wreck in progress. I said they were dying. I didn't say I'd miss them. And this is coming from someone who just enjoyed the hell out of my marathon of the DCAU's Batman Beyond over the last few weeks. The obsession with their perpetually-shrinking fan base is beyond insane. There are good stories to be told with these characters. Hell, I'm even half on board with the idea that the superhero is the renaissance of the Greek Pantheon. The sooner they're wrested out of the grip of the companies who own them, the better.
2077691 You know, I've heard that a lot of it is marketing's fault. Back in the 80s after the great video game crash, they started doing market research. Turns out boys were more likely to buy video games than girls. So they started marketing games to boys. This started a feedback loop of games only being marketed to boys, so only boys bought games, so games were only marketed to boys.
Many of these industries are hyper conscious of the market they have, and pander to it to the point of alienating that market. Square Enix only recently admitted that they'd screwed up final fantasy by trying to pander to supposed "trends" like real time combat. All because they didn't want to become "irrelevant."
I can only assume the same thing has happened in the comic book industry, marketing comic books to people who currently buy comic books, thus locking the industry into a self fulfilling prophecy of what a "comic book" is and always will be.
2077709
But I don't want to write an original story in this case. I want to write a story about a web-slinging superhero and use the pre-established Spiderman background. I'm not going to ignore everything that came before, but I'm going to ignore some of it. Because I don't like it. You yourself said:
And I agree. I'm absolutely fine with shitting on the original author's conception of a character if doing so creates a better story. You think that the original writers deserve veneration and respect. I don't. Write the best story possible based on the property you want to work from. Anything that improves a story is A-okay in my book.
2077516
On the other hand I think it polite on the part of the author to warn the reader beforehand if the story deviates from canon, be it by using the AU tag, by specifying up to which episode the story follows the show, or in some other way. IMHO It doesn't need to tell exactly what is different, but the fact something important to the story is different should be clearly communicated. If there is a lack of such warning, and I comment on the story, I will point it.
2077595
More like bumping it a few notches up due to the fact I already know other elements . I'm not going to read something I consider bad just because it's part of a larger universe, but I might pick something merely good over something great due to the good one being in the same universe I already enjoy.
There's also the fact that, when well explored, the interconnected universe allows the author to use other stories in it as a really large, though optional, intro. It allows for kinds of internal references that would otherwise require unwieldy infodumps to achieve. Kinda akin to why fanfics can dispense with much of the setting without issues, the interconnected universe can serve the same function for providing finer details of the scenario.
I'm not against exploring other aspects of the setting or the characters that can't fit the canon, BTW. I just ask for such ventures to clearly communicate that they are deviating from the canon. Though I do hold it against a fic if it needlessly deviates from canon (as in, things that don't matter in the story are different from the canon just for the heck of it).
Generally, I agree that rigid adherence to every last detail of canon is probably useless. The basic level of canon provided by the show is kind of important, though. That tells us what sort of ponies the Mane 6 and others are: How they behave, how they interact, what they like to talk about... All that. If a writer uses a character's form and name in a story, it's best that they use the character's personality as well. Beyond that, you're absolutely right.
<(Bugs who, now?)
As a random example:
If a writer has Applejack acting like Bugs Bunny, for instance, it would be nice to have a reason for that somewhere in the story.
2077789
I think our debate is an issue of degree. Ignoring a writer is fine, but it should be done out of conscious choice, not ignorance. In your example, you said you hadn't read issue #27. In our example, it was a chia pet, and pretty insignificant. But if you hadn't read issue #27, how would you know?
I've actually had this happen to me. I tried to do a FoE story, and thought I had a great idea. Of course, I created a massive canon faux-pas because I hadn't bothered to read the material in full. I'd gone through the wiki and thought myself informed, only to find out it was incomplete after I put forward my embarrassingly badly researched story. I looked like a total asshole, which is probably where my view on the topic comes from.
I guess ultimately my point is as I said above. Ignore as you will, but ignore because you know it's something to be ignored, not something you never bothered to learn, because for every chia pet you might miss, you could as easily miss a pivotal character moment.
Let me be a voice of dissent here. There are some continuities that do fit with your point, and MLP is one of them. I don't mind lack of canon in MLP works, because what is in the show is so simple, and indeed the fandom is part of the attraction of the show.
By counter, some series are less about suggesting a universe and creating a motif to work with, but are about creating a consistent and separate universe to be more immersive. Like Lord of the Rings for example. Despite the intro to the books specifically disclaiming perfect consistency, it holds well. So while I like the LOTR movies and in particular the Hobbit movies, I want them to hold to strict canon.
In other words, not every story is built to make money or even to entertain. Some are made to educate or inform, and yes, some are built to immerse people in an alternate universe.
Now, I don't know much about the EU. I just know the movies. And my opinion holds to what most fans think: Star Wars and Empire Strikes Back are awesome, Jedi was OK, the prequels suck. But all the reasons the first two movies were cool were canonical. The Jedi order, the Empire, the rebels, hyperdrive, the Force. Those need to stay.
2077595
Nah. It's just clean, wholesome catharsis. You're taking it out on the idea itself, and we're here to offer discussion to help you formalize and solidify your opinion.
Me personally, not at all. However, fiction is a tricky business. It's all one big facade to begin with, so breaking suspension of disbelief is a big problem. As someone else mentioned, Abrams-Trek is exactly the right way to do it - acknowledgement, separation, and even explanation, which is more than most should hope for. Just ignoring such a huge part of the fans' understanding of what Star Wars is isn't the best way of doing it.
At the end of the day, I'll probably enjoy it a lot more than if it had included the EU. I don't mind. But I think those who are upset are justified - they've lost a lot, and Disney does not seem sympathetic to that.
2077789
I think your opinion is fine, and in fact good, for a fanfiction author. For the legal successor to a story, perhaps more reverence is necessary to prevent breaking suspension of disbelief.
I can see where you are going. Though if you are going to do something new, it should be new, and probably mention it somewhere instead of going from book 20 to book 21 with certain things suddenly missing.
Forget continuity. Stories that stick to Continuity, and make little if any changes are boring. The ones where either you go into the future, past the end of the show (or other canon material) are often far better. Also, those where you alter the timelike, and then totally derail the timelike in the future, are also interesting, because you do not know what is going to happen.
I never have an issue with ignoring inconvenient canon material, or ignoing new stuff added after the story was planned out. Generally, Worst case, an authors note saying that the author is aware of the confict, but ignoring it, is plenty.
Personally I wouldn't object to any story ignoring, literally, any piece of canon it wanted, so long as it still is a good story.
For this purpose, I don't maintain one continuity. I don't get attached to it.
I have various continuities, which include various things in different combinations, depending.
Like, Star Trek continuity... You have ToS. Some parts of this are compatible with TNG, but much of it really isn't. So they can have continuity each within themselves, and each one can incorporate elements of the other, but get squeezed out when contradictions arise...
... and that's okay. It's not GREAT - maintaining a smaller number of continuities is a good thing, I think - but it's okay.
I write my stories in line with FIM canon. If I can do it, anyone else can. It is therefore sometimes upsetting to see another writer flagrantly disregard canon. Granted, those incidents are fairly few and far between, but it still happens sometimes.
Additionally, I know I'm not the only one who feels like that, as almost everyone here will pipe up about some particular canon deviation in some story. So, as a writer, I know that it's in my best interest to stick to canon.
But. The great thing about fimfiction is this glorious 'Alternate Universe' tag. So... you can deviate and get away with it, if you like.
2077594 I think this guy has a point. I mean... we're all riding on FIM's universe here. As fanfiction writers, we should respect that. That doesn't mean we have to count the comic books, the movies, famous fanfictions, and Tweets from the show's writers as canon too. But there is some stuff that should be sacred. Maybe Writer A doesn't like that Twilight has wings. If he ignores that and writes the story anyway, it'll just look stupid. However, Writer B feels the same way and cleverly writes in a lampshade over the problem of Twilicorn.
My point is, if something canon really interferes with your story so much, you could either tag it AU or just write your way around it. Not that difficult.
Well said. Characterization is how we know the characters of the story and why they do what they do. Canon offers options for places, people, and things they might encounter, but it should not constrain possible stories.
Of course, ignore enough of it, and the story's going to need an "Alternate Universe" tag, but that's a small price to pay for telling the story you want and not the story that's 100% show accurate. After all, that story doesn't exist. Not in fan fiction.
Well damn.
That's insightful. I may never have thought about it that way. Just goes to show how much of an amateur I am when it comes to storytelling and characters.
But I don't think I'll ever forget what you said here. Essentially, there are certain elements of the story that are important to remember and keep because they're and central to the story. However, if you want to write something in depth with another's characters (or previous ones of your own) and there's a glitch with canon, finding a way around it is NOT that bad and, in your opinion, encouraged.
At least, that's how I understand it.
But thank you very much for your rant. One man's trash is another man's treasure - you may be annoyed at stuff because of an idea you believe in and must explain your idea to let others understand why you're so cross, but that concept and idea of yours (coming from a brilliant writer) will certainly be insightful to many others; myself included, of course.
AIP§
2078202
Well I wouldn't take anything I say as gospel (or anything anyone else says, for that matter) but I'm glad to provide some food for thought.
2078217
It's the thought behind that counts for me. Of course there are limitations and constraints, but essentially, if I want to write a fic that's Fallout: Equestria-based because I have an cool idea and a message I want to get across and that's the best universe/canon to do it in, I should.
I like that. A lot. It encourages others to write and be creative and, to an extent, tells them how to deal with nitpicky haters. It like your post because it's the type of thing that'll inspire an author instead of bringing them down, thus stifling the wonderful act of creation and storytelling through imagination.
Good on you!
Even this could be made into a good story... (Your mileage may vary on the "good" part.)
The story begins with Bruce Wayne and Clark Kent are doing an interview for a Daily Planet article about Wayne Enterprises. Shots ring out. Wayne drops to the floor reflexively, but Clark fails to for some reason. Not that it matters... unbeknownst to most, he's really Superman, right? Except... a blossom of red spreads across Clark's white shirt. Clark himself doesn't seem to believe it. Bruce can only watch in horror as Clark is loaded into an ambulance and carted away by the EMTs. What just happened?
"Canon" is what seems to get a lot of readers, authors, etc. into hissy fits around here. Seriously, look no further that Derpy (or Ditzy Doo, if that's what you prefer to call her). The Doo/Hooves family is pure fanon, which could easily be attacked (and has been on the message boards occasionally) by certain scenes in "canon." Yet the Doo family is here to stay.
Scootaloo has a bedroom... somewhere in Ponyville. It doesn't mean that A Taste of the Good Life gets tossed out the window. We still haven't seen the Scoot's "canon" parents yet, so why not Ebby? Or Red Currant, Fluttershy,
SnowflakeBulk Biceps, or any of the myriad origins she has, including being a changeling.This is a good way of putting to bed complaints like "Why didn't Gandalf just fly the eagles into Mordor with the ring and save everyone the trouble?" And frankly, I hate complaints like that, because the only way to shoot them down is by making convoluted excuses for a story that you love to exist. If it's a great story that has affected peoples' lives and entertained its audience, why do we need to make excuses for it?
Good on ya, m8.
Hey Eakin, did you delete my third post here for some reason or did I manage to not submit it by mistake?
2077595
Again, it's why Sandman is such a rich work, and why mainstream is weaker. I mean, there's ways around the problem - hell, Doctor Who has one of the best solutions out there for having canon and then contradicting it at will. 'Oops! Someone fucked up time again!' is wonderful in that regard.
So in short : Canon can and does serve a point, and yes, I agree What If stories are good, so why not just -let- them be obvious alternate takes instead of 'And now, Jean is alive. Again' stories?
2078514
As a rule, I don't delete comments. Certainly haven't deleted any of yours.
2078560
Doc Who has the advantage of its timey-wimey nature. But most of what I'm getting from your comments is that I should read Sandman. I'm mostly a Gaiman newbie, outside of Good Omens. You're making me think that if would be worth investing the time/money into reading his stuff, though. So, I'm listening. Here's your chance to pitch it to me.
Well, that's a dose of encouragement. I'll have to water some plot seeds with that.
The way I see canon is that there can be more than one of them.
Take Batman for instance. There's no one Batman canon, but there are several internal Batman canons. Batman the Animated Series doesn't share the same continuity as the post-crisis pre-new-52 comics, or the 60's TV show, but it has an established, consistent canon. And the existence of that canon hasn't kept new cartoons, movies, and comics about Batman with alternative canons from cropping up.
So, basically I agree and disagree with you at the same time.
2078580 Weird. Must have forgotten to hit submit. I'll try to remember what it was and rewrite it later. It wasn't much.
I should note I don't mind Twilight having inconsistent powers episode to episode.
It's a loose canon, but dammit, it gets the job done.