Canonical background
Hotmissile
[Sorry, this isn't going to be an exciting discussion, just a
request for information. But do discuss, if you wish!]
Now we all know what the main body of TF canon is: the Marvel
comics, the cartoon, the Dreamwave comics & the tech specs. Everyone
knows about these and how to get hold of them.
However, there are some other references which keep popping up in
discussions which seem to be regarded as canonical, most of which I've
never read and know little about. These include:
BotCon literature:
Critical Mass (comic, '97)
Reaching the Omega Point:
Visitations (script, '98)
Covenant (story, '99)
Schism (story, '99)
Paradox (story, '99)
Herald (story, '99)
??? (comic, '00) *
The Wreckers:
Departure (comic, '01)
Primeval Dawn (comic, '01)
Betrayal (comic, '02) *
Apart from the two *ed, these are on http://www.botcon.com , so I
can read them. Jon Hartman says the two that aren't online are still
available to buy via 3H, so I'm going to try contacting
http://www.otfcc.com
Others:
Apelinq's Journals (Never heard of these before Grebo mentioned them
the other day.)
Alignment (Transforce exclusive?)
The Last Days of Optimus Prime (Transforce?)
Universe comic?
So, my questions:
* ~Are~ these canonical?
* Are there any others I've not heard of?
* How can I get hold of them? But I think I remember Paul Cannon
(Transforce organiser) having issues with Alignment being bootlegged,
so I'd better try and contact him to get that.
Thanks for your help.
Mic // Hotmissile
Grebo Guru
"it's getting hot in here, so take off all your armor..."
Ahem. Sorry.
So my main-frame Hotmissile <hotmi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> [Sorry, this isn't going to be an exciting discussion, just a
> request for information. But do discuss, if you wish!]
Transformers information is always exciting to me!!!
> Now we all know what the main body of TF canon is: the Marvel
> comics, the cartoon, the Dreamwave comics & the tech specs. Everyone
> knows about these and how to get hold of them.
I am on the fence about the DW comics' canonicity, but they are pretty
good, so what the hell.
The TF cartoon canon is:
the first two seasons of the cartoon
the Movie
the third season of the cartoon
"The Rebirth", a three-parter which comprised the entirety of the 4th
season (and in my opinion is awful).
The TF Marvel comics canon is:
the Marvel 80-issue series
Transformers Universe #1-4 (profiles books)
Headmasters #1-4
Transformers Vs GI Joe #1-4
A handful of late issues of GI Joe which offers a bridge from the
80-issue series to TFG2
and
Transformers Generation 2 #1-12
There's also a comic adaptation of the movie which sorta stands on its
own...
The TF UK canon includes all of the above, plus about a zillion more
"intertestamental" stories published as weeklies, in annuals, etc.
There's also the new novels, which I understand fit into DW continuity.
There are also several TF commercials, some for the toys and some for
the comics, which had a fair amount of animation and seemed to operate
within their own continuity. This continuity seems closest to the
TechSpecs.
And then there's the Japanese anime continuity, which includes all of
the US Cartoon continuity, plus:
Scramble City (an OVA set after season 2 but before the movie... it
doesnt fit completely and is unfinished)
The Headmasters (an anime TV series which supplants The Rebirth)
Masterforce
Victory
Zone (an OVA series of which only one episode was ever finished)
The TF Zone stories serialized in TV Magazine
The Battlestars, which was serialized in TV Magazine
Operation: Combine, which was serialized in TV Magazine
Transformers Generation 2, which was serialized in TV Magazine
Plus there are the manga -- the Japanese TF comics which are similar to
but not exactly the same as the anime continuity.
Oh yeah! There's an AWESOME fan comic out there called "Transformers
Chronicles" written and drawn by Hirofumi Ichikawa (who is GOD) and
translated by Doug Dlin (who is also Godlike). Its a drastically
different (and, IMO, much better) idea for a story to go along with the
Generation-2 toy line. Ask Doug if he has any copies left -- I bought
mine from him, and it remains my favorite TF comic even AFTER having
read all the DW stuff!
Ok, so anyway, next there's Beast Wars... Its continuity takes BOTH the
US Comics and US Cartoon as "myths from the past" and draws on both of
them, cleverly never declaring either continuity to be its only source
of history. Beast Machines is the direct sequel to BW.
BW also had a VERY short comic written by Simon Furman. It was included
with the bat-Optimus/gator-Megs 2-pack before the BW TV show was aired,
and it seemed to be saying that the BW characters WERE the G1
characters, now in organic forms. This little pocket universe has been
well and duly orphaned since then, however.
In Japan, there were two BW non-CG animes: Beast Wars II ("Second") and
Beast Wars Neo. There was also a BW II "movie" (it was about 45 minutes
long and part of a double feature) which has Optimus Primal teaming up
with BWII's LioConvoy. BM never aired in Japan.
There were also three volumes of BW Manga. BWII had two volumes, BW Neo
had one. Both are significantly different from the anime.
Then came TF: Car Robots, which *could* be connected to the G1 toon and
BW as the source of its history, although it happened in an alternate
reality. In America, TFCR became TF Robots In Disguise, and the
characters were recoceived as being actual G1 characters... this
muddied things quite a bit.
Now we have Armada, which is pretty much the same in both countries.
Oh, and I mustn't forget the little stories that come with the
Sixcombiner Micromasters reissues. They seem to happen in another
alternate reality as well, although it's not totally clear. The stories
certainly don't jibe with Operation: Combine, which the toys were
originally made for.
> However, there are some other references which keep popping up in
> discussions which seem to be regarded as canonical, most of which I've
> never read and know little about. These include:
>
> BotCon literature:
> Critical Mass (comic, '97)
This being a satirical story, I'd say it should be taken with a grain
of salt, if at all... It does provide an intro to Omega Point though.
(Somewhat frustratingly.)
> Reaching the Omega Point:
> Visitations (script, '98)
> Covenant (story, '99)
> Schism (story, '99)
> Paradox (story, '99)
> Herald (story, '99)
> ??? (comic, '00) *
The comic is called "Terminus". I am not at all fond of the art, but
the story is pretty fun.
> The Wreckers:
> Departure (comic, '01)
> Primeval Dawn (comic, '01)
> Betrayal (comic, '02) *
And another issue coming sometime this year. Yay!!!
> Apart from the two *ed, these are on http://www.botcon.com , so I
> can read them. Jon Hartman says the two that aren't online are still
> available to buy via 3H, so I'm going to try contacting
> http://www.otfcc.com
Excellent plan, yes.
> Others:
> Apelinq's Journals (Never heard of these before Grebo mentioned them
> the other day.)
They are a lead-in to the Wreckers storyline. A "personal log" written
from a first-person POV. That person is Apelinq, the leader of the
Wreckers and the ostensible "hero" of the Wreckers storyline. I have an
MS Word transcript of them (thank you Autobot Super Deluxe Grade!!!)
and I can eMail 'em to you if you want. Shoot me an eMail at
greb...@aol.com to remind me, OK?
> Alignment (Transforce exclusive?)
Yeah. The entire manuscript for it is somewhere online. Do a Google
Groups search for it, you'll find it fast enough. There used to be a
webpage which nailed Alignment down as happening in the year 2412 AD,
coolly enough.
> The Last Days of Optimus Prime (Transforce?)
This comic can be found online. Its only 3 pages long. I can email this
to you as well if you like.
> Universe comic?
Hasn't come out yet, but starts 1 year after the end of Beast Machines.
Look here:
http://www.transfandom.com/matrix/content/story.php?story_id=25
> So, my questions:
> * ~Are~ these canonical?
That's a tricky question. I think the official stance is "If Hasbro
approved it, it's canonical". However, some stories appear to be "more
canonical" than others... I would say depending upon just how much
involvement Hasbro has with the story. I think the best way to look at
it is: "if the story has toys associated with it, it's VERY canonical."
I would say that the "Most Canonical" continuity is that of Beast Wars
and Beast Machines, because it had toys AND it only had one story. (The
TV show -- the was no ongoing comic series or any other story of the
Beast Wars around.)
Next comes the "Very Canonical" continuities of the US cartoon, Marvel
comics, and UK comics. This body of work, taken together, is G1. I only
consider it less canonical than BW because it has SO many different
story treatments. I'd have to put Armada on the same level of
canonicity, seeing as how it too has toys, a cartoon, and two different
comics stories (the DW comics and the mini-comics included with the
toys).
Next in terms of canonicity is the Japanese continuity (both G1 and
BW), which had MANY more episodes and toys than the US cartoon
continuity has and had alternate stories in comics form. I consider
Japan's TF to be just a tiny bit less canonical than the Western G1
continuity above only because the whole Transformers property was
invented in America (by Hasbro and Marvel) even though the toys were
invented in Japan.
Next in terms of canonicity would have to be the Botcon & OTFCC
stories: Critical Mass, Omega Point, Apelinq's Journals, The Wreckers,
and Universe. Because they all have toys to go with the stories.
However, since most of these toys are exclusives and were never sold on
a mass-market level, I'd have to call the stories "less canonical" than
those above. Given that several of the TFU toys are available at the
mass-market level, though, Id have to say its the "Most Canonical" of
all the convention stories.
Dreamwave's continuity would be the next most canon continuity. It
might be on the same level as the convention stories, seeing as how
it's doing to well and so widely available... But you'll note that
there have yet to be any Toys tied specifically to the DW comics ONLY,
and you'll also note that the DW comics contradict the G1 toys'
techspecs. (Of course, so did the characters in the TV show and comics,
so that's not a big deal anyway...)
Alignment and The Last Days of Optimus Prime are pretty shaky in terms
of canonicity... They were written by Simon Furman, sure, and Furman is
who most US fans consider to be the best TF comics writer. So those are
points in those stories' favor.
However, those stories had no toys associated with them and didn't have
Hasbro's logo stamped on them, so that makes them considerably less
canon.
Plus, Furman is not the "Father of TF" (Bob Budiansky fits that bill a
little better)... he's more like the "Stepfather of TF", since he
inherited it and contributed to it after it had already been "birthed"
(this is true for his work on BW as well). Then again, Furman is
writing the TF Universe comic, which is the "most canon of the
convention-exclusive stories".... Hell, its gone beyond that now. And
considering that Hasbro has pretty much given him free regin storywise,
he may very well throw in references to TLDoOP and Alignment, thereby
increasing their canon status somewhat.
Anyway, that's how I see it all, at least.
> * Are there any others I've not heard of?
I can't remember any more right now. (Wheeze!)
> * How can I get hold of them? But I think I remember Paul Cannon
> (Transforce organiser) having issues with Alignment being bootlegged,
> so I'd better try and contact him to get that.
Well, like I said, its escaped into the net and found fairly easily
with the use of a Google Groups search. Sorry Paul... I do wish the
books would be reprinted so that more fans could own the "genuine
article" (myself included! I only have part 1!).
> Thanks for your help.
No prob dood!!
Grebo
Cradok
news:pfmtjv42pmp8ah3m8...@4ax.com...
> * Are there any others I've not heard of?
There are a couple of others on the Transforce site - www.transforce.org.uk,
I believe - which were the 2000 Transforce exclusive. They're basically fan
comics, but they're entertaining.
> * How can I get hold of them? But I think I remember Paul Cannon
> (Transforce organiser) having issues with Alignment being bootlegged,
> so I'd better try and contact him to get that.
The Transforce site has an 'Alignment preview' up. What this means, I have
no idea, but hopefully it's something good.
Cradok
news:160820032036237182%greb...@aol.com...
> The TF UK canon includes all of the above, plus about a zillion more
> "intertestamental" stories published as weeklies, in annuals, etc.
Not quite. It doesn't include the TF/GIJ crossover - although it /was/ later
reprinted in it. Also, some of the annual stories don't fit, as they have
TFs in the wrong places at the wrong times.
> That's a tricky question. I think the official stance is "If Hasbro
> approved it, it's canonical". However, some stories appear to be "more
> canonical" than others... I would say depending upon just how much
> involvement Hasbro has with the story. I think the best way to look at
> it is: "if the story has toys associated with it, it's VERY canonical."
Hmmm...there isn't really such thing as 'more canonical', it's either canon
or it's not. What we have in Transformers is a whole load of canon devided
into about twenty different continuities.
Ka Faraq Gatri
<hotmi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> So, my questions:
>* ~Are~ these canonical?
Basically, _everything_ Hasbro & Takara authorize is canon, but not
necessarity _the_same_canon_. The Marvel comics are their own canon,
while the Marvel UK comics are basically a superset of the US ones,
but with enough differences to make them a distinct canon. The US &
Japanese G1 cartoons are a similar situation. I could elaborate, but
you get the idea.
Dave Connell aka Ka Faraq Gatri
kfg...@rcn.com
I pledge allegiance to the flag, of the United States of America,
and to the republic for which it stands, one nation UNDER GOD,
indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
Neale Davidson
> necessarity _the_same_canon_.
Well 'canon' implies a single, comprehensive storyline. Transformers,
of course, does not /have/ a 'canon'. It's a 'mythos', with lots of
different
continuities with similar themes.
Neale Davidson
Farrell
news:_FJ%a.27806$pK2....@news.indigo.ie...
> "Grebo Guru" <greb...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:160820032036237182%greb...@aol.com...
> > The TF UK canon includes all of the above, plus about a zillion more
> > "intertestamental" stories published as weeklies, in annuals, etc.
>
> Not quite. It doesn't include the TF/GIJ crossover - although it /was/
later
> reprinted in it. Also, some of the annual stories don't fit, as they have
> TFs in the wrong places at the wrong times.
>
Transformers without caring about the continuity - does it matter that in
Dreadwind Down, that Silverbolt was running around, when (IIRC) he was
actually in a statis module at that point awaiting repairs?
They then added the 1 or 2 stories into an annual to force you to buy,
because without it, you'd be missing a small plot point - how DID Highbrow
come to have Scorpy's head, for example...
--
Capt
http://www.tfhl.net
"That's it - screw CNN, from now on - I'm going to rely on Porn sites,
for news...." -=[Clawz]=- in alt.games.half-life
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.502 / Virus Database: 300 - Release Date: 18/07/2003
Ka Faraq Gatri
I agree, but I consider all of the stories making up each individual
continuity to be its own canon. But you're right, there is no single
canon for the whole TF mythos.
Neale Davidson
> continuity to be its own canon. But you're right, there is no single
> canon for the whole TF mythos.
But, again, you're assuming that there's /any/ work out there that
must be followed for future works... which isn't really true either.
(Hence all the continuity problems even /within/ individual continuities)
Neale Davidson
Grebo Guru
Delving into the sticky question of canon, Ka Faraq Gatri
<kfg...@rcn.com> wrote:
> I agree, but I consider all of the stories making up each individual
> continuity to be its own canon. But you're right, there is no single
> canon for the whole TF mythos.
Hmmm... I have to admit, I took some risks in trying to answer
Hotmissile's questions about canon. There is no hard and fast answer,
to be sure. There is definitely no single continuity, Im sure we all
agree on that. But what Hotmissile was asking, as far as I could tell,
was what stories are "official" and which ones are "fan works". After
all, I think most people would agree that -- for example -- the Beast
Wars TV series is more canonical than, say, the Alignment story.
Dont'cha think?
Let's see what the dictionary has to say...
Canon:
The collection of books received as genuine Holy Scriptures. In more
secular terms, a group of literary works that are generally accepted as
representing a field.
For us, "Holy Scripture" would mean anything that is recognized and
endorsed by Hasbro.
Continuity:
An uninterrupted succession or flow; a coherent whole.
Heh. Not even the G1 cartoon qualifies as that!
Mythos:
The pattern of basic values and attitudes of a people,
characteristically transmitted through myths and the arts.
For our purposes, that would translate to: "The pattern of basic values
and attitudes of the Transformers, transmitted through various fiction
media."
So there you go. What's my point? Um... I forget.
Grebo!
Neale Davidson
> The collection of books received as genuine Holy Scriptures. In more
> secular terms, a group of literary works that are generally accepted as
> representing a field.
> For us, "Holy Scripture" would mean anything that is recognized and
> endorsed by Hasbro.
Not quite, 'cause you're forgetting that there were a LOT of Holy
Scriptures that the reformation pushed aside as 'non canon'. They're
related stories, of course, but not 'true' to the core Scripture. IE, they
don't represent the entire field.
Meaning that the comic adaptation of 'Big Broadcast of 2006' may
indeed be official and endorsed, but is not 'canon' since Hasbro hasn't
accepted it as being a 'representation of the field'.
> Continuity:
> An uninterrupted succession or flow; a coherent whole.
> Heh. Not even the G1 cartoon qualifies as that!
I don't think we have /any/ strict continuity in Transformers that.
Everything seems to conflict itself. Even TV Beast Wars, the most
cohesive of the various stories, has a few points of 'breakdown'
here and there.
> Mythos:
> The pattern of basic values and attitudes of a people,
> characteristically transmitted through myths and the arts.
>
> For our purposes, that would translate to: "The pattern of basic values
> and attitudes of the Transformers, transmitted through various fiction
> media."
Which is why I use 'Mythos'. :)
Neale Davidson
Steve-o Stonebraker
> [Sorry, this isn't going to be an exciting discussion, just a
> request for information. But do discuss, if you wish!]
This is actually a topic which has prmopted extensive discussion in the
past, although personally I've never really understood why. It seems to
me that there are just a tiny handful of equally valid ways of looking at
the situation.
> Now we all know what the main body of TF canon is: the Marvel
> comics, the cartoon, the Dreamwave comics & the tech specs. Everyone
> knows about these and how to get hold of them.
Not quite. :) One problem is, if you're going to talk about canon *at
all*, you have decide what you mean by it.
The term's most common meaning within the Transformers fandom is "anything
official". In other words, the things you just listed are indeed canon,
and so are all the BotCon literature, the coloring books on my website,
the stories of the Commodore 64 video games, and anything else you can
think of. No piece of it is more authoritative than any other piece.
Some pieces are *larger*, or more well known, obviously, and those are the
ones that the most people care or talk about. That might be what you
meant by "the main body of TF canon". But the other stuff is canon, too,
in this outlook. So, basically, everything which went through some sort
of Hasbro licensing or approval process is canon. Alignment, which
doesn't technically have approval, is not strictly canon, although like
the "inside info" that Bob and Larry used to post here, it could
definitely be seen as pseudo- or quasi- canon. It's relevant, but doesn't
trump what was actually seen in sanctioned stories. Also, of obvious note
is that the canon contains many dozens of contradictory continuities.
When talking about Star Wars, or Buffy, or *most* things probably, the
meaning of "canon" is a bit different. That's because those fictions grew
out of a single primary work, and sidestories were added later in other
media which might or might not impact the "real" main story. TFs was,
from the very start, a beast of two or more continuities. (Although I
guess you could argue for the comic being more "real" since it came out
earlier.) Neither the comic nor the cartoon really grew out of the other,
and are quite contradictory in many, many places. So Tranfandom, from day
one, has never been concerned with which official stories were real and
which ones weren't.
It's my understanding that other fandoms use canonicity to determine
whether they "need" to pick something up (like a new comic series, or a
novel) in order to experience all of the "real" story. Sidestories are
relegated to a less important status. Still fun, maybe, but ultimately
irrelevant because they don't affect the canon. "Canon" is rarely used in
this sense among Transfans. (Or at least in ATT.) This is because the
idea it refers to simply doesn't exist in Transformers fiction, and never
has. Rather than looking for canonicity, you'd have to ask about
continuities. "Is Story X in Continuity B?" If so, and you're a
Continuity B junkie, then you need it.
Even talking about continuities is maddening, though. Is "Wreckers" part
of the BW/BM continuity? It mostly matches, certainly, but it could be
argued against. One can even argue that BM doesn't follow BW well enough.
It might make more sense to say that BM exists in a parallel continuity
where something very much like BW, but not BW exactly, occurred. This is
even more true for the G1/BW gap, especially since BW incorporates both G1
comic and G1 cartoon elements.
Since everything is such a mishmash, some fans refer to the whole mess as
a mythos. This sort of emphasizes the way the stories build off each
other, even when they don't share continuity, and the idea that no one
story is more valid than another. This is definitely useful, and is
gaining support. The one problem is that it makes no distinction between
official and unofficial works, which is the main thing that the word
"canon" has always been used for here. So, they aren't interchangable,
and I think the fandom should continue to use both words when appropriate.
> However, there are some other references which keep popping up in
> discussions which seem to be regarded as canonical, most of which I've
> never read and know little about. These include:
> [ship]
If you're asking about canonicity in the sense of "do these stories impact
the other stuff that I'm already reading/watching so that I need to read
them for other stuff to make sense?", then the answer is "No, they aren't
canon in that sense". But neither is anything else. :)
> * Are there any others I've not heard of?
Any other endorsed BotCon/OTFCC stuff? Or any other convention stuff?
Or any other stuff at all? You've listed all the BotCon (endorsed)
fiction and, I think, all the Transforce (non-endorsed, but by Furman)
fiction. So, if that's the stuff you want to read, then that's all you
need. If you don't want to bother, then don't. If you want to read more
than that, go ahead. There's lots of stuff out there. :) You don't need
to worry about their events leaking into other continuities, leading you
to be confused. If that's your concern, then don't worry. If your
concern is wanting to read a lot of good stories, and to be able to talk
to other fans about the stories you've read, then you should check them
out because most of the "devoted" fan population reads them, and there's a
lot in them to talk about.
--Steve-o
--
Steve Stonebraker | http://www.physics.ohio-state.edu/~sstoneb/
sst...@yahoo.com | Transformers, astrophysics, comics, games, cartoons.
Steve-o Stonebraker
>> Critical Mass (comic, '97)
>
> This being a satirical story, I'd say it should be taken with a grain
> of salt, if at all... It does provide an intro to Omega Point though.
> (Somewhat frustratingly.)
Critical Mass is perfectly serious. It's the BC98 script reading story,
Visitation, which is comedic. It is, as you say, directly connected to
the Omega Point stories, though. One can look at it as a loose retelling
of the "real" events, if one wishes.
>> * ~Are~ these canonical?
>
> That's a tricky question. I think the official stance is "If Hasbro
> approved it, it's canonical".
There is no official stance in the official-from-Hasbro sense, because
Hasbro doesn't really care enough to make that sort of proclamation. It's
not worth the trouble for them or for us. The "official" stance within
the fandom -- or at least within those parts of the fandom that I have
experienced -- is that canonical = official. There is no baggage, good or
bad, that goes with the term. "Canon" is just a concise, noun-form
version of the word "officially sanctioned/approved".
> However, some stories appear to be "more canonical" than others... I
> would say depending upon just how much involvement Hasbro has with the
> story.
It does seem like some people have that view, but I can say definitively
that I don't, and a lot of other people don't, too. I think making that
sort of distinction is, well, "dangerous" isn't exactly the word I want,
but it's close. I don't like the idea of declaring certain stories to be
more important than others when the whole thing is just a big jumble of
contradictory stuff anyway. That makes it too easy to dismiss people's
interpretations or ideas by saying things like, "Yeah, you might get that
from Story A, but Story B is more canonical and says otherwise." That's
stifling to fan creativity. I'm not advocating a situation where no views
can be dismissed at all, but any such discussion has to unfold with an
understanding on both sides of what the continuity being discussed is.
This is sort of where the idea of "personal canon" comes in. We each have
our own, personal, internalized vision of what each continuity "really"
is, and that view cannot be invalidated by other people. For example, I
absolutely refuse to accept the idea that there can be female
Transformers. Or "male" Transformers either. They are robots. They are
asexual. Obviously, there are many canonical (ie. official) stories which
contradict this, but I don't care. In my heart, Elita One is not female.
The fact that she is repeatedly referred to as female by other
Transformers is irrelevant, because it simply doesn't make sense for her
to be female. I have elaborate retcons in my mind which make it all okay.
I also think that RID is a completely separate entity from all other TF
continuities, but some fans disagree. There are fans who have elaborate
retcons in their minds which allow RID to fit in perfectly with other
continuities of their choice. That's the truth to them, just as asexual
TFs are the truth to me. And that's totally fine.
Now, I can tell that you like giving structure to things, Grebo. I do,
too, really. That's what I volunteered to maintain the FAQ all those
years ago. But within the body of canon, I don't think adding structure
and weight in the way that you are proposing is worth the trouble. It
doesn't really serve any purpose except to let people trump each other
with "more valid" ideas based on the strength of their canonicity. It's
much simpler, and safer, to just state what continuities are being
discussed, and any personal-canon modifications people might be carrying
with them.
Steve-o Stonebraker
> Canon:
> The collection of books received as genuine Holy Scriptures. In more
> secular terms, a group of literary works that are generally accepted as
> representing a field.
>
> For us, "Holy Scripture" would mean anything that is recognized and
> endorsed by Hasbro.
I'd be more inclined to go with the secular version, in which the group of
works that represent the field would be, again, everything official. In
the end, though, dictionary definitions don't really matter because
"canon", as used within a fandom, is a piece of jargon, not a normal word.
It means whatever the people using it mean by it.
Cradok
news:slrnbjvqtv....@campbell.mps.ohio-state.edu...
> This is sort of where the idea of "personal canon" comes in.
Dear god, no. Personal canon is a horribly oxymoronic and pretentious term.
'Personal continuity' is so much better.
Grebo Guru
The diligent Steve-o Stonebraker <sst...@campbell.mps.ohio-state.edu>
wrote:
> Now, I can tell that you like giving structure to things, Grebo.
I sure do, yes... Its fun AND frustrating!
(Heh. Remember the episode of the Simpson where Marge got sugar
outlawed? Chief Wiggum's son, Ralph I do believe, was suffering from
extreme hyperactivity... He was jumping up and down, saying "I'm happy
AND angry!!" I know the feeling. Hee hee!)
> I do, too, really. That's what I volunteered to maintain the FAQ all those
> years ago.
I hope you know we all appreciate it, because we do!
> But within the body of canon, I don't think adding structure
> and weight in the way that you are proposing is worth the trouble.
You're probably right. I wa just trying to present the situation in a
easily-understandable way to Hotmissile. I oversimplified in the
process, which was probably something of a mistake on my part. But, I
tried to address the issue as he saw it, so, well, there you go.
Grebo
Onslaught Six
> continuities, but some fans disagree. There are fans who have elaborate
> retcons in their minds which allow RID to fit in perfectly with other
> continuities of their choice.
Of course, because we want those ultra cool toys to be able to beat
the crap out of our junky BM Maximals. [/cheap shot at BM's toys]
Hotmissile
confusing myself, so I though better of it...
[Time passes.]
Hmm. Maybe I should have phrased my original post slightly
differently. This is what you get if you spend most of the day
drinking and then post to ATT at 3am.
I'm not even sure what I meant ~myself~ now. Thinx. When I said
"What's canonical?" I did basically mean "What's official?". e.g. What
would people use as sources in the long discussions about Optimi,
Decepticons in the time of Predacons, the Vok, etc. which have popped
up recently? For example, I read a very good profile of Spinister on
Lexicon, by Charl Brogden, but I wouldn't call this "canonical", and
wouldn't use it to prove any points. However, if "Alignment", etc. are
"canonical" it would be nice to read them, to see how toys are
presented as characters, how different series are bridged. (Not saying
that I don't enjoy reading fanfic, tho'.)
Considering the conflicts between different media, canon was
probably the wrong word; maybe "mythos" would have been better, but
then I'd have had to ask "What's mythological?", and I'd have got all
these stories about Starscream flying to close to the Sun, etc. But,
as Steve-o says:
>Since everything is such a mishmash, some fans refer to the whole mess as
>a mythos. [...] This is definitely useful, and is
>gaining support. The one problem is that it makes no distinction between
>official and unofficial works, which is the main thing that the word
>"canon" has always been used for here. So, they aren't interchangable,
>and I think the fandom should continue to use both words when appropriate.
"Official" may have to be used in the future (for my PoV).
I think I understand what Grebo was saying (do correct me if I'm
wrong). Even though you do only get "canon" and "non-canon", some
sources are more reliable than others. If something happened in Beast
Wars, there's (generally) nothing that contradicts it. Hence it can be
safely said to have happened. However if an event occured in the G1
(Marvel) comics, it may not have in the cartoon (but it ~could~ have,
in some cases). Hence these sources are less reliable... or less
"canonical", you could put it.
So even though everything official is canonical, some canon holds
less weight in discussions (I'm avoiding the word "arguments" here).
But not so much less weight that it can be dismissed without thought.
(Obviously, I'm well aware that these discussions and continuities
created are essentially "fanfic", and some (many) people may see it
differently.)
If only I hadn't asked "~Are~ these canonical?" in my original
message. But thanks for your thoughts on it, Grebo, Steve-o, Neale, et
al.
Now, to what I actually meant...
Steve-o Stonebraker <sst...@campbell.mps.ohio-state.edu> said what!?:
>Not quite. :) One problem is, if you're going to talk about canon *at
>all*, you have decide what you mean by it.
>
>The term's most common meaning within the Transformers fandom is "anything
>official".
Yep, that's it!
>No piece of it is more authoritative than any other piece.
>Some pieces are *larger*, or more well known, obviously, and those are the
>ones that the most people care or talk about. That might be what you
>meant by "the main body of TF canon".
And that's pretty what I meant by "the main body" - the stuff that
most people know.
>But the other stuff is canon, too,
>in this outlook. So, basically, everything which went through some sort
>of Hasbro licensing or approval process is canon. Alignment, which
>doesn't technically have approval, is not strictly canon, although like
>the "inside info" that Bob and Larry used to post here, it could
>definitely be seen as pseudo- or quasi- canon. It's relevant, but doesn't
>trump what was actually seen in sanctioned stories.
This is the sort of thing I wanted to know. Is there any compendium
of Bob & Larry pseudocanon online? Searching for "Bob Skir" or "Larry
DiTillio" in Google could bring up a lot of results...
>TFs was,
>from the very start, a beast of two or more continuities. (Although I
>guess you could argue for the comic being more "real" since it came out
>earlier.) Neither the comic nor the cartoon really grew out of the other,
>and are quite contradictory in many, many places. So Tranfandom, from day
>one, has never been concerned with which official stories were real and
>which ones weren't.
I prefer the comic so I'm going to use that argument from now on. ;)
(What's that you say? Gobots are more real than Transformers?)
I wouldn't go so far as calling some things "real" and some, um,
"unreal", I'm more trying to connect the different strands with the
fewest possible Universes (or "continuities").
>If your
>concern is wanting to read a lot of good stories, and to be able to talk
>to other fans about the stories you've read, then you should check them
>out because most of the "devoted" fan population reads them, and there's a
>lot in them to talk about.
That's the one!
Well, thanks for your help everyone (that list of official material
should be useful, Grebo).
Canon to the left of me, canon to the right...
Mic // Hotmissile
Soundwave says "I am a rock, I am an island."
Steve-o Stonebraker
>> This is sort of where the idea of "personal canon" comes in.
>
> Dear god, no. Personal canon is a horribly oxymoronic and pretentious term.
It is? Uh, okay. Maybe if you refuse to accept the clear Transfan
definition of "canon" in the first place.
> 'Personal continuity' is so much better.
Personal continuity doesn't cut it, because a person's personal canon
can encompass any number of continuities.
Steve-o Stonebraker
> This is the sort of thing I wanted to know. Is there any compendium
> of Bob & Larry pseudocanon online? Searching for "Bob Skir" or "Larry
> DiTillio" in Google could bring up a lot of results...
You can search Google for posts made by Bob and Larry using the email
addresses they posted with: beas...@aol.com and diti...@aol.com. Just
stick one of those in the "author" field of an advanced groups search.
Bob Skir's interaction with the fandom was all through bobskir.com, which
you would think would be an official site but is actually a branch of
Bigbot.com. The "Beast Machines FAQ" area is where you'll find Skir's
comments. Be careful not to click on things without checking where they
point, though, since Bigbot has self-promoting affiliate links all over
the place. For example, if you click the "voice acting how to" link --
which you might think is some sort of industry advice from story editor
Skir -- you actually go to Amazon and bigbot gets money. I vaguely recall
remors that bigbot was editing/writing some of the FAQ answers themselves,
too, but I don't know how credible that was. I think it was more of a
concern on the message boards there.