How important is Star Trek "canon" to you?

[putaro]

It's one of the favorite areas to discuss. How important do you think it is when reading or writing fan fiction?

[WarpGirl]

LOL! Well I'll put it this way... When I'm discussing what actually what happened and lines actually spoken on screen then I will say every breath, facial expression, and pause counts as important.

When I'm writing my fics, I will say "screw anything that messes up my vision for the story I need to tell!" That said, I won't throw so much away that it isn't recognizable as an ENT fic.

[panyasan]

I follow the basic lines. I stick to canon, but try to work my way around it by given better explanations for certains episodes then we saw on screen.

BTW, with discussions about canon always keep in mind that people can read or see the same thing, but could totally interpretate canon differently.

Part of this has to do with what we call in the study of communications "your reference". We all see and hear things throught our own glasses: our views, opinions, past experciences color our interpretation of what we see or hear.

The fun is to keep a open mind for all interpretations, you may learn a thing or two.

[Asso]

I have learned throughout my life that there is hardly any event, no word, no action that can't be understood, perceived, interpreted in a different way by anyone. Not infrequently (if not always), people themselves who live those events, who say those words, who perform those actions, change their own perceptions over time (and this 'time' can be extremely short), even in good faith.
Canon is a subjective phenomenon, in my opinion, and that's why, personally, I distrust those solons (Memory Alpha and the like) that seem wanting to claim to systematize Canon in 'their' Canon.

[WarpGirl]

Well to be fair, sites like memory-alpha do not try to have "their canon" at all. Wiki's like it are compiled by devoted fans who use the sources to compile information other fans can access quickly. Are they 1,000% accurate? No. However, I've known some people that work very hard on those Wiki's. They try extremely hard to make sure only official sources are referenced for articals. They work very hard for nothing, and can be viciously heckled by other "fans" simply because they are a wiki. It isn't fair!!!!!!!!!

Guess what? Not everyone can plunk down 100$ for DVD's or Encyclopedias, and giant official coffee table books. Sites like Memory-Alpha should be appreciated, or at the very least given the benifit of the doubt.

[putaro]

I think Asso makes a very good point. Remember that movie "He Said, She Said" where they had the two different points of view and how different they were?

At the same time, Memory Alpha is very handy, especially for things that are "facts" and I do appreciate the amount of work that's been put into it. One of the neat things about writing stuff in the Star Trek universe is you can look up a lot of things rather than trying to figure it out yourself.

Speaking of Star Trek books, the only one I own is "The Star Fleet Technical Manual" that I bought when I was in middle school (it's the first printing, 1975). I just pulled it off the shelf to take a look. I don't think I've cracked it since I moved to Japan. I'd forgotten how much stuff was in it. Did you know that the mini-skirts in TOS were spec'ced to be exatcly 7.6 cm below the crotch?

[WarpGirl]

I think that we're confusing canon, with what we like or dislike. Let me give you and example... *the_abomination* is "canon" meaning according to TPTB everything that happened in the episode happened in the ST universe. We here tend to write it off as an "inaccurate historical holoprogram" not to be taken seriously. The truth is that is an opinion not a fact.

Sites like memory-alpha are not designed to cater to what anyone wants, or thinks should happen. All they are meant to do it compile information based on what was shown on screen. Nothing more, nothing less. Now mistakes get made, human error, or people just wanting to stir things up. And you sometimes get inaccuracies. It's par for the course.

I'll let you in on a little secret... I used to hate wikis, when I was first writing fanfic someone would start quoting http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page and I'd cringe, and politely ask the person not to waste my time. It was a hangover from college where if you used wikipedia it was an automatic F.

Then an aquaintence finally got a little fed up with me, and rightly so! Turns out he was one of the founding members. He said to me Silver, listen should you use wiki's for a college report? No. But let me tell you something, the people who start fan wiki's are obsessed with accuracy. I can't tell you how man nights I stayed awake searching for bad quotes and sources on wookiee. Remember the people who run thesre sites don't get paid. They get nothing out of this except to help other fans get more out of what they love. It used to drive me nuts how people would go off on how "inaccurate" an artical was, but these same people never reported it, or tried to help fix the problem. How can we know something is wrong if we're not told?

Frankly he kicked my tail metaphorically. And the truth is both Memory-Alpha, as well as Wookieepedia are FAR MORE ACCURATE, then both www.startrek.com or the Star Wars databank. The OFFICIAL sites for ST and SW's.

All I'm saying is that we should keep in mind what "canon" is. Everything that happened ON SCREEN. Not our interpretation of it. Bottom line Trip is dead! Stinks, but that is true canon.

[Cogito]

All I'm saying is that we should keep in mind what "canon" is. Everything that happened ON SCREEN. Not our interpretation of it. Bottom line Trip is dead! Stinks, but that is true canon.

I don't entirely agree with you there. Most of what happened on screen is open to interpretation.

For example, let's suppose we see Trip laid out on a biobed, and later on we see Archer tell T'Pol that he's dead. In that case what's in canon is what Archer told T'Pol. But it's quite conceivable that Archer was mistaken, or deliberately lying, or perhaps it was just a horrible dream. Nothing in canon tells us whether that's the case. If the series continued and we never saw Trip again, it'd be reasonable to assume he was in fact dead. But on the other hand if Trip turns up at the start of the next season with a smirk on his face and says he was just faking it so he could go off on some secret spy mission, or some unknown alien we've never heard of before transported him away at the last moment and transported a dead clone back in his place, or T'Pol wakes up with a start to find Trip safe and sound beside her, then we've got to accept that he wasn't actually dead.

What's canon is what was said and shown on the screen. The world you imagine to make sense of what you heard and saw is not canon. Usually the distinction doesn't matter. But sometimes it does.

[putaro]

The funny thing about "canon" is that it's a losing battle. If, miraculously, a Season 5 had been reinstated and the writers wanted to bring Trip back, they would have invented some kind of a reset button and brought him back to life. So, "canon" is constantly at the mercy of the writers.

Asso is completely right. There is no one true view of history. New facts are often being unearthed that can completely change the view of what happened. World War II is a prime example of this - the fact that the Allies had cracked the German and Japanese ciphers was kept absolutely secret for 30 years. Decisions and events are cast in a whole new light when you realize that the Allies often knew what the Axis powers were up to. For example, Yamamoto's death (he was the Japanese admiral who planned Pearl Harbor and probably one of their best strategic thinkers) was no longer a lucky accident but instead a planned assasination. (His plane was shot down over the Pacific - because we had cracked the Japanese codes we knew where he was going to be and sent planes to intercept him. The odds of a flight of P-38's just happening across his plane, which was the original "truth" were astronomical. But there was no other good explanation.).

What's canon is what was said and shown on the screen. The world you imagine to make sense of what you heard and saw is not canon. Usually the distinction doesn't matter. But sometimes it does.

Cogito is dead on.

Furthermore, Star Trek (and other fiction) is even worse than history because THERE IS NO UNDERLYING TRUTH. It's all made up. The fact that the writers ignore "canon" on a regular basis means that to create "canon" you have to go through a reconciliation process. If Spock talks about the Romulan War being fought at sub-light speeds and then we see the Romulans and Humans in Enterprise with warp drive, you have to interpret and reconcile to come up with an answer. If one character gives an event as happening at a certain date and another gives a different date, you have to interpret and reconcile.

It's all good fun - but you can't take it too seriously. I mean, if the writers wanted to bring Trip back to life they could invoke Q, time travel, clones or any other number of devices (after all, we all saw Trip in a coffin at the beginning of "Similitude") to do so. And so can we! Quite often, what is "canon" depends on when the off button got hit. After all, if the series had ended five minutes before the end of "Twilight" EVERYONE was dead.

I find it fun and interesting to try to shoehorn my ideas into "canon". It's a challenge, like building a ship in a bottle. But, I'm not going to lose any sleep if I don't get it all right. If that's your cup of tea, have a party. Just realize there are many points of view. IDIC!

[WarpGirl]

Well you have to remember I cut my teeth in a fandon where Canon is almost worshiped. Now let me be clear I don't do that!

As a matter of fact I'd like to shove a lot of "Canon" down a few writers throats. And believe me George Lucas gets more of my ire then the killer B's will EVER see. But I learned one thing... As someone once told me, canon doesn't care what you think or want, it only cares about what is shown.

All of what you guys are saying is great for writing fanfic. But let's remember something else Technically, we're all breaking the law here. TPTB don't care how we interpret anything they did. They don't care about any of our opinions beyond making a buck. As far as they are concerned the only way it played out is how they put it on screen.

[panyasan]

I think that we're confusing canon, with what we like or dislike. Let me give you and example... *the_abomination* is "canon" meaning according to TPTB everything that happened in the episode happened in the ST universe. We here tend to write it off as an "inaccurate historical holoprogram" not to be taken seriously. The truth is that is an opinion not a fact.

No, that is not true. Riker is using a hologram in *the_abomination* and in that hologram Trip dies. What happened in that hologram can or can't based on true events, we don't know. I can watch a movie about the French revolution and it all can be lies. Not true. No facts.

Okay, you say: but Troi says Trip died. But isn't that hear-saying? Did she see the body?

It's canon that Trip and T'Pol served on Ent. We see them working and walking around ENT. So it's a fact. But why T'Pol came and stayed on board - that we can interpetate by analysing her actions and words. And we can draw many different conclusions. So in that respect canon are just the dry facts.

[WarpGirl]

That's a great consolation viewpoint, but according to the B's as far as they're concerned Trip is dead. They and Paramount own it and they made the decision. Look it's not nearly as bad as some of what George Lucas did to SW's. At least Trip lives in the books even if they aren't canon.

In SW's the books are canon and GL destroyed so many things it's not funny.

[Asso]

Warpgirl, I don't understand why you love torturing yourself.

Do you love that Trip is dead? No, I think. So, why don't you grasp the lifebuoy that the indefiniteness of the show, its patent mistiness, allow to float on the waves to your aid?

But on one thing I agree with you: the books certainly cannot be called 'Canon', in any way. Nice (some of them), perhaps. However, nothing more than a mere business transaction.
Without a single breath of passion.
A book, a story, must live, must breathe.
It should not be dead air.

I apologize if, unwittingly, I can annoy someone. I express only my opinion, strong, I understand, but honest and sincere.

[panyasan]

That's a great consolation viewpoint, but according to the B's as far as they're concerned Trip is dead. They and Paramount own it and they made the decision.

Well, that is your opinion and I respectfully disagree for reasons pointed out in my post. My view, shared by many, is as canon as your interpretation of canon.

[Cogito]

That's a great consolation viewpoint, but according to the B's as far as they're concerned Trip is dead. They and Paramount own it and they made the decision.

Do you think that 'canon' includes the writers/producers intentions, as well as what was actually screened? It doesn't mean that to me. It may be interesting to know what the writers had in mind, but it's not canon unless it actually happened on the screen. (Actually, if the plots and characterisations had been handled better I'd be much more interested to know what their thoughts and intentions were. As it is, meh, I'll take my interpretation over theirs.)