There has been a little confusion over my use of the word "canon". Just to clarify, this is what I mean by it.
Canon is anything that happened in the 52 TV episodes and two BBC radio plays (I know some do not include the radio plays) and nothing more.
A story is within the boundaries of canon if it does not contradict anything that is in canon (such a story is not in itself canon).
A story is non-canonical if it contradicts what is in canon.
-- cheers Steve Rogerson http://homepages.poptel.org.uk/steve.rogerson
Redemption: The Blake's 7 and Babylon 5 convention 21-23 February 2003, Ashford, Kent http://www.smof.com/redemption
From: Steve Rogerson steve.rogerson@mcr1.poptel.org.uk
Canon is anything that happened in the 52 TV episodes and two BBC radio
plays (I
know some do not include the radio plays) and nothing more.
A story is within the boundaries of canon if it does not contradict
anything that
is in canon (such a story is not in itself canon).
A story is non-canonical if it contradicts what is in canon.
My own definitions (made up here on the spot, though I've used them rather more loosely in the past) -
Canonical - actually there, in the series (not the radio plays), for all to see. Subcanonical - an interpretation of the canon that does not contradict it. Extracanonical - an addition to the canon that is neither supported by the canon nor directly violates it. Noncanonical - a flat contradiction of the canon.
So, taking a particular incident that has recently come under the spotlight: Canon - Blake kissed Inga Subcanon - Blake loved Inga (an interpretation of the kiss) Extracanon - Blake was the father of Inga's illegitimate child who was taken away from her at birth by the Morality Police, inspiring Blake to join the Freedom Party and vow to overthrow the Federation (invented backstory that canon neither supports nor refutes). Noncanon - 'Inga' was really Tarrant in disguise.
Neil
Steve's typology:
Canonical - actually there, in the series (not the radio plays), for all
to
see. Subcanonical - an interpretation of the canon that does not contradict it. Extracanonical - an addition to the canon that is neither supported by the canon nor directly violates it.
Some items are more plausible than others however--for instance, I'll bet Tavia isn't the only person who thinks Avon likes espresso, there are widely-held fanon items and coterie and idiosyncratic ones.
Noncanonical - a flat contradiction of the canon.
Some stories are intended as AUs (e.g., Blake as Coriolanus) which is a different approach then "oh, stuff canon." There are also things that might be termed permanent vs. disposable items--i.e., I've written a lot of stories that take a consistent view of certain issues, and only one story in which Gan is a werewolf. I don't REALLY believe that Gan is a werewolf, but...
Neil said:
So, taking a particular incident that has recently come under the
spotlight:
Canon - Blake kissed Inga Subcanon - Blake loved Inga (an interpretation of the kiss)
However, he could have loved her as a family member, or as a precious reminder of the past that was taken away from him
Extracanon - Blake was the father of Inga's illegitimate child who was
taken
away from her at birth by the Morality Police, inspiring Blake to join the Freedom Party and vow to overthrow the Federation (invented backstory that canon neither supports nor refutes).
Nice one! Are you going to write it?
Noncanon - 'Inga' was really Tarrant in disguise.
Crikey! Hair straightening technology must make great strides! Oh, and don't forget Inga-clones and Inga-androids programmed to kill Blake.
-(Y)
From: Dana Shilling dshilling@worldnet.att.net
Steve's typology:
Mine, actually
Noncanonical - a flat contradiction of the canon.
Some stories are intended as AUs (e.g., Blake as Coriolanus) which is a different approach then "oh, stuff canon."
I would say that all AUs are Noncanonical (though I think Anticanonical is a better term than Non) by definition, since by their nature they contradict canon in some way.
There are also things that might be termed permanent vs. disposable items--i.e., I've written a lot of stories that take a consistent view of certain issues, and only one story in which Gan is a werewolf. I don't REALLY believe that Gan is a werewolf, but...
I suppose the canonicity of that would have to depend on how you regard werewolves.
Further item to add to the typology: Altercanonical - the integration of canonical, subcanonical and extracanonical elements into a consistent and coherent structure that embrace the entire series, usually for a series of fictional pieces rather than an individual story. One story in such an altercanon might then refer to subcanonical or extracanonical elements introduced in another element of the altercanon. The altercanon might therefore penetrate or emerge from the canon at any point, hugging the canon like scaffolding around a building.
Subcanon - Blake loved Inga (an interpretation of the kiss)
However, he could have loved her as a family member, or as a precious reminder of the past that was taken away from him
And either would be a particular subcanonical interpretation.
Extracanon - Blake was the father of Inga's illegitimate child who was
taken
away from her at birth by the Morality Police, inspiring Blake to join
the
Freedom Party and vow to overthrow the Federation (invented backstory
that
canon neither supports nor refutes).
Nice one! Are you going to write it?
Nope.
Noncanon - 'Inga' was really Tarrant in disguise.
Crikey! Hair straightening technology must make great strides! Oh, and don't forget Inga-clones and Inga-androids programmed to kill Blake.
They would be extracanonical, not anticanonical.
Neil
-
Dana Shilling -
Neil Faulkner -
Steve Rogerson