Let's Talk "Canon"

[Cerez]

I feel the use of this word as it pertains to Star Wars needs some clarification.

 

As @@Ping rightly pointed out in our private discussion, according to the Oxford Dictionary "canon" is:

 

1. A general law, rule, principle, or criterion by which something is judged: "the appointment violated the canons of fair play and equal opportunity"

 

2. A collection or list of sacred books accepted as genuine: "the biblical canon"

 

2.1 The works of a particular author or artist that are recognized as genuine: "the Shakespeare canon"

 

2.2 The list of works considered to be permanently established as being of the highest quality: "Hopkins was firmly established in the canon of English poetry"

Now, two things strike me here. First, "works of a particular author or artist that are recognized as genuine".

 

Companies may own copyright, but they are not authors of a work. People are authors with author's rights. In the case of the original Star Wars trilogy, the title of an "author" seems to more or less legitimately fall to George Lucas, as far as the story of Star Wars is concerned.

 

ANH - George Lucas

ESB - Leigh Brackett, Lawrence Kasdan, George Lucas

ROJ - Lawrence Kasdan, George Lucas

 

In all three original trilogy movies, Lucas played a key role in shaping the story.

 

Let me put that in contrast with the new, Disney films to draw a picture:

 

TFA - Lawrence Kasdan, J.J. Abrams, Michael Arndt

Ep8 - Rian Johnson?

 

RO - Chris Weitz, John Knoll, Gary Whitta

 

So it is clear that "canon" in this definition of the word does not apply here.

 

Next, let's examine the second potential meaning of the word that can be relevant here: "list of works considered to be permanently established as being of the highest quality."

 

Perhaps Disney meant "canon" as in the stories that are of the highest quality? If so, isn't it presumptuous to suppose that the company alone can decide what is highest quality, and not rely on the fans to decide what they like best to call something "Star Wars canon"?

 

Or is it that they mean it in the general sense, as a "general law, rule, or principle" by which fans are meant to abide by?

 

Whatever the case may be, I think it is safe to say that Star Wars "canon" to us, fans, could no longer possibly mean anything other than "approved by Disney". It is certainly not the meaning of the word that pertains to the author's vision, as there is no one author, not anymore.

 

Perhaps it is best to refer to our official Star Wars history as just that, our official Star Wars history. And in that case, if you ask me, this wouldn't be the shallow spectrum that Disney has inconsiderately and/or inaccurately (perhaps somewhat arrogantly) proclaimed "canon", but the Star Wars stories we, as a communal fan-base have grown up with and grown to love and respect over the years.

 

This is not to say that new stories cannot become a part of that history. In order to do so, they must impress us, inspire us, and stay with us for many-many years to come. If they are to overwrite old stories, they must do so to be better. Something doesn't just become official Star Wars history because the company that owns the franchise wills it and labels it so. Star Wars history is what we, as the majority of fans, together, recognise as official Star Wars history.

 

Yes, that includes Knights of the Old Republic as well (even if KOTOR was never officially "canon"). Whatever Star Wars story has touched the hearts of most, and left an impression is true Star Wars history. This is the history that we rely on when we role-play, when we write fan-fiction, or even when we battle it out in a video game -- when we share our experiences and knowledge of Star Wars with each other.

 

If the new movies are worth anything, they will stay with us, and join this history. If they are not, they will be forgotten as the flops they were.

 

After feeling bitter about this for many months, I think I may have finally found my peace with Disney's Star Wars, and I hope these thoughts help ease the conflict within all of us, and, perhaps, among each other we all have in regards to different views and feelings about Lucas' handover to Disney, and new direction they've taken with the franchise whose stories and media we've grown to love.

 

So keep in mind: "canon" is not the right word anymore, and it's really not worth to debate over. It means something else entirely now than what it used to while Lucas still had some vague control over Star Wars stories. "Canon" stands now for Disney produced stuff. What we actually value is our official Star Wars history, and that is something that emerges over the filter of time, as that which is quality stays with us. We, as a greater community, select that with the stories and content where our hearts lie. No single company decision can change or alter that.

 

They may eventually win our hearts over, but they're gonna have to do a bloody good job storytelling. And if they do so, it will be well deserved. Until then, and forever, Star Wars history is all that we as a community, together, have grown to love and respect in the franchise.

[hleV]

Are you still bitching about KOTOR being non-canon?

[eezstreet]

Episodes 7-9 are canon. KOTOR and much of the EU is still not. There's no "talk" that needs to happen here.

[Seven]

We're talking about the fact that for the first time star wars is truly being divided into multiple universes, so the word canon is not applying to the series as a whole. There are multiple universes where things are canon that aren't in others. Think batman and such. Theres no set in stone official canon. At least in my eyes.

[TheWhitePhoenix]

I'm gonna have to agree with @@Seven and @@Cerez on this.

[Rayce]

I, too, go with the view that Star Wars is a multiverse. And I therefore view the EU as canon, just existing in a parallel universe, with things like alternate endings in games and Infinities being other divergent timelines.

 

So, "It's true. All of it. The Yuuzhan Vong, Revan, Thrawn, they're real."

[TheWhitePhoenix]

I, too, go with the view that Star Wars is a multiverse. And I therefore view the EU as canon, just existing in a parallel universe, with things like alternate endings in games and Infinities being other divergent timelines.

^ There we go. And of course, if you also love what Disney made too, then it exists in it's own universe as well. @@Seven also brought up Batman, which is DC, which has multiple incarnations of Batman. Same goes for Marvel. And Star Trek has two timelines after JJ rebooted it. So...if it worked for these series, it can also work for Star Wars.

[Futuza]

OMG not this again. Drop it already.

[Cerez]

I think everyone is kind of missing the point in my article/thoughts here. "Canon" is now Disney content. That's what it stands for. That's all it stands for.

 

The word "canon" implies that there is an author who maintains control of the stories, which does not exist with Disney, as in their case Star Wars is simply licensed to third parties as an IP to create new stories/films/video games. There is no central author, and therefore there is no "canon" anymore. Even with Lucas it was moot, but now it's truly gone.

 

But instead what's rising into light is that we still have a Star Wars history, which is all the things we've grown to know and love about Star Wars as a community. So much of the Legends content is also a part of our history, as much as some of the better quality new, Disney content may be.

 

Our Star Wars history is valuable to us, not solely Disney's content, which is what "canon" now stands for.

 

When it comes to story conflicts, it is now up to us as a community to decide which story we will accept in the timeline we're using, and, unless we're all dead-set of having everything the Disney way, this will generally be the more loved, more respected Star Wars story we know.

[Cerez]

 

[Futuza]

Post-2014, the official Star Wars canon consists of the seven released Star Wars theatrical feature films, the Star Wars animated film and television series The Clone Wars and Star Wars Rebels, and any other material released after April 25, 2014, unless otherwise stated.

 

That's officially canon. Yes, it includes Lucas' work. Yes, it includes the movies.

[eezstreet]

There are two kinds of canon: Canon and Legends. And the stuff beyond Legends which was not even canon then. I don't know why this warrants a whole thread, other than to serve as a soapbox for why you hate Disney. Enough of it already.

[TheWhitePhoenix]

Okay guys, hold on: WHERE did he say he hated Disney in this thread and WHERE did you see him attack others for their own personal preferences or what Disney has declared? Eez, Fuzuta, ease up guys. Come on. :/ At least he didn't pull an Acrobat and pull a full on Disney-Hate Campaign.

[Cerez]

To be clear, @@eezstreet, if we're trying to make this personal, I don't hate Disney. I find it offensive how they are trying to take control of something that doesn't belong to them. Star Wars, as a franchise and IP is their property now. Star Wars, as the stories we love is not.

 

My earlier harsh actions were in direct, instinctive response to the aggressive nature of their campaign, and actions. They were a reaction. But in truth, this is because, as many, I have considered "canon" to be standing for "official Star Wars history", which it is clear to me now that this is no longer the case. Disney took the Star Wars "canon" label, and (likely consciously) twisted it to their own use to serve their needs.

 

As I said earlier, the original trilogy is George Lucas' canon as far as the story of Star Wars is concerned, and some of the other content, such as The Clone Wars, too (as his daughter wrote some of the episodes, and he oversaw the story development of The Clone Wars series).

 

The Disney content, however, cannot be Lucas' canon, as he was not involved in the story development of these films and content. They cannot be Disney's canon, as there is no such thing, and Disney did not author Star Wars.

 

Therefore "canon" now simply means, in Disney's definition, "content owned and approved by us".

[Cerez]

Furthermore, there's nothing wrong with the Disney company wanting to have their own, "official" Star Wars storyline, it's just that this storyline does not necessarily take precedence over the Lucas canon and the other Star Wars stories that have come before it, and that the majority of us have grown to love. In other words, it may be quickly labeled "canon" by Disney, but in honesty it's truly not canon, it doesn't have reason or right to be, and it's certainly not official Star Wars history. Not until it shows quality to be remembered, levels with the old stories, and stands the test of time. And it'll never be "canon", the same as the EU stories.

[therfiles]

If that works for you, good for you.

[eezstreet]

Okay guys, hold on: WHERE did he say he hated Disney in this thread and WHERE did you see him attack others for their own personal preferences or what Disney has declared? Eez, Fuzuta, ease up guys. Come on. :/ At least he didn't pull an Acrobat and pull a full on Disney-Hate Campaign.

I never said that Cerez attacked anyone for their personal preferences. And, maybe he/she didn't explicitly hate it, but the entire OP is coming across as whining about how Episode 7 sucked/why it should not be considered a Star Wars movie, and we received the message the first time. We get it. The OP also doesn't introduce anything new to this debate, other than the weak argument that "Lucas wasn't involved, therefore it's not canon" which is silly - movies aren't made by one person, they're made by a team of people. Han Solo was originally an alien in Lucas' vision; does that make ANH not canon? If Jar Jar is somehow "more canon" (and by the OP's scale, "better" because apparently being canon is important) than Han Solo, please kill me, slowly, with much torture, thanks.

 

To be clear, @@eezstreet, if we're trying to make this personal, I don't hate Disney. I find it offensive how they are trying to take control of something that doesn't belong to them. Star Wars, as a franchise and IP is their property now. Star Wars, as the stories we love is not.

 

My earlier harsh actions were in direct, instinctive response to the aggressive nature of their campaign, and actions. They were a reaction. But in truth, this is because, as many, I have considered "canon" to be standing for "official Star Wars history", which it is clear to me now that this is no longer the case. Disney took the Star Wars "canon" label, and (likely consciously) twisted it to their own use to serve their needs.

 

As I said earlier, the original trilogy is George Lucas' canon as far as the story of Star Wars is concerned, and some of the other content, such as The Clone Wars, too (as his daughter wrote some of the episodes, and he oversaw the story development of The Clone Wars series).

 

The Disney content, however, cannot be Lucas' canon, as he was not involved in the story development of these films and content. They cannot be Disney's canon, as there is no such thing, and Disney did not author Star Wars.

 

Therefore "canon" now simply means, in Disney's definition, "content owned and approved by us".

Disney is not "taking control of something," they literally bought it from George Lucas and are allowed to do with the IP whatever they please.

 

Here's a question to your logic though - would Jedi Knight games not be considered canon at all then because they were written and produced by Activision, having only been given the greenlight by someone at Lucasarts?

[Cerez]

Here's a question to your logic though - would Jedi Knight games not be considered canon at all then because they were written and produced by Activision, having only been given the greenlight by someone at Lucasarts?

They aren't. They never were. Lucas never oversaw the story of the Jedi Knight series, as far as I know. So they were never really canon. Just like the new (Disney) Star Wars films. However, unlike the new films, they were never really labeled as "canon" either, to my knowledge...

 

What they are is Star Wars history, as far as the games are concerned, because we love the games, and most of us think they are some of the best Star Wars action games that have ever come out. They stood the test of time, and are still remembered.

[therfiles]

I guess...why does it matter? Just like what you like. Understand that there is an "official" timeline of events (otherwise how will new fans enter the story), but as a fan you are free to like things however you want. Is there a reason we need to redefine things?

[Cerez]

I guess...why does it matter? Just like what you like. Understand that there is an "official" timeline of events (otherwise how will new fans enter the story), but as a fan you are free to like things however you want. Is there a reason we need to redefine things?

Glad you asked. You're the first one of the nay-sayers to actually read what I wrote and think it through. A tall, cold glass of wine to you.

 

With all the marketing that has been happening in the world lately, it should be obvious, but what the Disney marketing guys aim to do by twisting our use of the word "canon" as it pertains to Star Wars here is to make us focus entirely on their new content, as if it were the one and only "official" Star Wars content and storyline. The reason I wrote this article is to raise awareness to this campaign. It's not canon, and it's by no right the "official" storyline.

 

How does this affect us? The more people, without thinking it through, start to blindly believe and promote that Disney's way is the only "official" way, the more damage to our community and long history this will do, not to mention a segregation between fans. Disney has no right to affect our community, wipe our long past, our culture, and try to manipulate us into submission this way -- unless we are dumb enough to let ourselves be subjected to it.

 

We have a Star Wars history, and we should be proud of it. Disney may not respect that, but that doesn't mean we need to side with them and forget about our deep culture, or discredit the stories we've grown to love and that have shaped our past -- unless we really feel that they need to be discredited. Disney has no right to tell us what is creditable in Star Wars and what is not, and overwrite our past only to call the newly created past "official" by their standards. We're entering 1984 territory here.

 

"Peace" stands for "military". "Canon" stands for "Disney approved".

 

We're not that blind, are we?

[Ping]

I disagree vehemently, as I have pointed out many times here. At first you have claimed that canon is whatever the fans decide it is (together with Seven), which is ridiculous, and now you claim canon does not exist because there is no single author behind the new movies, whereas previously Lucas apparently did everything by himself even if some of his decisions were overruled.

 

The argument is also weak given that it excludes teams of people as collectively being an author of a work (and assigns sole credit to Lucas for the first three movies). Since you cannot have an unauthored work of art, and since TFA is a work of art, therefore it must have an author; given that Lucas didn't make ANH on his own, i.e. the team behind the production was Lucasfilms, and since the team behind the production of TFA was Lucasfilms too, even if the individuals have changed, the author can be considered Lucasfilms in both cases - just like the fact that Nietzsche changed significantly as a person between his earliest work and his latest work, which is reflected strongly in the style and content of the two works, still makes him the very same author behind both works. TFA is recognized as a genuine work by Lucasfilms in contrast to a fake fan-film that tried to pass as a work made by Lucasfilms. Whatever group of people constitutes the team is completely irrelevant to questions of authenticity and thereby to questions of canon.

 

Finally I would like to draw your attention to the possibility that fictional canonicity might not be part of the definitions given at oxford's. Dictionaries are not infallible holy bibles of language use, they can be both wrong, incomplete or unhelpful. Questions of fictional canonicity are only really relevant in cases where we have retcons, i.e. where a later work either reinterprets or outright contradicts the events of an earlier work taking place in the same universe. In cases of retcons, the person in charge of the intellectual property (or authoring process, doesn't matter) has the final say as to what happened. In this case that is Lucasfilms and in this case they say Kotor is not canon. Whether or not an eternally resentful group of diehard fans accepts their decision or not is entirely irrelevant to whether or not what they say is correct. They make it so by saying it because they can do whatever they want with the franchise.

[Cerez]

And as I said there, it didn't go unnoted. It's part of the reason I've started this thread, to discuss it. @@Ping, so, from your point of view, by what definition of "canon" do Disney, and its subsidiary, Lucasfilm, have right to claim that their new storyline is official, and to be considered more important and relevant (or credible) than the original storyline many of their new stories are trying to replace?

 

I don't doubt that TFA has a collective body of writers as an author for the story, and I've listed the writers, but, with the exception of one writer for ROJ, those authors have absolutely nothing to do with the original story of Star Wars. My point is that Disney is not an author, and neither is Lucasfilm. They are not an individual, or a group of individuals who directly oversees story development, and keeps a close eye on the story-world. They are a company, a licensor, selling rights and hiring others to make movies based on Star Wars. There is no overseeing body here, no collective author with moral responsibility over all Star Wars works to keep things in check, unlike with Lucas. George Lucas is still the only true author, the only one with moral responsibility over the whole of Star Wars.

 

And Disney may control the franchise, but the company does not control the public. Which is what I'm getting at. They can do whatever they want, but that doesn't mean it will go down well with us, the fans. Without our support there is no Star Wars franchise, there is no "official" new storyline, and they can kiss their license goodbye. That's why it doesn't pay to insult the fans. Our world, and our past should be treated with the respect it deserves. And we are the ones who keep Star Wars alive, therefore we have a say whether something is officially adopted into Star Wars history or rejected for being a weak attempt, and sub-par.

[Ping]

Lucasfilm and co. are in charge of fictional canonicity, i.e. they are in charge of settling disputes over retcons and thereby have authority over the story.

 

As to your second paragraph: I know what that your point is that Lucasfilm is not an author, but you have not given any reasons as to why this should be the case and have not addressed my argument to the contrary either. See my previous post again for that: Lucasfilm is the name of the group that collectively makes up the author of the originals, prequels and TFA. Whether the individuals changed over time is irrelevant to questions of authorship; and if you want to claim otherwise, then you'd have to slice up the Lucasfilm from ANH and ROJ and claim they are different authors as well (regardless of who was in charge of what, because people change over time as well, so the Lucas of ANH was not the Lucas of ROJ, just as Lucasfilm from ANH was not the Lucasfilm from TFA, which I disagree with). Neither case addresses what I wrote in my last paragraph, namely that canonicity in terms of authorship might not be the same as fictional canonicity. The former may change over time, the latter stays constant with whoever is in charge of writing the story, i.e. the Lucasfilm of today.

 

 There is no overseeing body here, no collective author with moral responsibility over all Star Wars works to keep things in check, unlike with Lucas.

There is, it's called the Lucasfilm Story Group and they are in charge of guiding the storyline and determining canon. See, they even have their little story-focused branch over at Lucasfilm to figure out where to go and what to do from here, which contradicts basically everything you have said about Lucasfilm's involvement with the story so far.

 

Without our support there is no Star Wars franchise, there is no "official" new storyline, and they can kiss their license goodbye.

 That's complete nonsense and spoken with a great amount of bitterness. I can write a book, creating an original fictional universe without publishing it and have zero fanbase, but my storyline would still exist and I'd be officially in charge of it, including license (if I trademark it) and all. This is the kind of wishful thinking fueled by the resetment of the powerless I have mentioned in the status updates before and which drives this entire (completely ridiculous and absurd) discussion about canon being determined by the fans or being nonexistant or whatever. You are just so extremely bummed about Lucasfilm going into a direction you don't like that you're trying to change facts by re-defining words. It's the only way for the weak to deal with the fact that they are not in charge of the things they value. The curious thing is that Lucasfilm doesn't give a damn if you like their decisions or not, or if you want to assert your own headcanon or deny plain facts or whatever. The prequels were shit and still earned them a huge amount of money, and while you are busy being a reactive and bitter slave leading a crusade on some insignificant part of the internet, writing many words that will change absolutely nothing except have you (hopefully) eventually come to terms with your own powerlessness, they are busy creating new art.

[Grab]

tl;dr.

Lets let belive people in what they want to belive in. As I said, I don't understand why people just listen to Disney(argument that they have license for SW is not argument for me), I do not accept what are they doing, but I won't fight with people who like these changes. Officially there is "Canon" - Disney's version of Star Wars and "Legends" - oryginal history of SW.

[Cerez]

@@Ping, wow... no comment... (you need to ease up...)

 

You've just shocked me to he bone. This has just made me want to deny that I was ever a Star Wars fan. I am no slave to Star Wars, or to Disney, thank you. I have my human rights and freedom.

 

As to the points you've raised, I have addressed them with good reasoning, but let me address them directly, for extra clarity:

 

To say that Nietzsche has changed, and that he is not the same person 20 years later changes nothing on the fact that he is still the same individual who wrote the work in question. Unless that person has completely lost their memory, and even then, they will feel moral responsibility over their creation. That's why an author is respected as the creator in charge of that work. If nothing else, their name is attached to it.

 

From ANH to ROJ George Lucas supervised the story of Star Wars. The author hasn't changed.

 

While it's good to hear that there is some management as to the direction of the new stories at Disney with the Story Group in charge of keeping things going, that still doesn't change the fact that George Lucas is the author of Star Wars, the original story and world that inspired this franchise. A new author stepping in now cannot claim that their rewriting of the old stories is the new Star Wars canon. They can, but it would be hardly justified, or gain favour... and it certainly doesn't help to give their work credibility.

 

When you are talking about "fictional canon", I ask you; what canon? Whose canon? From whose point of view? And if you say the Lucasfilm Story Group, I will tell you again: they have no moral right over the original author's, George Lucas' Star Wars, or the other Star Wars authors' work for that matter. Their license and IP ownership entitles them to create new Star Wars works, not to desecrate old stories and content.

 

As to your last paragraph, it's not nonsense. Let's say, hypothetically, that the new trilogy runs its cinema time, and the movies really fail to impress the public -- they are complete flops. Do you think the Star Wars fan community will follow the new Disney proclaimed "canon" storyline when they play, and write fiction, and role-play? No, they won't. We'd be complete fools to. The new movies will eventually simply fade into oblivion, and the old stories will return to take their place. We decide what makes Star Wars history by the content we like in majority, not Disney.

 

Now, your argument is that Disney doesn't care because they reap the benefits in the cinemas anyway. I never argued that they did care, or that they would not earn money from their initially published content. But the more they disappoint their fans, the less loyalty and support they will get in return. A big part of the reason Star Wars has been so successful over these last decades is that it has a dedicated and loyal fan-base who keeps buying new content and merchandise from the franchise. We do this of our own free will, because we care about and support Star Wars. But if Disney decides to lay waste to our turf, do you think we will stand for it, and continue supporting their cause? Do you think we'll care about their next flop and insult? Do you think we'll invest money in it?

 

I am already not watching the new sequel in the cinemas. I will watch a shared copy. The same goes for Rogue One. Now, I know not everybody feels the same way about The Force Awakens, and I respect that some people still find it inspiring and interesting -- but once again, that's not everyone, and with the recent desecration of some of the old stories and characters, Disney has already lost quite a bit of fan loyalty.

 

Nothing is forcing us to keep supporting Disney's Star Wars. We do it because we still believe that they can do some justice to the franchise. But what if we didn't?

 

But the real issue here is not what happens to Disney, or whether they earn their money, but what happens to us as a segregated community in consequence of their rewrites and actions. If I find the new movies and Disney's recent actions personally hurtful, do you think I will follow the new "official" storyline, and find it credible? Now, say you and I wanted to partake in an after-the-Battle-of-Endor time-framed story together. Which storyline is true? Which Star Wars history will we play by? Will you insist repeatedly with certain "proof" that Disney's "canon" is the one true choice?

 

And here we bear witness to a new form of discrimination.