The Official Luke Skywalker and the Shadows of Mindor Discussion Thread (Spoilers Allowed)

Wouldn't a better term to use be "personal continuity"? It basically retains the same meaning, but eliminates the possible connotation that it's official.

 

It would (though I'd guess that you're still going to have the same problem being taken seriously around here...).

 

The terms are interchangeble. And while I think there is nothing wrong with a personal continuity, I do agree discussing personal cannon/continuity on the discussion boards here doesn't lend it self well to discussion.

I did, however, find this--"Literature Forum Rules posted:The Literature forum follows the Lucasfilm canon policy (see here for details.) Do not debate canon"--pretty funny.

Seems like debating canon is the practically the chief purpose of these forums at times (I'm exaggerating of course).

But talk about an oxymoron.

 

How so? We don't argue about what's canon or not. We talk about how to make things fit, sure, but we don't have canon wars. (There's a reason that's a rule, and you've never seen anything like those wars. I only have from looking back at OLD threads...)

 

Hmmm. I've seen some pretty nasty things said in regards to cannon. But I agree "wars" is too strong a word, which I never said, BTW.

But I think "debate" is the key word here. I think there is plenty of debate that goes around here (not knocking it mind you--although it does gets out of hand at times)in regards to what fits and what doesn't, as well as how (but I would not say it's all about how).

 

Very well. I concede.

Ah, not necessarily. You could create a new history to validate those references, even if you don't consider the sources those references were originally based on to be authoritative.

Besides, I have no problem with TTT.

Uh ... okay.

Only on TheForce.Net can a single off-the-cuff remark be blown so widely out of proportion.

Yeah, I think you're right. I'll go with that then. It works just as well, and if it makes the sticklers-for-semantics happy ...

 

It would (though I'd guess that you're still going to have the same problem being taken seriously around here...).



lol. having a personal canon might make it easier than judging works in continuity in canon, but it leaves you without an anchor.

 

In response to "Do not debate canon" all I really have to say is lol. I have some swampland on Dagobah I want to sell you.

 

I... may have gone into infodump/"Someone on the internet is WRONG" mode there. Sorry. "Personal canon" getting thrown around in conversation as though it's meaningful to the debate is one of my pet peeves.

Rob?How things are canon is discussed all the time, especially these days. The many canon-infractions of the last three years have seen to that. However, very little of that has come down to arguing whether things are canon but rather how they are canon. E.g. how do we reconcile KT's Mandos with TCW's Mandos with Abel's Mandos? It's tricky! But you don't see (many ) people arguing that KT's Mandos or Abel's Mandos are just not canon. That quickly runs into warning-and-ban territory, at least historically.

So, sure, thanks to a lot of things that have been goofy with the continuity recently, there's a lot more talk about. (That also might say something about whether the IU stuff is good enough to generate good IU discussion, but that's another point entirely!) Even so, we don't see a lot of "DE isn't canon!" "Yes it is!" "Nuh-uh!" "Uh-huh!" either.

 

LIEK zOMG.
I always thought this was about discussing books and, you know, aspects literary and such.
I stand corrected and for the rest of my life a huge step back.



*bold by me

 

We're going backwards here, people! I thought we settled what was canon and what wasn't five years ago when the Canon Wars ended with a whimper. Should I go brush off my stripes? I earned them.

 

Im sorry, Ive only been here since December. What exactly were the Canon Wars? Ker referenced them earlier, so i was wondering. They sound vicious. Though by looking at dates, it sounds like Ker was referencing an earlier war.

 

The Canon Wars were a board-wide conflict that lasted a few years, it was going strong when I registered in '03. Basically, it was people bashing the EU and saying how they had no relation to the films, etc etc. There was also a group of people, like me and others, who would step in to defend the EU and generally try and cool the argument down with solid facts.

In about 2005 it started to die a very slow death, to the point where there was just nothing going on anymore which was around the time ROTS came out. It was fun, it could get very messay but it made me a better poster. I think I have a few scars here somewhere...

 

Thanks. Huh. I might try searching through the archives for that. Sounds interesting.

 

i have big issues with canon as well. but i accept it. i don't spend the rest of my life whining about it. WEu is canon, the only thing that can smack down the eu is if something does not mesh with gl canon from the films. the clone wars eu writings are frought with errors, and i think GL needs to put them in there place when they step over the line, that aside eu novels especially are valid. i do personally think that comics and video games should be lower canon. comics are always greatly embellished, specially in the 80's and 90's.

 

I remember the old EUDF days...but I'm glad that they're over and we have a more unified policy regarding canon.

 

Whatever you want to call it. If the rule says "Do Not Debate Canon" then that goes by the wayside all the time. It's about the style of the debates.

Look at Eeth Koth's appearance in Wildspace. A canon source, a novel about The Clone Wars, ressurected him right then and there.....yet many just decided that was an error and dismissed his appearance as not canon.

Now I'm not talking about any internet debate "wars" that may have happened once upon a starship, but this type of thing goes on all the time. Sources conflict and canon is debated, some believing that based on what they have researched that X has to be this way, while others believe that its the opposite of that based on the sources they have looked at.

 

I think what the rule is meant to proscribe (and, as a result, how it is actually enforced in practice) is debates about the nature of Star Wars canon itself, not particular details. Discussing how something fits or doesn't fit into the Lucasfilm-established framework of canon isn't what the rule is targeting; arguing that the framework *itself* is wrong is.

When people were dismissing the presence of Eeth Koth in Wild Space, they were doing it on the basis of our best understanding of how Lucasfilm's canon system works (i.e. the sources killing him was C-canon, making them just as canonically valid as Wild Space, and a case-by-case analysis at the time made the Wild Space appearance look like a mistake rather than a conscious decision). People *weren't* claiming that Wild Space wasn't a canon source, or that the DK books were higher canon than Wild Space, or that the entire canon structure itself was marketing propaganda and the only true Star Wars was the films. *THAT* sort of thing is what the rule is targeting.

 

Only on TheForce.Net can a single off-the-cuff remark be blown so widely out of proportion

not true. starwars.com is far worse. i get along better on here

 

[image=http://www.nerve.com/CS/blogs/61fps/2009/01/facepalm.jpg]

 

If you have an issue with canon and you want something changed, the squeaky wheel method always works. Just don't make a thread and slap an "SOS" on it. And make sure it's nothing major (like say, bring-anakin-solo-back). Put it in your sig or something. Go around to different forums and just act like it's totally true. And who knows? Some fellow working at LucasArts might just stick it in the next totally-official Star Wars game and make all your dreams come true.


Not like I'm speaking from personal experience or anything.



And while we're on the subject of canon in LSATSOM.... can I just say how terrifically ecstatic I was when Stover fixed the Blackhole=Cronal=Shadowspawn retcon?

 

Yeah I get that, the rule just worded in a vague way.

 

No, no, no... Canon, not cannon. Cannon go boom!

Could. Not. Resist.

 

In certain cases, you could argue that both go boom.