New Addition to the Canon: The DK Library

[Marc Xavier]

Obviously you skipped the part where I was mentioning to Wayne that you are quite open to using the EU.

Thankyou.

The fact that you like to "interpret" things (to put it politely) in a particular way does not invalidate this, no matter how wrong you were proven to be.

Remember that context matters, boyo.

Yes, context does matter. And you're quickly moving this thread out of it's original and intended context, in other words, getting off topic.

[Connor MacLeod]

Yes, context does matter. And you're quickly moving this thread out of it's original and intended context, in other words, getting off topic.

You're the one who accused me of "attacking" you when I was clarifying that you tended to utilize a different interpretation of materials is all. The fact that you may incorrectly interpret said material is not relevant to the very fact you employ it (and therefore are not one of the "EU isn't canon" crowd.)

There, now that that is settled, we can let the topic resume its course, unless you of course want to drag it off course with more accusations even though I have quite clearly clarified my initial opinion. Be my guest if you feel the need to have the last word as it were

[Darth Wong]

All of this bickering over canon is ridiculous, and would not be happening if not for the idiocy of Darkstar and the small handful of people who are led around by the scent of his droppings.

Does anyone seriously think that Lucasfilm Licensing is ever going to tell people that all of the products they sell don't mean shit? They make a lot of statements designed to remind people that the movies rule, because there are people out there who actually think that the books are higher than the movies (case in point: 8km long SSD). But at no point have they ever stated that the official stuff doesn't count for shit, which is what Darkstar and his 3 fans seem to think. And nobody who approaches this with an even remotely rational perspective would think otherwise, which is why Darkstar spends all of his time on incredibly voluminous out-of-context semantics nitpicking.

I just honestly can't believe that this argument is still going on.

[Connor MacLeod]

I just honestly can't believe that this argument is still going on.

Can't you? Its just an extension of the whole effort of the rabid anti-Star Wars fanatics (of any stripe) attempting to discredit the obvious fact of SW capabilities by attacking the source's validity (or in the case of canon, such as the TESB asteroid calcs or Dodonna calcs, by the validity of the interpretation or analysis.)

As long as the rabid fanwhores cannot win by direct means, they will try to distort or misdirect the facts in an effort to knock their opposition down to size. They see it as their only chance to "win", which is what makes thema ll the more pathetic.

[Marc Xavier]

Does anyone seriously think that Lucasfilm Licensing is ever going to tell people that all of the products they sell don't mean shit?

I sincerely doubt it.

They make a lot of statements designed to remind people that the movies rule, because there are people out there who actually think that the books are higher than the movies (case in point: 8km long SSD). But at no point have they ever stated that the official stuff doesn't count for shit, which is what Darkstar and his 3 fans seem to think. And nobody who approaches this with an even remotely rational perspective would think otherwise, which is why Darkstar spends all of his time on incredibly voluminous out-of-context semantics nitpicking.

It seems to me that the source of alot of the strife over there is coming because of polarization of the stances. A "virtually all" vs a "virtually nothing" argument between the two sides.

[Master of Ossus]

It seems to me that the source of alot of the strife over there is coming because of polarization of the stances. A "virtually all" vs a "virtually nothing" argument between the two sides.

Is there any other way to do it? The quotes we have state that there's absolute canon (the movies), the "very accurate" (sometimes referred to as canon) in the form of the scripts, plays, and novelizations, and then there's the EU. Either you include the EU or you don't.

[Marc Xavier]

It seems to me that the source of alot of the strife over there is coming because of polarization of the stances. A "virtually all" vs a "virtually nothing" argument between the two sides.

Is there any other way to do it? The quotes we have state that there's absolute canon (the movies), the "very accurate" (sometimes referred to as canon) in the form of the scripts, plays, and novelizations, and then there's the EU. Either you include the EU or you don't.

Sure there's another way to do it. For example, you could apply a level of “suspectness” to EU material. Perhaps that level of “suspectness” would decrease as more and more sources corroborate it, or it would increase as more sources contradict it, and in the case of where the canon contradicts it, it would be rejected altogether. There might be other systems to "gauge" how suspect (or "non-suspect") a piece of EU material would be as well, as I'm sure some folks around here could come up with.

[Mad]

Sure there's another way to do it. For example, you could apply a level of “suspectness” to EU material. Perhaps that level of “suspectness” would decrease as more and more sources corroborate it, or it would increase as more sources contradict it, and in the case of where the canon contradicts it, it would be rejected altogether. There might be other systems to "gauge" how suspect (or "non-suspect") a piece of EU material would be as well, as I'm sure some folks around here could come up with.

Why would we need to go through all that? On that thread you linked to before, giving Leland Chee's answer to a question on canon, Sue Rostoni answered the same question a little later on that same page:

"the films and novelizations come first... meaning that if something in an EU novel or comic book or whatever contradicts something in the film, the film is more 'true.' Books in the EU are considered part of the canon of the universe."

Rostoni generalizes and refers to everything as "canon," but she keeps the same hierarchy as everyone else. (It shouldn't come as a suprise that she uses different terminology than others... nearly everyone that has given an official statement has done so using their own terminology to refer to the exact same hierarchy and methods.)

Here, she says that the books are "part of the canon of the universe." The only time the hierarchy comes up is when there's a contradiction. Other than in the case of those contradictions, everything goes. Quite simple and effective, don't you think?

[Howedar]

Sure there's another way to do it. For example, you could apply a level of “suspectness” to EU material. Perhaps that level of “suspectness” would decrease as more and more sources corroborate it, or it would increase as more sources contradict it, and in the case of where the canon contradicts it, it would be rejected altogether. There might be other systems to "gauge" how suspect (or "non-suspect") a piece of EU material would be as well, as I'm sure some folks around here could come up with.

Ultimately any given statement in an EU source needs to be either accepted or rejected. There is a very real dichotomy in this debate.

[Marc Xavier]

The only time the hierarchy comes up is when there's a contradiction. Other than in the case of those contradictions, everything goes. Quite simple and effective, don't you think?

It might be, except in the case of contradictions inside of the surviving EU, which MoO, Wayne, and I are currently discussing on the other thread. A hard set rule of "if it doesn't contradict the films, it's 'as good as canon'" doesn't quite work because of the inherent contradictions inside of the EU material, so we're discussing various logical filters (one of which you actually suggested) to weed out the discrepancies. Ossus himself has forwarded a suggestion in the hope of not being arbitrary about constructing a filter candidate, and I'm interested in determining the merit of the various systems.

That is, of course, unless the "real" Star Wars universe is allowed to be self-contradictory, (to borrow some material from the essay Wayne showed me), "Gloss over the five different recorded accounts of Han's Ord Mantell adventure; they all occurred. Accept that the evacuation of Yavin IV reportedly occurred both a few weeks and a few years after A New Hope; both accounts are accurate. Overlook how implausible it might be that Luke and Vader battled each other twice before The Empire Strikes Back; battle they did. Quibble not over the two accounts of Han's infamous 'Kessel run,' the three accounts of the fate of Bespin, the five accounts of the discovery of Hoth, the three accounts of Luke's and Leia's swimming abilities, the two accounts of the nature of the Kaiburr Crystal, the five accounts of the trio's 'first' run-in with Boba Fett, the four accounts of Fett's real identity, or the three accounts of how the plans to the original Death Star were stolen. They are apparently all part of one storyline now, impossible contradictions and all."

Incidentally, it's mainly these internal contradictions (and some statements made by employees in the Lucas family of companies) that persuaded me that perhaps a "suspect" approach to the truth-value of the EU might be worthwhile, since it appears that the standard of what is "canon" inside of the Expanded Universe allows for such an amount of discrepancies.