StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Insider 23 wrote:'Gospel,' or canon as we refer to it, includes the screenplays, the films, the radio dramas and the novelisations. These works spin out of George Lucas' original stories, the rest are written by other writers. However, between us, we've read everything, and much of it is taken into account in the overall continuity. The entire catalog of published works comprises a vast history -- with many off-shoots, variations and tangents -- like any other well-developed mythology.

Sue Rostini wrote:Canon refers to an authoritative list of books that the Lucas Licensing editors consider an authentic part of the official Star Wars history. Our goal is to present a continuous and unified history of the Star Wars galaxy, insofar as that history does not conflict with, or undermine the meaning of Mr. Lucas's Star Wars saga of films and screenplays. Things that Lucas Licensing does not consider official parts of the continuous Star Wars history show an Infinities logo or are contained in Star Wars Tales. Everything else is considered canon.

Sansweet wrote:Which brings us to the often-asked question: Just what is Star Wars canon, and what is not? The one sure answer: the Star Wars Trilogy Special Edition- the three films themselves ... in a close second we have the authorized adaptations of the films: the novels, radio dramas, and comics. After that, almost everything falls into a category of "quasi-canon".

How do we reconcile some of the clashing between these quotes?

It's simple. All three quotes maintain one standard theme: That the movies are superior to all other forms.

That's it.

Down to the simplest, easiest form, beyond all the pettiness and agendas of the likes of Darkstar, the only reason that Lucas and Lucasfilm presents a "canon policy" at all is simply to maintain the superiority of the films. Methinks that, if they didn't care about that one point, they wouldn't even bother with quotes like these.

Mr Sansweet's quote does not in fact contradict Miss Rostoni's. Both quotes emphasize the primacy of the films themselves, and then communicate, together with the Insider quote, the concept that other sources' validity is dependent upon how well they reflect the films (the immediate family of materials consequently rank highest).

The chief difficulty is the two different, though related, definitions of "canon". Mr Sansweet appears to be using "canon" in the Biblical sense, i.e., the list of books of the Bible formally recognised as Divinely inspired. In this sense, it is correct to call other sources "quasi-canonical", as it correctly communicates the idea that they are correct and valid insofar as they do not contradict the "canonical" sources ("quasi-" means "to some degree" or "in some manner").

Miss Rostoni, however, appears to be using "canon" in the literary sense, i.e., a list of books by an author accepted as authentic. In this sense, "canon" does not imply a greater or lesser degree of evidential weight or authority; rather, it simply recognizes the authenticity of the Expanded Universe as part of the genuine story of Star Wars. Notice that she makes the same distinction as has always been made -- the Expanded Universe is authoritative insofar as it does not contradict or undermine Mr Lucas's works.

Publius

Thanks, Publius.