Charles Phipps wrote:
If we become invested in characters, we like to know that their our investment of time (as well as money) is worth it. It may be a purely emotional response but saying, "this story doesn't count" undermines its importance in the grand scheme of things. It's a statement the events aren't considered important by the developers of the program to include and, on some level, may just be a cash cow.
See, I don't understand that attitude. It's worth it if you enjoy the story. Its importance is in its entertainment value, not in how well it fits with other stories. The Dark Knight
isn't consistent with the continuity of Batman: The Animated Series
, and neither is consistent with the comics, but that doesn't mean they're worth less. It just means they're a distinct take on the characters and concepts.
Not everything has to be part of a "grand scheme." Not everything is significant only because of what comes later. Countless great stories are entirely self-contained. There's no sequel to Hamlet
. There's no Son of Citizen Kane
. Someone did write a sequel to Casablanca
and it was a travesty. Sometimes the value of a story is entirely in the story itself.
And it's a mistake to interpret it as saying that non-canonical stories "aren't important." As I keep stressing, canon is not a value judgment, just a classification. Canon doesn't disregard tie-ins because they aren't important, but because they can't be directly supervised in detail by the creators at the same time they're focused on the main work, and so it's not really feasible.