Are there any canon books?

[MCabrera]

Posted by ecky:
^ no its not. in the trek universe only that shown on screen is canon, if you have an issue with that i suggest you kindly inform paramount as its their rules.

I wouldn't necessarily call it a rule, they just don't take into account events that take place in novels when writing the scripts for the stories. I imagine it has more to do with ease of keeping up with their information, sticking to the Hundreds of hours of film rather than the hundreds of hours of film plus the hundreds of thousands of words in print.

I imagine it's also for the ease of the viewership who don't read the novels. Does anyone remember Ghostwriter ? I used to watch it sometimes with my younger brother. It would irk me when you would watch the whole show and then at the end you would have to go buy one of their books to finish the story in the episode. By keeping the series separate from the novels, they ensure that the major points of the stories and the characters are easily followable for the characters. Not exactly the same situation, but this exageration is a good example.

But what about Star Wars you say? Well, they don't have the volume of footage that Star Trek does, making six movies more easily digestible. The novels never contradict the movies because there are only six stories to tell (mind you I'm counting the forthcoming episode 3 in this number), so depending on what mood Lucas is in the stories can have moderately free range to complete the "saga" of these characters.

[Steve Roby]

Posted by suzi:
Apart from the movie adaptions are there any books that are considered canon?

EVERY FAN'S CANON PRIMER

DICK: Say, is this here item cannon?
JANE: Does it fire large iron balls at your enemies?
DICK: Huh? No, I mean is it official Star Trek, you know, cannon.
JANE: You mean canon. The term originally referred to the books of the Bible that were chosen by early Church leaders to refer to those books that would be retained and accepted as those directly inspired by the Word of God. One of the original and still most popular literary uses of the term refers to the original Sherlock Holmes stories by Arthur Conan Doyle, to differentiate them from the thousands of stories about Holmes written by other people. Many Sherlock Holmes fans dislike the imitations and thus read only the canon.
DICK: Whatever. Okay, so is this canon?
JANE: Is it a Star Trek movie or episode produced and released by Paramount (or Desilu, if it's old enough)?
DICK: Why, no, it's a b--
JANE: Well, then, it isn't canon.
DICK: Huh?
JANE: If it isn't an official Star Trek episode or movie, it isn't canon.
DICK: Well, it's a book.
JANE: Right. So it isn't canon, is it?
DICK: It could be.
JANE: Is a book aired on TV or shown in movie theaters?
DICK: No, but--
JANE: Then it isn't canon.
DICK: But this here book was written by someone who used to write for the series.
JANE: So?
DICK: Well, doesn't that make it cannon?
JANE: Canon. Not cannon. Not any kind of artillery or weapon in general. Don't make me go through this again. Or are you one of those Star Track fans?
DICK: Okay, doesn't that make it canon, then?
JANE: The creators of the shows don't regard each others' books as canon. They feel completely free to contradict what Jeri Taylor wrote in her books, for example. So what does that tell you?
DICK: I don't know.
JANE: It tells you that the books aren't canon, no matter who writes them. Because the books are not TV episodes or movies.
DICK: I don't understand. My dog Spot told me that Attack of the Clones had forty different references to a children's book from 1984 about Ewoks, because in Star Wars everything is canon. Even the Happy Meal boxes.
JANE: Is Star Trek part of Star Wars?
DICK: No.
JANE: Is Star Trek related to Star Wars in any way?
DICK: No.
JANE: Does it make sense to compare ten hours of filmed story with five or six hundred hours of filmed story?
DICK: Well, I dunno, not really.
JANE: Then what in the Black Hole of Carcosa does Star Wars have to do with this discussion? I'll answer that for you: nothing.
DICK: So this book isn't canon?
JANE: Is it a book?
DICK: Yes...
JANE: Well, then?
DICK: I guess it isn't canon.
JANE: By George, I think he's got it.
DICK: But maybe it could be canon if enough fans think it's good enough to be canon.
RICK BERMAN: Dick, I'm Rick Berman. I run Star Trek. The books aren't canon. Period.
DICK: But what about Gene Roddenberry?
THE GHOST OF GENE RODDENBERRY: Dick, I don't even think some of the movies are canon. And if I was still alive I'd be going on about some of the newer Star Trek TV series not being canon. And you want the books to be canon? Didn't you people get the message from my boy Richard Arnold?
DICK: Yeah, but I can call it canon if I want.
THE GHOST OF NOAH WEBSTER: Words have meanings, my lad, and you seem not to grasp the meaning of that word.
DICK: Huh? Whatever, word nazi. Anyway, I'm a fan. I am the true owner of Star Trek because I keep it alive. I can determine what is canon.
JANE, RICK BERMAN, THE GHOST OF GENE RODDENBERRY, AND THE GHOST OF NOAH WEBSTER: The hell with this.
SOUND EFFECTS: Jane, Rick, Gene, and Noah apply the Steel-Toed Doc Martens of Correction.

[Marco Palmieri]

^Hey, can we make this a FAQ? (j/k)

[Ordover]

So is what you're saying, Steve, is that only the Catholic Church can decide what part of Star Trek is canon?

[Emh]

That's great, Steve! We really should have that in the FAQ!

[Cradok]

Posted by Blake:
Its just as much canon as the George Lucas Star Wars movie novel.

You mean the one that wasn't actually written by George Lucas, and was in fact ghost-written by Alan Dean Foster, yes?

And 'personal continuity', people, makes much, much more sence than the horrible 'personal canon'.

Edit: Love the dialogue, Steve. Funniest thing I've seen all week.

[MichaelS]

^What he said. This question comes up so often, it should really be part of a FAQ - probably in gigantic flashing letters.

[KRAD]

Steve, you are my new hero.

[Dayton Ward]

Posted by Steve Roby:
EVERY FAN'S CANON PRIMER

LMAO!!!!

That one just got archived, with proper credit attributed to Mr. Roby of course, and to be unleashed at a future date when circumstances warrant (and by my watch, that should be about 14 seconds from now).

Damn, I needed that laugh. Thanks, Steve!

[TerriO]

Posted by Steve Roby:

EVERY FAN'S CANON PRIMER

Steve, can I PLEASE quote this elsewhere with appropriate linkage and credit? This is brilliant.

[James Dixon]

Posted by Cradok:

You mean the one that wasn't actually written by George Lucas, and was in fact ghost-written by Alan Dean Foster, yes?

That was the same period I was reading all of the Alan Dean Foster "Log series" TAS novelizations... And the same era when ADF ghost novelized the first Star Wars novelization...

My problem: I strongly suspected that ADF wrote the Star Wars book because it felt likt his style--and this was confirmed some years later... But, regarding the ST-TMP novelization, the whole book just didn't Feel like ADF's writing... And to this day I've read quite a few ADF books (virtually all of his Commonwealth series), including his novelizations of other films such as Darkstar, and I still can't believe that ADF novelized ST-TMP...

[James Dixon]

Posted by Emh:
That's great, Steve! We really should have that in the FAQ!

The problem I have with it is the fact that Enterprise is most definitely not canon, despite being "official"... The whole deal is like a sad joke on the part of TOS fans...

[Defcon]

I couldn´t care less if books are canon or not. For me it´s more important that i enjoy the book when i read it, than that it fits into a certain continuity and is a official part of the Star Trek canon history. OK, it´s great if you get a great read and it doesn´t contradicts the novels you have read earlier or the TV-shows and movies, but for me the overall quality is far more imortant than if novels are canon or not.
There is The Final Reflection for example. It was heavily contradicted by TNG, the movies and several novels, and it´s therfore maybe one of the most uncanonic (does this word exists?) novels out there, but it´s still a great novel.

[Steve Roby]

Posted by TerriO:
Steve, can I PLEASE quote this elsewhere with appropriate linkage and credit? This is brilliant.

Certainly, and thanks to you and the other folks who said nice things about it.

And if Suzi is still reading this thread: Suzi, I hope you didn't read my little rant as anything personally directed against you. I'm guessing you're relatively new to this ancient debate. Every time it comes up there are a few folks who haven't seen this old battle play out dozens of times over the years, and the exasperation some of us feel whenever it rears its ugly head again may seem a little harsh to the newer fans. Trust me, no matter where you stand on the issue, in a few years you too will be exasperated when the subject arises again.

And Defcon cuts to the heart of the matter. The Final Reflection, Diane Duane's Romulan books, Federation... it doesn't matter that canon Trek may have contradicted them. They're still well worth reading.

[NAHTMMM]

Posted by Defcon:
I couldn´t care less if books are canon or not. For me it´s more important that i enjoy the book when i read it, than that it fits into a certain continuity and is a official part of the Star Trek canon history. OK, it´s great if you get a great read and it doesn´t contradicts the novels you have read earlier or the TV-shows and movies, but for me the overall quality is far more imortant than if novels are canon or not.

Good for you. I don't feel that canonicity (Just for the record, I may have made that word up) should factor into deciding whether a story is good or not. It should keep true to characters and situations and abilities and the like, but that is not the same as being canon.