Could books Ever become Canon?

[Steve Roby]

^Well, if the studio CAN'T canonize the novels, then this discussion is pointless.

And "the studio" doesn't give a flying wallenda anyway. Gene Roddenberry and Richard Arnold had a canon policy. They're gone, and so is their policy. Jeri Taylor said her Voyager novels were canon; as soon as she left Voyager, her books were no longer canon, and episodes contradicted some of what she established in her novels.

Rick Berman ran Star Trek for several years, but he's gone. JJ Abrams is making a new movie but he has nothing to do with DS9, Voyager, or Enterprise, and he's probably never seen any of them, so he's got no canon policy for Star Trek as a whole.

Books aren't canon because it's unreasonable to expect anyone creating a Trek TV or movie series to worry about what happens in several hundred Trek novels. It's a practical approach. Not a judgment on the quality of the novels.

Books won't be canon because Star Trek doesn't belong to one immortal person who can enforce his or her idea of what constitutes canon. If, for example, Abrams, Orci, et al. had a press conference tomorrow and said that henceforth the Countdown comic miniseries is to be considered canon, and the movie stiffs at the box office and Abrams and his merry gang go on to do other things and never venture near Star Trek again, whoever comes along next to work on Star Trek will neither know nor care about Countdown's canon status.

Well, to be fair, most canon discussions are pointless.

Especially if "most" = "damn near all."

(If only the TrekBBS had a place for discussions about Star Trek books, we wouldn't have to talk about this in General Trek Discussion. But even if that happened, the TrekBBS would have to have moderators who have the ability to move threads to the proper forum.)

 

[darkwing_duck1]

Which is nonsense, and par for Roddenberry's post-fact revisionism; he didn't object to such during the creation of the Technical Manual.

An interview with GR had him saying it was his own shortsightedness. He truly thought ST was dead when Joseph signed his contract to create a semi-licensed publication - one to which a loophole enabled Joseph to retained the rights to "sub let" his original concepts.

How then do we deal with his (GR's) numerous POSITIVE statements made to FJ prior to the time Paramount started putting pressure on GR in other arenas and the liciensing department started going behind his (GR's) back?

 

[Therin of Andor]

Well, that's remarkable for certain, as TAS is the gray area of Trek canon.

TAS wasn't "removed" from ST canon until a memo in 1989, when Filmation was being sold off and the rights to their back catalogue of productions was in flux.

ST VI isn't the only example of TAS material being picked up by the live action productions. There's also TMP's second bridge elevator and Vulcan's planetoid in close orbit, and TNG's holodeck.

According to a letter GR once sent out to ST clubs in early 1978, he was trying to convince Majel Barrett to play a dual role in TMP: as Dr Chapel and (in cameo) as M'Ress, but she baulked at the thought of all the makeup.

 

[Therin of Andor]

How then do we deal with his (GR's) numerous POSITIVE statements made to FJ prior to the time Paramount started putting pressure on GR in other arenas and the liciensing department started going behind his (GR's) back?

GR admitted in the early 80s that he had mixed feelings about the Tech Manual. How is that a problem? Most ST fans have mixed feeling about aspects of licensed ST tie-ins, and it wasn't till TNG started that GR secured a strong power of veto over some products.

The manual was a great piece of extrapolation of an essentially-dead TV show, but when GR started to hear fans talking excitedly about how many dreadnaughts it would take to destroy the Klingon homeworld, or when they asked him questions about single-nacelled Starfleet craft, he did regret giving FJ such free range.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

How then do we deal with his (GR's) numerous POSITIVE statements made to FJ prior to the time Paramount started putting pressure on GR in other arenas and the liciensing department started going behind his (GR's) back?

GR admitted in the early 80s that he had mixed feelings about the Tech Manual. How is that a problem? Most ST fans have mixed feeling about aspects of licensed ST tie-ins, and it wasn't till TNG started that GR secured a strong power of veto over some products.

In other words AFTER the mess with Paramount going behind his back. Gene was nothing but SUPPORTIVE of the Tech Manual until he started having trouble with the studio. Karen's documentation proves that.

And by the time of TNG, he was under the influence of those bottom feeders Maizlish and Richard Arnold.

 

[Ezri II]

NO NO NO NO !!!!

There are so many books and so many different types of stories from so many different points of view. If you made it canon, who would be on the committee to say this book is official canon and this book is not in official canon.

If they did, there could be lawsuits because the non canon books would have less value. Second, any new book would have to conform to the past books that was made official in canon. So we lose some books and new books would be more dull to read as it conforms with past books.

An author that writes Star Trek books has to conform a bit to the past canon and non canon viewpoints. Not that many authors would like to have less liberty with their book story.

 

[Therin of Andor]

In other words AFTER the mess with Paramount going behind his back. Gene was nothing but SUPPORTIVE of the Tech Manual until he started having trouble with the studio. Karen's documentation proves that.

It doesn't prove what he was not saying in public at the time, though. It's my understanding that GR did not like the idea of "war gamers" getting off on lining up their white-metal Starfleet dreadnaught miniatures to play Star Fleet Battles, and boasting to him at conventions how great dreadnaughts were, and could they please see some in the next ST movie.

Seeing a diagram in a tie-in book wouldn't have suggested how its future popularity might change someone's mind.

But maybe that hadn't happened until after his correspondence with FJ. It's my understanding the GR was originally impressed with the TM's scope. He's allowed to have a change of heart.

 

[Therin of Andor]

If they did, there could be lawsuits because the non canon books would have less value. .

How? The contracts all ST tie-in authors sign give over all their ownership rights to CBS, the copyright owners.

 

[RandyS]

Well, to be fair, most canon discussions are pointless.

Tell me about it.

 

[Lightinspire]

I think Shatner's books of the return of Kirk could be canon because they are a continuation of treklore. The book CrossOver was fantastic and followed Canon to a T. Who makes the decision of canon..Rick Berman??

 

[Therin of Andor]

I think Shatner's books of the return of Kirk could be canon because they are a continuation of treklore. The book CrossOver was fantastic and followed Canon to a T. Who makes the decision of canon..Rick Berman??

In 1989, the Star Trek Office of Gene Roddenberry at Paramount issued a memo to the then-current tie-in licensees confirming to them that, for their purposes, they were only to consider as-screened, live-action ST produced by Desilu/Paramount as canonical. "Canon" did not include TAS, licensed comics, RPG manuals, novels, short stories or live-action filmed sequences for playing at attractions at theme parks.

The memo has never been retracted, but Paula Block at CBS Consumer Products, who must approve all licensed tie-in proposals and final manuscripts, has been allowing some supposed breaches of that memo ever since Gene Roddenberry passed away.

 

[Sci]

I think Shatner's books of the return of Kirk could be canon because they are a continuation of treklore. The book CrossOver was fantastic and followed Canon to a T. Who makes the decision of canon..Rick Berman??

Canon only refers to works that future works are supposed to somehow be consistent with. In other words, the only difference between an episode and a novel is that an episode can contradict a novel but a novel can't contradict an episode.

 

[captcalhoun]

you think this is bad, try the Transformers universe...

G1, G2, Beast Wars and Beast Machines are all supposedly in the same continuity, but the G1 comics and cartoons are quite distinct. the BW 'toon uses references to both. then there's Japanese series like Victory that follow the G1 cartoon, but precede the animated movie... then there's BW II and Neo from Japan...

then you've got Robots in Disguise, the 'Unicron trilogy' - Armada, Energon and Cybertron and then there's the Bayformers and Animated...

and Takara thinks they're all ONE continuity despite blatant contradictions and that doesn't even get into the differences between UK and US G1 comics or the UK G2 comic and US G2 comic have differing begginings or the likes of Alternators, Machine Wars, Universe or the Ladybird children's books...

 

[Steve Roby]

I think Shatner's books of the return of Kirk could be canon because they are a continuation of treklore. The book CrossOver was fantastic and followed Canon to a T. Who makes the decision of canon..Rick Berman??

Out of curiosity, did you actually read this thread?

 

[ALF]

you think this is bad, try the Transformers universe...

G1, G2, Beast Wars and Beast Machines are all supposedly in the same continuity, but the G1 comics and cartoons are quite distinct. the BW 'toon uses references to both. then there's Japanese series like Victory that follow the G1 cartoon, but precede the animated movie... then there's BW II and Neo from Japan...

then you've got Robots in Disguise, the 'Unicron trilogy' - Armada, Energon and Cybertron and then there's the Bayformers and Animated...

and Takara thinks they're all ONE continuity despite blatant contradictions and that doesn't even get into the differences between UK and US G1 comics or the UK G2 comic and US G2 comic have differing begginings or the likes of Alternators, Machine Wars, Universe or the Ladybird children's books...

Dude... I was JUST thinking that same thing. Transformers is a mess, but if you're a fan as I am, when you switch on some Robots in Disguise, the best thing is to just forget about how poorly tied together all the series' (and in the case of the Hasbro 80s series in particular) and the episodes are and enjoy it for what it is.

This is great advice for Trek in general. Especially when Miles O'Brien's pisses on Colin Ferrell in Intermission.
http://jp.youtube.com/watch?v=gIJ2mKNxFyA

 

[captcalhoun]

http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/transformers/images/1/1d/Continuities.png

slightly out-dated since it hasn't got the 2007 movie (and comics, novel-prequel etc) or Animated...

http://transformers.wikia.com/wiki/Image:Japaneseflowchart.jpg

Japanese take. again, dated.

 

[Lightinspire]

Yes I did read it, I'm here like everyone else getting involved in the discussion and expressing my thoughts/opinions..did you even read his books? Especially Star Trek The Return, I cannot see myself how that is in violation of Canon.

 

[Steve Roby]

Yes I did read it, I'm here like everyone else getting involved in the discussion and expressing my thoughts/opinions..did you even read his books? Especially Star Trek The Return, I cannot see myself how that is in violation of Canon.

It's simple. The definition of Star Trek canon -- the only one we have, the one from Roddenberry and Arnold -- is that the only canon Trek is the filmed Star Trek (and not even all of that counts). By definition, a book is not filmed Star Trek and therefore is not canon. This has been addressed upstream in this thread, and in linked locations, like my old Canon Primer. That's why I asked whether you'd actually read the thread.

What you seem to be talking about is not canon but continuity. You seem to be saying that the Shatnerverse books are consistent with what we see on TV and in the movies. That's not an unreasonable position to take. But that just means they don't violate the continuity of the series. If the books were to be canon, that would mean that Trek movies and TV shows would, if dealing with Kirk post-Generations, have to accept that what happens in the Shatner books is what has really happened. And that is not likely to happen.

Continuity is not canon. We're talking about canon, and I think you're talking about continuity. Continuity is the stuff that happens. Canon is the stuff that happens that everybody writing any form of Star Trek has to stay consistent with. The books are generally consistent with continuity. They are not canon.

Are any moderators reading this? Is there a reason for a books and canon thread here and another one in the place where discussions about books are supposed to be?

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

^^

Very nice distinction.

Thank God for continuity, without it the books would be a mess.

 

[Unicron]

I'm kind of mixed personally. There's a lot of the material that fits in perfectly well with the official continuity in the canon sources (televised media) and I see absolutely no reason, if it were possible to include written materials in the same light, that said materials would have to be a straightjacket on the creativity of the show producers. I've sometimes gotten that impression from these discussions, and it's always puzzled me. I think ideally, as has been the case with Star Wars, these expansions can serve to make the franchise stronger by fleshing out the details we don't get to see on the big screen.

I think the problem, ultimately, is that Trek has never had a system for integrating those two sets of materials together. Star Wars, B5 and other franchises have done so, but Trek likely can't. They've made the choice to acknowledge one set over the other, and in doing so have cemented that separation into the mindset of many fans.

* shrugs * I dunno. I'd like to think that if Trek had a system like that used by Star Wars for determining canoncity, then a lot of the potential headaches involved with so many tie-ins would be far less than it would be now. That sort of system works best when it's established early on. And I think it could be more profitable for Paramount in some respects, because they can make more products to sell. The televised media, while still being the prime source, doesn't necessarily have to be the only source for supporting the franchise.