Alright, my final words on this whole topic as well. Thanks to everyone who contributed with explanations. I was genuinely curious about how other people think and why, that's why I kept responding. I realize I could've let it go pages ago, but I felt compelled to respond to new posts and got carried away cause continuity and canon matter to me. Other people discuss the meticulous details of equally fictional warp speeds and distances, or MCU and SW at length in ST threads, so I didn't see why this would be a problem. The last part about certain aspects of physiology were of interest to me because I minored in physiology and it initially seemed to contradict what I remembered from textbooks. I shall endeavor to be a less persistent trekkie biologist.
Exactly so. And, I am of the personal opinion that its OK for fans to build there when stories don't provide every single detail.
Canon, Sony, Minolta, Guanlong, and a handmade medium format designed and constructed by an Eastern European fellow named Cezary.
Agreed. Considering the distance we are now from TOS, we can also choose to disregard any later building on top of whatever was established, or we can choose to incorporate. Fans are fickle as hell.
I tend to just break it down into timelines where the broad strokes are relatively the same, but the details are different.
@BillJ I’ve ordered the analogue versions of Star Trek Starmaps and Star Fleet Cartographer’s Reference Library. I’ve got the sickness bad now, lol
Professionally in the sense that I make money at it, not so in the sense that I don't make a living at it. More of a photographer, although I studied filmmaking and I've done video production as part of my job.
Nice! I'm a videographer and editor. I've wanted to try photography too. I work at a public access station. I record local government meetings, school sports, and cover town events. On the side, I do independent film. Very independent, little to no budget. (IMDB link) (YouTube Link) Anyway, back to Arguing About Canon.
Just sharing some cultural meta-theory here in case anyone is interested in this particular lens. The cultural distinction between canon and non-canon is the same distinction as that between Modernism and post-modernism (or post-structuralism). Modernism is characterized by an almost obsessive desire to "pin it all down" in math, physics, etc. whereas post-modernism delights int the simultaneous existence of parallel and frequently contradictory lenses and viewpoints. (Fwiw, the attempts by Modernism to decide what "is" once and for all were all miserable failures, and this drove the emergence of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem, Turing's Halting Problem, quantum physics, etc.) In 20th century media, for example, comic books embraced the "many stories" approach and didn't try to observe any kind of continuity or canon at all, just lots of "issues" and stories. Since fans are more obsessive about canon than makers this is one of the reasons that the contemporary MCU has tried to deliberately fracture the idea of "canon" in favor of a What If and "multiverse" playing field for story-telling. Not coincidentally, this is the same trick that Abrams pulled on his Star Trek reboot. (But remember that the TNG movies threw existing Zephram Cochrane lore out the window for the film First Contact, and most folks didn't mind, and also didn't require a "multiverse" explanation, although one could argue that the time travel in First Contact already performs the same trick as Abrams's ). This is why the idea of "head canon" is so valuable. We all love what we love, and head canon celebrates the notion that we can all bring our own unique perspectives and thoughts and opinions to bear on what matters to us from our favorite influences (Star Trek, MCU, etc.). Personally I love Patton Oswalt's extended Star Wars rant for a great and hilarious example: Not trying to "answer" the question from the original post, just sharing another perspective. :-)
Personally, I don't see the need to have the term "head canon." By nature humans are going to have a variety of interpretations, especially of artistic works. I suppose the term is helpful in terms of clarifying that this isn't what happened on screen but my own interpretation of it. I just find it an odd term because, well, we all will have our own viewpoint of what we value from the story, canon or not.
It's not going to change. Fans want a sense of control over their beloved franchise and worry is as close to control as they can get.