The Way to Eden - Canon?
- Thread starter TiberiusK
- Start date
Thanks. I honestly don't give much of a damn about it myself (though I'll occasionally point out that something is or isn't canonical), but I really hate to see the word misused the way it tends to be.
Could be my BA in English Writing showing itself...stupid college degree.
"We don't have a choice in what's canon by the very definition of canon. It's not a matter of opinion." (DonIago)
Where's this definition? Dictionary.com talks about generally-accepted sets of rules within organizations, in the passive voice, making it all sort of vague. Is there some fan dictionary that I was supposed to buy?
"Canon" in fan terms is an informal sort of fan invention. It's not possible therefore to get very technical about it. It's a word we pull out to talk about what's acceptable to us, and what we can or can't suspend disbelief in. Your absolutist definition is fine, and is useful for you, but it doesn't serve me well, and I get to disagree.
Anyway, use whatever word you want, but there are possible plots insane enough that, were they to get made into a ST film, fans would have to reject them. If they trampled shamelessly over continuity, for one thing. If you can't reconcile it with the rest of ST, at all, it can't be canon. How could it be? They call the Vulcan "Bones" and he's purple. There. Paramount-sanctioned uncanon Trek.
It won't be that blatant, of course.
Where's this definition? Dictionary.com talks about generally-accepted sets of rules within organizations, in the passive voice, making it all sort of vague. Is there some fan dictionary that I was supposed to buy?
"Canon" in fan terms is an informal sort of fan invention. It's not possible therefore to get very technical about it. It's a word we pull out to talk about what's acceptable to us, and what we can or can't suspend disbelief in. Your absolutist definition is fine, and is useful for you, but it doesn't serve me well, and I get to disagree.
Anyway, use whatever word you want, but there are possible plots insane enough that, were they to get made into a ST film, fans would have to reject them. If they trampled shamelessly over continuity, for one thing. If you can't reconcile it with the rest of ST, at all, it can't be canon. How could it be? They call the Vulcan "Bones" and he's purple. There. Paramount-sanctioned uncanon Trek.
It won't be that blatant, of course.
The rules that are generally accepted are not created by the public, but by the organization. In this case that organization is Paramount, or CBS, or whoever. It most certainly is not you or I or anyone on this board who doesn't have authority within those organizations.
Canon is not a fan invention. As stated it's a Paramount/CBS invention as applied to Star Trek. I'm pretty sure this is already discussed in a FAQ somewhere on this board. It's exceedingly easy to get technical about it- if it was shown on screen then, in general terms, it's canon. If it was not shown on screen, then ultimately it's _not_ canon. That's all there is to it. You can't use the term canon to describe what's acceptable to the fans because the fans don't have the authority to define canon. Maybe it is absolutist, but once we start saying 'this word doesn't mean this, it means that' communication breaks down in any case.
Regardless of how insane a Trek idea was, if it was branded by the authorities who control Trek as being Star Trek, it would be canon, just perhaps not fan-accepted canon. As evidenced, within the canon of Star Trek there's pleny of room for self-contradiction.
Canon is not a fan invention. As stated it's a Paramount/CBS invention as applied to Star Trek. I'm pretty sure this is already discussed in a FAQ somewhere on this board. It's exceedingly easy to get technical about it- if it was shown on screen then, in general terms, it's canon. If it was not shown on screen, then ultimately it's _not_ canon. That's all there is to it. You can't use the term canon to describe what's acceptable to the fans because the fans don't have the authority to define canon. Maybe it is absolutist, but once we start saying 'this word doesn't mean this, it means that' communication breaks down in any case.
Regardless of how insane a Trek idea was, if it was branded by the authorities who control Trek as being Star Trek, it would be canon, just perhaps not fan-accepted canon. As evidenced, within the canon of Star Trek there's pleny of room for self-contradiction.
I don't want to get into an argument on what is or isn't canon, but I do find the notion of Paramount declaring what it is to be really strange - and even weirder that anyone would want to accept these strictures.
No, it's simply an invention of Gene Roddenberry's then-Star Trek Office at Paramount, which Paramount, then Viacom and now Paramount/CBS were happy to accept as to what aspects of Star Trek should be respected as "canonical" by the official ST licensees.
However, since Roddenberry's death in 1991, Paula Block and her team at Licensing have not had "the memo" enforced upon them, and the licensees have had a much easier time slipping non-canonical references into the ST tie-ins. The Star Trek Office closed after Roddenberry's death and Richard Arnold, um, left his post as Star Trek Archivist at Paramount.
They're not imposing it on fans, it's to do with the official licensees, and to help them fast track the approvals process. Things get approved for publication faster if the writers don't get too hooked up in stuff that wasn't on the actual shows, and there's less chance someone will try to sue Paramount. For example, Filmation's kzinti (TAS) were still the property of Larry Niven, not Paramount.
For a time, Gene Roddenberry and Richard Arnold were (perhaps overly) concerned that some ST tie-ins were being based on elements from other tie-ins, and they wanted the licensees to base material only on the live-action, as aired, ST material. No more of DC, Pocket and FAS sharing new ship tech, no more of original characters hopping from novel to novel, etc.
Roddenberry got tired of being asked at conventions why Kirk and Picard didn't make use of technology etc (from the "Star Trek Starfleet Technical Manual", FASA RPGs, "Star Trek Maps", etc) to solve dilemmas in the ST movies and TNG. So he declared everything else non-canonical. Problem solved.
(But: after Roddenberry's death, "the memo" is no longer enforced as strictly as it was.)
You, however, are welcome to include whatever you like in your personal continuity. Paramount doesn't care what you include, but if you were an official licensee of a ST tie-in you have to conform to their specifications.
I'm more than happy to accept "The Way to Eden" as canon - after watching ENT, I realized that even this episode turns out to be reasonably insightful and far more enjoyable than anything I saw in the last series. If it weren't for the camp aspects, the actual premise of the story is as strong as any other decent Trek story: the possibility that technology and progress can create disharmony and disease, and not simply an unquestioned Utopia.
Sounds familiar ...
In fact, "The Way to Eden" is now one of my favorite episodes of TOS (but nothing will ever redeem "Spock's Brain"
).
Sounds familiar ...
In fact, "The Way to Eden" is now one of my favorite episodes of TOS (but nothing will ever redeem "Spock's Brain"
).Well animated isn't 'live' to begin with.
I would argue that since Roddenberry was the Authority, if he decanonized TAS than it would stand. The fans may not agree, but I already established that the fans don't control the canon.
I think I did say 'generally' earlier in regards to onscreen = canon because TAS (and I think ST5) may or may not be considered exceptions to the general rule.
I would argue that since Roddenberry was the Authority, if he decanonized TAS than it would stand. The fans may not agree, but I already established that the fans don't control the canon.
I think I did say 'generally' earlier in regards to onscreen = canon because TAS (and I think ST5) may or may not be considered exceptions to the general rule.
Before "the memo" of 1989, Roddenberry happily embraced TAS as part of ST. In interviews prior to TNG, it was often said that there were 78 episodes of TOS, plus 22 TAS making 100 adventures in all. (The actual production number of "Encounter at Farpoint" - coincidentally - ended up being called 101.)
With the advent of TNG, ST tie-in licensing was seen to be getting out of hand. At the same time, Filmation was being sold off, Larry Niven was commissioning for "The Man-Kzin Wars" science fiction anthologies - and trying to sell a "Ringworld" RPG licence - and one of Pocket's ST novels ("TNG: The Captain's Honor") was announced as featuring the kzinti.
So, TAS was removed from canon, to stave off any possibility of legal argument, and to force the licencees and writers of novels/comics to focus on "the big seven" cast of TOS and "the big eight" of TNG, rather than create (and share) their own casts of regulars, as they'd been doing. FASA lost its RPG license; Arex and M'Ress were physically erased from DC Comics' TOS movie-era Series II comics; and "The Captain's Honor" got another felinoid race called the M'dok; and the licensees were asked to ignore TAS from then on.
You also need to remember the poltical situation at Paramount in 1989. Roddenberry was feuding with David Gerrold and DC Fontana about TNG - and both of them were luminaries associated very closely with TAS. Decanonizing TAS at that point was probably a strong message about their "value" to ST.
"The memo" of 1989 confirmed that canon referred to live-action, as aired ST episodes and movies. Not counted as canon were filmed sequences made for computer games, filmed pieces made for use in live venues such as Universal Studios, TAS, and (as always) licensed tie-in novels, comics, RPG manuals, mini-biographies on action figure cardbacks, etc.
However, in comments on UseNet and GEnie, attempting to explain aspects of "the memo" from the then-ST Office, I recall Richard Arnold mentioning that, as a result of Roddenberry's comments on ST V being ignored by Paramount, GR considered "parts" of that movie "to be apocryphal". (Seemingly, Sarek having another son prior to Spock; and McCoy committing euthanasia.) Previously, with ST II, he had threatened to remove his name from the credits if he was unhappy with the film as a whole, as a sign to the fans.
However, Roddenberry died in 1991 and one of the very first books out after his death was the novelization of "TNG: Unification", in which Jeri Taylor mentions the Phylosians.
So, the restrictions were loosened at Paramount/Viacom/CBS Consumer Products - and remain loosened, but Paramount/CBS have never officially retracted "the memo". Neither did the 1989 memo anticipate the canonicity of director's cut ST movies, which is why fans continue to quibble.
Right, that's fine then since I'm not likely to be a licensee any time soon. I do note however that a lot of fans seem to use the word "canon" to denote whether or not something should be counted in continuity. What's that all about?
it's canon but i prefer not count it in my continuity. Tiburonians are fine...the rest, not so much.
the only non-canon episode is VGR "Threshold" cuz braga decanonised it by having Paris say "i've never flown at transwarp speed" in a later episode.
or is that just YATI*?
*Yet Another Trek Inconsistency
the only non-canon episode is VGR "Threshold" cuz braga decanonised it by having Paris say "i've never flown at transwarp speed" in a later episode.
or is that just YATI*?
*Yet Another Trek Inconsistency
i won't argue with that...
Canon can never be judged subjectively. You can poll a thousand Trek fans and ask them whether they thought "City on the Edge of Forever" was a better episode than "Spock's Brain" and even if a thousand of a thousand people said they thought "City" was the better offering, that would not be established as a fact.
Actually, I doubt in a real life situation that you'd ever get that one hundred percent consensus - there would doubtless be those two or three deviant fans who claim that they liked "Spock's Brain" better!
In order for its canonicity to be called into question, an episode of any series, video or literary, has to so blatantly violate previously established groundrules established in the fictional universe so that its existence as a story within that larger framework is too problematic for it to be incorporated.
From a strictly objective viewpoint, the concept of the Guardian of Forever is just as ridiculous and implausible as a race of brian-stealing miniskirted women. We just like CEF better because it tells a more satisfying story than SB.
As for "The Way to Eden", I hardly think its great Star Trek by any means, but I also think that this is one of those epsiodes which gets bashed way, way too much. It has a lot of good qualities. And I think the whole thing is kind of a neat statement on the hypocrisy of the hippies of that era (how they preached peace and love but some were willing to blow up buildings and kill people who they opposed politically).
Actually, I doubt in a real life situation that you'd ever get that one hundred percent consensus - there would doubtless be those two or three deviant fans who claim that they liked "Spock's Brain" better!
In order for its canonicity to be called into question, an episode of any series, video or literary, has to so blatantly violate previously established groundrules established in the fictional universe so that its existence as a story within that larger framework is too problematic for it to be incorporated.
From a strictly objective viewpoint, the concept of the Guardian of Forever is just as ridiculous and implausible as a race of brian-stealing miniskirted women. We just like CEF better because it tells a more satisfying story than SB.
As for "The Way to Eden", I hardly think its great Star Trek by any means, but I also think that this is one of those epsiodes which gets bashed way, way too much. It has a lot of good qualities. And I think the whole thing is kind of a neat statement on the hypocrisy of the hippies of that era (how they preached peace and love but some were willing to blow up buildings and kill people who they opposed politically).
Similar threads
- Locked
