What's in YOUR 'head canon'?

[Albertese]

You can buy the hybrid alien who looks just like a human with pointy ears, but him being descended from a consulting detective living in 1890s London is where your suspension of disbelief breaks down?

I toyed with the idea that the Sherlock Holmes canon was actual history in Star Trek. It's sort of a fun idea to be reading those stories in the knowledge that Vulcans and so forth are out there currently ignoring his exploits. But then we have Data being a fan of the novels and multiple episodes where it's pretty explicit that Holmes was fictional.

So that's where my suspension of disbelief breaks down.

--Alex

 

[Tracy Trek]

Doesn't the book Ishmael imply that Aaron Stemple is an ancestor of Spock? Odd that one of Spock's human ancestors should resemble his Vulcan father.

Yes, that was mentioned in the book Ishmael. That Amanda was a descendant of Stemple.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

But then we have Data being a fan of the novels and multiple episodes where it's pretty explicit that Holmes was fictional.

So that's where my suspension of disbelief breaks down.

Ah, I gotcha. I was forgetting about those.

 

[The Old Mixer]

Still, if one wanted to go that route...wasn't Holmes one of those series that used the conceit of being the fictionalized accounts of an actual person's exploits?

 

[JonnyQuest037]

Still, if one wanted to go that route...wasn't Holmes one of those series that used the conceit of being the fictionalized accounts of an actual person's exploits?

Sort of. Doyle had Holmes actually criticize Watson's accounts as overly-romanticized in a few stories. It was meta before meta was a thing.

You might be thinking of a common conceit in the Wold Newton Universe, where many fictional characters like Doc Savage were proposed to be real people who had different names in real life (Doc was really "James Clarke Wildman" according to Phillip Jose Farmer). Many of the adventurers in the WNU like Holmes, Tarzan, and Doc Savage were thought to be only fictional.

 

[The Old Mixer]

No, I was thinking of Holmes, as you described. Fleming did something similar at one point in the Bond series. (Think it was the obituary in You Only Live Twice.)

 

[JonnyQuest037]

Fleming did something similar at one point in the Bond series. (Think it was the obituary in You Only Live Twice.)

Yes, it was. Neither Doyle nor Fleming ever implied that their characters' real names were any different from what was given in the stories, though.

 

[Albertese]

If we're talking about Ian Fleming's James Bond, then I would add that in my James Bond head canon, "James Bond 007" is the whole code name and each "Bond" is actually a specially trained recruit who takes on the Bond name and persona. This way you get to have all the Bonds played by all the actors in the same setting.

This also allows Sean Connery's "Bond" to have the real name of John Patrick Mason, who, once Her Majesty's secret service was finished with him, ended up imprisoned, but, being super resourceful kept escaping until finally being locked up in Alcatraz for a while, but then years later, when former US military terrorists took the island prison over and threatened to launch nerve gas on the mainland, he was tapped to help break in to stop them.

That's right. The Rock is a secret Bond film.

Wait, weren't we talking about Star Trek...

--Alex

 

[The Old Mixer]

If we're talking about Ian Fleming's James Bond

Ian Fleming's James Bond was definitely one guy who was born with that name. You're proposing a head canon solution to something in the movies, which are a completely different animal from the original novels.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

That's right. The Rock is a secret Bond film.

Ian Fleming's James Bond was definitely one guy who was born with that name. You're proposing a head canon solution to something in the movies, which are a completely different animal from the original novels.

Not to mention that that Rock fan theory doesn't work with the timeline of the Connery Bond films at all. The Rock says that Mason was locked up in Alcatraz in 1963, before the Kennedy assassination. Connery played Bond in films released from 1962-1971.

 

[Iamnotspock]

Not to mention that that Rock fan theory doesn't work with the timeline of the Connery Bond films at all. The Rock says that Mason was locked up in Alcatraz in 1963, before the Kennedy assassination. Connery played Bond in films released from 1962-1971.

Also, Daniel Craig's Bond was definitely born with that name, per his parents' gravestones, and we see Roger Moore placing flowers on George Lazenby's wife's grave.

 

[Albertese]

Ian Fleming's James Bond was definitely one guy who was born with that name. You're proposing a head canon solution to something in the movies, which are a completely different animal from the original novels.

That's fair.

Not to mention that that Rock fan theory doesn't work with the timeline of the Connery Bond films at all. The Rock says that Mason was locked up in Alcatraz in 1963, before the Kennedy assassination. Connery played Bond in films released from 1962-1971.

Falsified records for plausible deniability.

Also, Daniel Craig's Bond was definitely born with that name, per his parents' gravestones, and we see Roger Moore placing flowers on George Lazenby's wife's grave.

"Bond" is not so uncommon a name. There's no reason one of the "James Bond 007" agents could not have been born with it by coincidence.

As we've seen with several of the examples of Star Trek head canon up thread, it doesn't really have to agree with all the on-screen details. The whole point of head-canon is that you're squinting a bit to fit the franchise into a slightly different mold which is more fun for you than the creator's intent alone. So, I'm quite comfortable with ignoring certain details here and there. As can many other fans, as is demonstrated by the totality of this thread.

Have fun with it guys, "it's just a TV show."

--Alex

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Still, if one wanted to go that route...wasn't Holmes one of those series that used the conceit of being the fictionalized accounts of an actual person's exploits?

Quite.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

"Bond" is not so uncommon a name. There's no reason one of the "James Bond 007" agents could not have been born with it by coincidence.

So Daniel Craig's character is born with the name James Bond, joins the British Secret Service... and is given the code name "James Bond"?

As we've seen with several of the examples of Star Trek head canon up thread, it doesn't really have to agree with all the on-screen details.

Or any, apparently. I'm fine with fan theories that require a bit of creative interpretation, but throwing out six of the seven Bond movies that Connery did to make The Rock theory work is a bit much for me. Where's the fun if you have to bend things that far out of shape in order to believe it?

 

[Tenacity]

Doc Savage were proposed to be real people who had different names in real life (Doc was really "James Clarke Wildman"

Naomi Wildman is descended from Doc Savage?

"The little girl of bronze."

 

[Albertese]

So Daniel Craig's character is born with the name James Bond, joins the British Secret Service... and is given the code name "James Bond"?

"James" is not so unusual a name either. Besides, refresh my memory, don't we only know Daniel Craig's parents are named Bond? Does that preclude him having been born as Mike Bond? Or Terry Bond? Or any other given name?

Or any, apparently. I'm fine with fan theories that require a bit of creative interpretation, but throwing out six of the seven Bond movies that Connery did to make The Rock theory work is a bit much for me. Where's the fun if you have to bend things that far out of shape in order to believe it?

You seem to misunderstand. The Rock theory is based on the assumption that the dates for Mason's imprisonment have been falsified to provide cover for the six Connery Bond films. Not the other way around. That'd be dumb.

--Alex

 

[JonnyQuest037]

"James" is not so unusual a name either. Besides, refresh my memory, don't we only know Daniel Craig's parents are named Bond? Does that preclude him having been born as Mike Bond? Or Terry Bond? Or any other given name?

I wasn't questioning the likelihood of a child being born with the name "James Bond." I was questioning the likelihood and common sense of giving a spy a codename that's exactly the same as his given name.

You seem to misunderstand. The Rock theory is based on the assumption that the dates for Mason's imprisonment have been falsified to provide cover for the six Connery Bond films. Not the other way around. That'd be dumb.

No dumber than throwing the continuity of the Bond films out of whack to accommodate a mediocre Michael Bay film. And didn't Mason himself say that he'd been imprisoned since 1963? What reason could he possibly have to go along with that cover story?

No matter how you slice it, it makes no sense.

 

[Tenacity]

In the opening scene of Casino Royale, the station chief Dryden knew Bond prior to him becoming a double oh, he knew him by the name Bond.

 

[Albertese]

I wasn't questioning the likelihood of a child being born with the name "James Bond." I was questioning the likelihood and common sense of giving a spy a codename that's exactly the same as his given name.


No dumber than throwing the continuity of the Bond films out of whack to accommodate a mediocre Michael Bay film. And didn't Mason himself say that he'd been imprisoned since 1963? What reason could he possibly have to go along with that cover story?

No matter how you slice it, it makes no sense.

You're probably right.

 

[The Old Mixer]

I just think of the Bond films as being a lot like comic books...sliding timelines, retcons, soft and hard reboots, and changing creative teams with dramatically different styles.