General "Canon/Filler" Debate/Discussion

Discussion regarding the entirety of the franchise in a general (meta) sense, including such aspects as: production, trends, merchandise, fan culture, and more.

Moderators: General Help, Kanzenshuu Staff

User avatar
TheGreatness25
I Live Here
Posts: 4924
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 9:36 am

Re: General "Canon/Filler" Debate/Discussion

Post by TheGreatness25 » Thu Jul 21, 2016 3:51 pm

Of all the made-up terms, "head canon" is really the biggie? We have a ton of fan terms. "Mystic Gohan," "Bootekns," "Boohan," "power scaling," "feats" (as used by DB fans), "planet busters," "universe busters," "SP Cell," "Grade II Super Saiyan," "Grade III Super Saiyan," and the one that seems to be making waves is "head canon?" I always interpreted "head canon" as one's personal viewpoint of the continuity of a story. It's like the second the word "canon" is used, it turns into a whole thing. If my head canon is that Cooler existed in the main timeline, you could never convince me otherwise simply because it's a personal way of viewing the story.

I don't know, what's the big deal with "head canon?" Technically, anything we've seen has been part of the story and any derivative idea that is not directly contradicted is fully valid to be someone's "head canon." Lots of people think that Batman: The Animated Series is "canon," but that's not the original Batman. To some people, the 60's Batman is "canon." To each their own and the beauty is that it's just a way for fans to enjoy the story in their own individualized way.

User avatar
Anime Kitten
I Live Here
Posts: 4271
Joined: Mon May 23, 2016 3:53 pm
Contact:

Re: General "Canon/Filler" Debate/Discussion

Post by Anime Kitten » Thu Jul 21, 2016 3:53 pm

ABED wrote:But do you need Sir Arthur Conan Doyle to say "this happened in my story" for you to agree the stories are canon?
I don't exactly follow. Do you mean if someone like Toriyama said stuff is canon? If it's officially stated to be by more than one source (Toriyama, Toei, etc.), then it's canon.
MyAnimeList | AniList
Discord: suchmisfortune

User avatar
ABED
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 20276
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 10:23 am
Location: Skippack, PA
Contact:

Re: General "Canon/Filler" Debate/Discussion

Post by ABED » Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:00 pm

We're in a thread about this topic, so of course there will be a lot of back and forth. I don't know why Mystic Gohan would be a big issue. My issue with head canon is what I've stated. I don't think it's helpful, it's contradictory and not nearly as clear
If my head canon is that Cooler existed in the main timeline, you could never convince me otherwise simply because it's a personal way of viewing the story.
Not the issue.
Lots of people think that Batman: The Animated Series is "canon,"
But what do you mean by that? Not canon to the comics? BTAS has its own canon.
Do you mean if someone like Toriyama said stuff is canon? If it's officially stated to be by more than one source (Toriyama, Toei, etc.), then it's canon.
Am I just not clear in my writing? I don't know how many ways I can say it. An author doesn't have to explicitly state something is canon for there to be canon. The Sherlock Holmes stories he wrote are canon even though I don't think the term existed (at least not in this context) back then. You don't need Toriyama to flat out state that his Dragon Ball manga is canon. The only issue is when it's ambiguous like in the case of the alternate ending.
The biggest truths aren't original. The truth is ketchup. It's Jim Belushi. Its job isn't to blow our minds. It's to be within reach.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take - Wayne Gretzky" - Michael Scott
Happiness is climate, not weather.

User avatar
Anime Kitten
I Live Here
Posts: 4271
Joined: Mon May 23, 2016 3:53 pm
Contact:

Re: General "Canon/Filler" Debate/Discussion

Post by Anime Kitten » Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:03 pm

I'm sure you've said if before, so I apologize, but what exactly is your definition of "canon" other than what is accepted as official events?
MyAnimeList | AniList
Discord: suchmisfortune

User avatar
MetaMoss
Patreon Supporter
Posts: 614
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 7:14 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon area

Re: General "Canon/Filler" Debate/Discussion

Post by MetaMoss » Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:05 pm

ABED wrote:
"Head canon" or "personal canon" is a notion that has the term canon on it because it translates a personal preference regarding what the canon should be. Therefore, it includes the term canon to briefly and accurately transmit the idea of what the notion is referring to and in what terms.

There is no better or more efficient way to transmit that idea in a two-word notion or expression, and it transmits it accurately, without it being confused with actual canon. There's no problem with it and there's no need to complicate the issue.
What did people ever do before we had the term head canon? Sorry if that's sarcastic, but this isn't a phenomena that was in need of a more succinct term. It comes off as someone trying to have their cake and eat it too by combining the two. Head canon makes as much sense as saying, "In my mind, the official story is GT did occur."
Just because you don't find value in the concept of a headcanon doesn't mean it has no use or purpose. Turns out, there's a whole bunch of people out there with different viewpoints, wants, and needs, and some of those folks have a use for the headcanon.
ABED wrote:
What is "implicitly" saying events happened? Is it just releasing a story depicting those events through official channels?

I assume official bodies means folks like Toriyama, Toei and Shueshia. Am I correct on that?
You are correct, sir.
This would a great way of defining canon, except those producing Dragon Ball don't seem to be too worried about having everything fit together nicely. We've got differences between the anime and manga, the changes in the Kanzenban, the recent movies vs. their retellings in Super, the Bardock Special vs. DB Minus, and plenty of other disconnects. So far, there hasn't been much (if any) official word on how to reconcile all these events into a cohesive universe, unlike, say, Star Wars and its way of handling the old EU canon. I'm not all that concerned with internal consistency in DB, so this lack of official guidance doesn't bother me, but what of the fans that do enjoy having a cohesive story that is internally consistent? Turns out, fans from many different fandoms have created this concept of a "personal canon" (or headcanon), where a fan picks and chooses the official material that they find to be internally consistent with each other to make the cohesive story they want out of a franchise. With Dragon Ball, you can have a headcanon that is just the Tankobon manga release, or maybe you have one that is the Kanzenban, Jaco, DB Minus, and the new movies. Maybe you count everything in the anime that doesn't contradict the manga, along with movies 9 and 13 and GT. Point is, it's just a way fans interact with the series in a way that gives them enjoyment and the satisfaction of having a series that completely "makes sense".
"Perfect" is the enemy of the good. True for Cell and true for real life.
Don't forget to slow down and enjoy yourself.

User avatar
Nejishiki
I Live Here
Posts: 2406
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2016 11:45 am

Re: General "Canon/Filler" Debate/Discussion

Post by Nejishiki » Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:10 pm

Super Saiyan Grades are actually terminology originating from Goku's dialogue in the manga and the anime-comic Trunks feature, being elaborated further in Daizenshuu 2. The more you know (It has nothing to do with your overall point. I just wanted to share it wasn't created by fans), carry on. :)

User avatar
sintzu
Banned
Posts: 13583
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 1:41 pm

Re: General "Canon/Filler" Debate/Discussion

Post by sintzu » Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:15 pm

ABED wrote:
Am I just not clear in my writing ? I don't know how many ways I can say it.

The only issue is when it's ambiguous like in the case of the alternate ending.
Maybe he/she is just trying to make you question your sanity. :lol:

Wouldn't an alternate ending mean it's completely different ? I view the new ending in the same way I view the BOG extended cut, it's a bit different but overall it's the same so I don't see why there's a debate over which one is canon.
July 9th 2018 will be remembered as the day Broly became canon.

User avatar
ABED
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 20276
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 10:23 am
Location: Skippack, PA
Contact:

Re: General "Canon/Filler" Debate/Discussion

Post by ABED » Thu Jul 21, 2016 4:36 pm

An alternate ending is different from an extended cut, at least if we're being very literal. Of course there are extended cuts that use different scenes, but generally speaking an extended cut is the same story but with more material, whereas an alternate ending is when the story has a different ending.
We've got differences between the anime and manga, the changes in the Kanzenban, the recent movies vs. their retellings in Super, the Bardock Special vs. DB Minus, and plenty of other disconnects.
I think some of the problem is that many seem to think that there's only one canon for any given story, but the way I think of it is there can be multiple canons if there are different versions of the story. For instance, the manga and anime each have their own canon.
With Dragon Ball, you can have a headcanon that is just the Tankobon manga release
But this isn't a version of canon, it's just the material they think is the most internally consistent and why do people feel the need to create terms like head canon when that description is perfectly good?

Either the term "canon" isn't well understood or there are too many definitions under that umbrella to be helpful. Some think canon means material that has "stuck" over time regardless of things like retcons and changes and reboots. For example, Bruce Wayne sees his parents die in front of him when he was a child, Superman comes from Krypton and has a vulnerability to radioactive pieces of his homeworld, Oliver Queen was marooned on an island for a while where he learned archery. However, lots of other things in comics are in flux. The Silver Age is different from the Modern Age or the New 52. What canon means to them is those events that have stood the test of time, even events that weren't there in the beginning, are "canon". However, that's different from what we're talking about. So does canon mean one or the other OR does it mean what some comic book fans take to mean canon OR does it mean both?
The biggest truths aren't original. The truth is ketchup. It's Jim Belushi. Its job isn't to blow our minds. It's to be within reach.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take - Wayne Gretzky" - Michael Scott
Happiness is climate, not weather.

User avatar
TheGreatness25
I Live Here
Posts: 4924
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 9:36 am

Re: General "Canon/Filler" Debate/Discussion

Post by TheGreatness25 » Thu Jul 21, 2016 6:10 pm

About the Grade II and III thing: I've never seen it referred to as such. Additionally, I never personally read the Daizenshuu 2 considering aye cant reed it guud :| Not at all, in fact.

To me, there's manga canon (42 volumes of Dragon Ball/I'm on the fence about Super), anime canon (DB, DBZ, and DBGT... but might have to reevaluate that), and movie canon. If you're talking about the true story of DB which kind of transcends the media form, then there's plenty of room for "head canon" as Toriyama signed off on a lot of stuff, so who's to say if that which he signed off on shouldn't be included in the story?

User avatar
MetaMoss
Patreon Supporter
Posts: 614
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 7:14 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon area

Re: General "Canon/Filler" Debate/Discussion

Post by MetaMoss » Thu Jul 21, 2016 7:15 pm

ABED wrote:
We've got differences between the anime and manga, the changes in the Kanzenban, the recent movies vs. their retellings in Super, the Bardock Special vs. DB Minus, and plenty of other disconnects.
I think some of the problem is that many seem to think that there's only one canon for any given story, but the way I think of it is there can be multiple canons if there are different versions of the story. For instance, the manga and anime each have their own canon.
Lots of fans separate manga and anime into their own "canons" (now that I think about it, it might be more proper to call those "continuities"), from what I've seen. It makes sense, but nothing has ever been officially said that separates the two in that way, so that's technically a fan-made "canon". The reason why personal canon is so widespread in Dragon Ball is because there is no official source saying "This is how it all fits together".
ABED wrote:
With Dragon Ball, you can have a headcanon that is just the Tankobon manga release
But this isn't a version of canon, it's just the material they think is the most internally consistent and why do people feel the need to create terms like head canon when that description is perfectly good?
Why say "peanut butter" when it isn't properly butter and the description "paste made of ground peanuts" suffices? I don't see why you're so set on decrying the creation of a new word (especially one that's been around for a good while). Yes, it's not a proper "canon" in the traditional definition of canon, but language tends to change over time, and people find new uses for some words.
ABED wrote: Either the term "canon" isn't well understood or there are too many definitions under that umbrella to be helpful. Some think canon means material that has "stuck" over time regardless of things like retcons and changes and reboots. For example, Bruce Wayne sees his parents die in front of him when he was a child, Superman comes from Krypton and has a vulnerability to radioactive pieces of his homeworld, Oliver Queen was marooned on an island for a while where he learned archery. However, lots of other things in comics are in flux. The Silver Age is different from the Modern Age or the New 52. What canon means to them is those events that have stood the test of time, even events that weren't there in the beginning, are "canon". However, that's different from what we're talking about. So does canon mean one or the other OR does it mean what some comic book fans take to mean canon OR does it mean both?

The difference between how DC does their canon and how DB does its is pretty huge and kinda the crux of this issue of headcanon: DC acknowledges its canon and knows how to keep with it, even through continuity reboots. When DC's current continuity gets messy enough, they'll hit some reset/reboot button and start anew with a fresh continuity, which tends to be internally consistent with itself. Pre-Flashpoint (to whatever the previous reboot was) is consistent with itself, but not with the New 52, and vice versa, and this is well-laid out by DC's creators. Dragon Ball has no such care put to its stories. Toei and Shueisha just put new content out with (seemingly) very little care with how it meshes with previous or future installments. What does Super mean for GT's place in the Dragon World? Toei ain't saying. Fans, either used to or, at least, aware of other franchises that have well thought-out canons, fill the desire for them themselves with the headcanon. It's a canon you made in your head, for your head's enjoyment, really.

As for what's "canon" really means for fiction, I'd say it can vary wildly, depending on the series. I keep to the off-the-cuff definition of "How the installments of a franchise fit together into a fictional universe", which seems to be how fandoms tend to use the term these days. How this plays out exactly is the fun part. Looking at the first case where somebody used "canon" with a fictional series with Doyle's Sherlock Holmes, canon here is very simple. A single creator, Doyle, wrote a series of stories all designed to fit together neatly, and they do (give or take a slight retcon of the protagonist's death). Then we have the aforementioned DC Comics canon, where there are several continuities that all act as their own consistent stories, where there have been a multitude of different creators, but the whole deal is under the control of the DC editors. The old Star Wars Expanded Universe canon had a multitude of creators attempting to create a single cohesive continuity, but had the "levels of canon" system where the installments were placed in a hierarchy, and the installments with no conflicts above them were officially in the main continuity (though this could change at any time). There's plenty of other examples, but I think I've made my point there: there's no one way to do a canon for your fictional series.

Side note: Mike did a whole blog post five years ago on the issue of Dragon Ball canon, which I think will be well worth the read for anyone reading this thread. There's also this podcast episode from 8 years ago that also tackles the issue.
"Perfect" is the enemy of the good. True for Cell and true for real life.
Don't forget to slow down and enjoy yourself.

User avatar
ABED
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 20276
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 10:23 am
Location: Skippack, PA
Contact:

Re: General "Canon/Filler" Debate/Discussion

Post by ABED » Thu Jul 21, 2016 7:48 pm

The reason why personal canon
No such thing.
Why say "peanut butter" when it isn't properly butter and the description "paste made of ground peanuts" suffices?
Because peanut butter isn't ambiguous. It doesn't have multiple, ill defined definitions. It is what it is.
Yes, it's not a proper "canon" in the traditional definition of canon, but language tends to change over time, and people find new uses for some words.
It's a bad definition and yes, language does change, but it can often be corrupted, packaged with disperate concepts (what Ayn Rand calls a "package deal"). If it's confusing and vague, chances are, it's a bad definition.
DC acknowledges its canon and knows how to keep with it, even through continuity reboots
But it doesn't. It's constantly changing, being rebooted, retconned, and altered in numerous other ways. It's up to the judgment of DC editors as to what is canon, but editors often change. Dragon Ball didn't have to put such thought into it because Toriyama wrote the manga. He didn't have to come out and say anything. The stories were canon by their nature.
The biggest truths aren't original. The truth is ketchup. It's Jim Belushi. Its job isn't to blow our minds. It's to be within reach.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take - Wayne Gretzky" - Michael Scott
Happiness is climate, not weather.

User avatar
MetaMoss
Patreon Supporter
Posts: 614
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 7:14 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon area

Re: General "Canon/Filler" Debate/Discussion

Post by MetaMoss » Thu Jul 21, 2016 8:13 pm

ABED wrote:
The reason why personal canon
No such thing.
Fine. Don't believe in the existence of a concept. I'm going to keep using it, and so will plenty of others. It's a really useful concept when dealing with fandoms, I have to say.
ABED wrote:
Yes, it's not a proper "canon" in the traditional definition of canon, but language tends to change over time, and people find new uses for some words.
It's a bad definition and yes, language does change, but it can often be corrupted, packaged with disperate concepts (what Ayn Rand calls a "package deal"). If it's confusing and vague, chances are, it's a bad definition.
So what authority do you have to say it's a "bad definition" when headcanon has been used as a word for years, by many people? I did not realize you some sort of "definition authority".
ABED wrote:
DC acknowledges its canon and knows how to keep with it, even through continuity reboots
But it doesn't. It's constantly changing, being rebooted, retconned, and altered in numerous other ways. It's up to the judgment of DC editors as to what is canon, but editors often change. Dragon Ball didn't have to put such thought into it because Toriyama wrote the manga. He didn't have to come out and say anything. The stories were canon by their nature.
But what about the movies released during the series' heyday? What about Episode of Bardock or Dragon Ball SD? Heroes? Xenoverse? Are those canon? It's not the manga (unless we're talking about the Kanzenban ending) that people have canon issues with, it's all the other stuff that has been released around it and in its wake. The thing is, with very few exceptions, there is absolutely no answer from any official source about how these things fit in as a cohesive whole, if at all. So, the fans make their own way of fitting everything together. It's fun, it's interesting to discuss, it adds another layer of enjoyment to this series we love (and to many other ones out there). If you're just going to endlessly argue that the very concept of fans making their own canons "doesn't make sense", then I do not know what else to say to you, except maybe suck it up and move on with your life.

At this point, I feel like reading Mike's blog post that I already linked will probably give you a better answer than whatever else I could muster.
"Perfect" is the enemy of the good. True for Cell and true for real life.
Don't forget to slow down and enjoy yourself.

User avatar
Polyphase Avatron
Born 'n Bred Here
Posts: 6643
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 10:48 am

Re: General "Canon/Filler" Debate/Discussion

Post by Polyphase Avatron » Thu Jul 21, 2016 8:19 pm

I don't agree with this, but I know someone who has a very odd idea about DBS canon.

His argument is that since Toriyama wrote the general plot outline and both the anime and manga creators filled in the rest based on that, only things that happened in both the DBS anime and manga are canon, and things exclusive to one or the other aren't. Kind of confusing if you ask me.
Cool stuff that I upload here because Youtube will copyright claim it: https://vimeo.com/user60967147

User avatar
MetaMoss
Patreon Supporter
Posts: 614
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 7:14 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon area

Re: General "Canon/Filler" Debate/Discussion

Post by MetaMoss » Thu Jul 21, 2016 8:21 pm

Polyphase Avatron wrote:I don't agree with this, but I know someone who has a very odd idea about DBS canon.

His argument is that since Toriyama wrote the general plot outline and both the anime and manga creators filled in the rest based on that, only things that happened in both the DBS anime and manga are canon, and things exclusive to one or the other aren't. Kind of confusing if you ask me.
Yeah, there's the problem with headcanons: they often don't make a lick of sense to anyone else.
"Perfect" is the enemy of the good. True for Cell and true for real life.
Don't forget to slow down and enjoy yourself.

User avatar
ABED
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 20276
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 10:23 am
Location: Skippack, PA
Contact:

Re: General "Canon/Filler" Debate/Discussion

Post by ABED » Thu Jul 21, 2016 8:54 pm

So what authority do you have to say it's a "bad definition" when headcanon has been used as a word for years, by many people? I did not realize you some sort of "definition authority".
It's bad if it's vague and unhelpful. If the purpose of a definition is to denote a concept. You don't need authority, you just need logic. Definitions aren't decided by some authority.

I've read Mike's post years ago and I disagree with certain points.
It's a really useful concept when dealing with fandoms, I have to say.
I don't disagreed with the concept that the word denotes. I disagree with the word, as it is, for lack of a better word, dumb.
It's not the manga (unless we're talking about the Kanzenban ending) that people have canon issues with, it's all the other stuff that has been released around it and in its wake. The thing is, with very few exceptions, there is absolutely no answer from any official source about how these things fit in as a cohesive whole, if at all.
But even that's not true. Mike has said before that there is no canon, even the manga isn't canon, unless I read him wrong. In the cases you are referring to, the answer to if those things are canon is "We (meaning the fans) don't know." It is fun to think of how the things connect or how you might change things to make them connect, but that is a separate issue from canon.
If you're just going to endlessly argue that the very concept of fans making their own canons "doesn't make sense", then I do not know what else to say to you, except maybe suck it up and move on with your life.
Don't do that. I'm not blowing this out of proportion. I don't spend my day thinking about this issue, but when I'm on a forum where we discuss the minutia of the show, then I'll discuss and disagree "strongly", all the while not really caring that much when I'm in my normal every day life.
Last edited by ABED on Thu Jul 21, 2016 9:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The biggest truths aren't original. The truth is ketchup. It's Jim Belushi. Its job isn't to blow our minds. It's to be within reach.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take - Wayne Gretzky" - Michael Scott
Happiness is climate, not weather.

User avatar
MetaMoss
Patreon Supporter
Posts: 614
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 7:14 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon area

Re: General "Canon/Filler" Debate/Discussion

Post by MetaMoss » Thu Jul 21, 2016 9:07 pm

ABED wrote:
So what authority do you have to say it's a "bad definition" when headcanon has been used as a word for years, by many people? I did not realize you some sort of "definition authority".
It's bad if it's vague and unhelpful. If the purpose of a definition is to denote a concept. You don't need authority, you just need logic. Definitions aren't decided by some authority.

I've read Mike's post years ago and I disagree with certain points.
It's a really useful concept when dealing with fandoms, I have to say.
I don't disagreed with the concept that the word denotes. I disagree with the word, as it is, for lack of a better word, dumb.
And you're the only person I've seen here who has a problem with it. So we can keep on this debate of whether or not "headcanon" is a term worth using, or we can stop derailing this thread and let some other folks discuss their interpretations of canon. I'm liking the latter a whole bit more, so that's what I'm gonna do.
"Perfect" is the enemy of the good. True for Cell and true for real life.
Don't forget to slow down and enjoy yourself.

User avatar
ABED
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 20276
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 10:23 am
Location: Skippack, PA
Contact:

Re: General "Canon/Filler" Debate/Discussion

Post by ABED » Thu Jul 21, 2016 9:11 pm

So what if I am? The purpose of this thread is to debate. And this isn't derailing anything. It's a general canon/filler thread, meaning as long as it's about canon or filler in some form or fashion, it's on topic. We aren't preventing anyone else from discussing things.
The biggest truths aren't original. The truth is ketchup. It's Jim Belushi. Its job isn't to blow our minds. It's to be within reach.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take - Wayne Gretzky" - Michael Scott
Happiness is climate, not weather.

User avatar
TheGreatness25
I Live Here
Posts: 4924
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 9:36 am

Re: General "Canon/Filler" Debate/Discussion

Post by TheGreatness25 » Thu Jul 21, 2016 11:52 pm

"Head canon" is self-explanatory and there is nothing really wrong with the term. It's not a misrepresentation; it's not like anyone is trying to pass it off as canon.

Damn, if I see the word "canon" one more time, I might have a nervous breakdown :wink: I'm aware that I'll see that word another 20 times by tomorrow lol

User avatar
ABED
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 20276
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 10:23 am
Location: Skippack, PA
Contact:

Re: General "Canon/Filler" Debate/Discussion

Post by ABED » Fri Jul 22, 2016 4:53 am

It's not self explanatory. Canon isn't what you desire or what you want, ergo not self explanatory.
The biggest truths aren't original. The truth is ketchup. It's Jim Belushi. Its job isn't to blow our minds. It's to be within reach.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take - Wayne Gretzky" - Michael Scott
Happiness is climate, not weather.

User avatar
MetaMoss
Patreon Supporter
Posts: 614
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 7:14 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon area

Re: General "Canon/Filler" Debate/Discussion

Post by MetaMoss » Fri Jul 22, 2016 10:50 am

ABED wrote:It's not self explanatory. Canon isn't what you desire or what you want, ergo not self explanatory.
That's why the head is there, it modifies the word. Canon is what an authority says is true or correct (biblical canon, Star Wars canon). Put "head" in front to create "headcanon", and the "authority" is now understood to be the mind (or "head) of some individual (which is not very authoritative at all). To go back to my peanut butter example, butter is "a pale yellow edible fatty substance made by churning cream and used as a spread or in cooking." (according to Google). Peanut butter does not fit that definition, but with the peanut describing this "butter", it is now understood that this is a butter-like substance made from peanuts.
"Perfect" is the enemy of the good. True for Cell and true for real life.
Don't forget to slow down and enjoy yourself.

Post Reply