Well no it's just that it's non-canon lolShineman wrote:it seems that non-canon is often used negatively against something one does not like personally, etc
Quality or personal preference does not depend on canon lol
Moderators: General Help, Kanzenshuu Staff
Well no it's just that it's non-canon lolShineman wrote:it seems that non-canon is often used negatively against something one does not like personally, etc
Shineman wrote:I posted this a while ago in regards to how canon should be treated (not for this franchise, but for all fictional content).
Shineman wrote:I think it might be a whole a lot of easier to defined canon as something like this:
Canon as a collection of accepted works. In the case of Dragon Ball, every form of Dragon Ball—official produced material—is accepted in the Dragon Ball canon. That includes movies, Dragon Ball Heroes, every single officially produced video games, clothing line, that Dragon Ball logo on a soda can produced officially by the right-owners, etc.
Non-Canon does not (and shouldn't) exist in this definition -- because it's redundant (nowadays, it seems that non-canon is often used negatively against something one does not like personally, etc). Whether or not things fit in a timeline has no bearing on their canon status.
As for what fits what, this should be referred as "continuity". A canon can have multiple continuities (i.e Marvel and DC). For Dragon Ball, obviously, there is a "main continuity" which states certain events actually happened, while others are simply cast off in their own continuities. For example, Broly films do not exist in the "main continuity" but exist as their own, respective continuity. It should be noted that contradictions/lack of explanations has no bearings in continuities. Until stated otherwise, it should be treated as part of that said continuity.
With that said, going off of official statements, the main continuity should look this:
Jaco the Galactic Patrolman [Stated as a Prequel of Dragon Ball]
Dragon Ball [Manga/Anime/Kai]
Dragon Ball Super [stated to occurred between the 10 years between Boo Arc and the Last Chapter. The manga was declared as a promotional material for the Anime, but it can count as well.]
Dragon Ball GT [Sequel to Dragon Ball and stated as a "Grand Side Story" of Dragon Ball]
Anything else falls within their own continuities.
How so?PsionicWarrior wrote:Well no it's just that it's non-canon lolShineman wrote:it seems that non-canon is often used negatively against something one does not like personally, etc
Quality or personal preference does not depend on canon lol
Oh, don’t worry, I wasn’t harping on you (or anyone), I was speaking in broadness of sense (generalization if you will and it’s mostly based on my own personal experiences and observations) of how people use the term “non-canon” in a negative connotation of not just in this franchise, but through various other franchises as well. The term gets thrown around quite easily to disregard a work(s) based on personal distaste, “set standard” or vice versa.Mister_Popo wrote:I agree a franchise can have seperate continuities, dimensions or realities. 'Canon' is commonly referred to as the main continuity. GT is definitely a part of the DB-franchise, but it's not the main continuity. 'Non-canon' and 'headcanon' are sometimes used to be respectful against some creations, perceptions or ideas. It wasn't my intention to bash on GT in this case, it just isn't canon in my opinion, that's all.
Isn't just saying the same thing? Why not just say it's not canon?That way, instead of saying “non canon”, you can just say, in your case, GT is not part of the main continuity (whenever you consider the makeup of the main continuity).
I'd say it was brought about with things like Disney breaking off the old Star Wars Expanded Universe that got a lot of people debating what "happened" and what hasn't, plus stuff like Jaco showing up and Super clashing with elements of GT. And because additional Dragon Ball media has such a loose idea on what continuity is, we get five lengthy canon topics in half a year!ABED wrote:This whole emphasis on canon feels relatively new.
Debates about Dragon Ball's "canon", on just this forum alone, well long predates either Disney's Star Wars acquisition, Jaco, and the Dragon Ball revival material. Just type in the word "canon" into the search, and you'll find threads filled with people nitpicking this issue every bit as fiercely all the way back in 2004.KBABZ wrote:I'd say it was brought about with things like Disney breaking off the old Star Wars Expanded Universe that got a lot of people debating what "happened" and what hasn't, plus stuff like Jaco showing up and Super clashing with elements of GT. And because additional Dragon Ball media has such a loose idea on what continuity is, we get five lengthy canon topics in half a year!ABED wrote:This whole emphasis on canon feels relatively new.
Journey to the West, chapter 26 wrote:The strong man will meet someone stronger still:
Come to naught at last he surely will!
Zephyr wrote:And that's to say nothing of how pretty much impossible it is to capture what made the original run of the series so great. I'm in the generation of fans that started with Toonami, so I totally empathize with the feeling of having "missed the party", experiencing disappointment, and wanting to experience it myself. But I can't, that's how life is. Time is a bitch. The party is over. Kageyama, Kikuchi, and Maeda are off the sauce now; Yanami almost OD'd; Yamamoto got arrested; Toriyama's not going to light trash cans on fire and hang from the chandelier anymore. We can't get the band back together, and even if we could, everyone's either old, in poor health, or calmed way the fuck down. Best we're going to get, and are getting, is a party that's almost entirely devoid of the magic that made the original one so awesome that we even want more.
Kamiccolo9 wrote:It grinds my gears that people get "outraged" over any of this stuff. It's a fucking cartoon. If you are that determined to be angry about something, get off the internet and make a stand for something that actually matters.
Rocketman wrote:"Shonen" basically means "stupid sentimental shit" anyway, so it's ok to be anti-shonen.
Well I didn't doubt that canon debating didn't happen until recently (I'm sure it goes as far back as when the first episode of DB aired in Japan with the Pilaf castle scene), I was more trying to postulate why it's so emphasized now as ABED suggests (being rather new in the DB community I have no experience in the matter).Kunzait_83 wrote:Debates about Dragon Ball's "canon", on just this forum alone, well long predates either Disney's Star Wars acquisition, Jaco, and the Dragon Ball revival material. Just type in the word "canon" into the search, and you'll find threads filled with people nitpicking this issue every bit as fiercely all the way back in 2004.KBABZ wrote:I'd say it was brought about with things like Disney breaking off the old Star Wars Expanded Universe that got a lot of people debating what "happened" and what hasn't, plus stuff like Jaco showing up and Super clashing with elements of GT. And because additional Dragon Ball media has such a loose idea on what continuity is, we get five lengthy canon topics in half a year!ABED wrote:This whole emphasis on canon feels relatively new.
Not exactly.ABED wrote:Isn't just saying the same thing? Why not just say it's not canon?That way, instead of saying “non canon”, you can just say, in your case, GT is not part of the main continuity (whenever you consider the makeup of the main continuity).
This whole emphasis on canon feels relatively new.
Then are you saying canon just means produced by an official source.If we accept the set definition of canon as collection of accepted works officially produced by the right holders, then “non-canon” implies that the right holders have nothing to do with the product at large. Meaning, no rights, no distribution rights, no mention of it in any other works they produced, etc.
AFAIK that's right lolMister_Popo wrote: TOEI does own the rights to make the anime, but they don't actually own the intellectual property, right?
Precisely.ABED wrote:Then are you saying canon just means produced by an official source.If we accept the set definition of canon as collection of accepted works officially produced by the right holders, then “non-canon” implies that the right holders have nothing to do with the product at large. Meaning, no rights, no distribution rights, no mention of it in any other works they produced, etc.
Sorry about that. The reason why I place emphasized on separating canon and continuity is precisely on the subject you brought up: when Toriyama passes and Dragon Ball is still producing content in the future, it's status of "canon" (in the context where it's used as a means of "what counts" in a story-related manner) is going to get pretty muddy. Some people (again, speaking in generalization here) might sworn off that Dragon Ball canon ends the moment Toriyama leaves the franchise.Mister_Popo wrote:I think it's clear what the main anime continuation is: DB / DBZ / DBS / BOG-ROF movies / a few tv specials like Bardock and Trunks.
I found many threads about this, but it wasn't my intend to start the old movies/GT-canon debate again, i rather wanted to take a look into the future.
TOEI does own the rights to make the anime, but they don't actually own the intellectual property, right?
If Toriyama sadly enough would leave us tomorrow: i don't think TOEI could do as they like, Shueisha (the manga publisher) would still first have to give their concent to what TOEI proposes or make content themselves that TOEI can execute. Like Disney owns the rights for Star Wars, they own the rights for Dragon Ball.
"The Dragon Ball Room is basically a section for handling all mediation between the author and foreign or domestic licensees and helping with editorial supervision and contracts relating to filming and commercialization of Dragon Ball and other works by Akira Toriyama. We decided to establish a new section for managing the rights of Akira Toriyamas work and other things to keep the franchise going indefinitely." (Iyoku, head of the DB Room)
So Shueishas Dragon Ball Room basically would become what the Lucasfilm Story Group is for Star Wars if Toriyama dies.
Shineman wrote:Precisely.ABED wrote:Then are you saying canon just means produced by an official source.If we accept the set definition of canon as collection of accepted works officially produced by the right holders, then “non-canon” implies that the right holders have nothing to do with the product at large. Meaning, no rights, no distribution rights, no mention of it in any other works they produced, etc.
Now that I think about it, the only time something is declared "non-canon", where a rights holders (putting this in the context of Dragon Ball) sworn off something is when they removed anything (well, for the most part? I'm sure VegettoEX and anyone knowledgeable in this subject knows the nitty gritty on the explicit details) that traces back to Yamamoto's musical score.
Sorry about that. The reason why I place emphasized on separating canon and continuity is precisely on the subject you brought up: when Toriyama passes and Dragon Ball is still producing content in the future, it's status of "canon" (in the context where it's used as a means of "what counts" in a story-related manner) is going to get pretty muddy. Some people (again, speaking in generalization here) might sworn off that Dragon Ball canon ends the moment Toriyama leaves the franchise.Mister_Popo wrote:I think it's clear what the main anime continuation is: DB / DBZ / DBS / BOG-ROF movies / a few tv specials like Bardock and Trunks.
I found many threads about this, but it wasn't my intend to start the old movies/GT-canon debate again, i rather wanted to take a look into the future.
TOEI does own the rights to make the anime, but they don't actually own the intellectual property, right?
If Toriyama sadly enough would leave us tomorrow: i don't think TOEI could do as they like, Shueisha (the manga publisher) would still first have to give their concent to what TOEI proposes or make content themselves that TOEI can execute. Like Disney owns the rights for Star Wars, they own the rights for Dragon Ball.
"The Dragon Ball Room is basically a section for handling all mediation between the author and foreign or domestic licensees and helping with editorial supervision and contracts relating to filming and commercialization of Dragon Ball and other works by Akira Toriyama. We decided to establish a new section for managing the rights of Akira Toriyamas work and other things to keep the franchise going indefinitely." (Iyoku, head of the DB Room)
So Shueishas Dragon Ball Room basically would become what the Lucasfilm Story Group is for Star Wars if Toriyama dies.
Ultimately, whether or not things are "canon" doesn't really matter in a long run, but it does become a hassle when there's a discussion going on on a product (Dragon Ball Heroes) and the first thing that comes into mind is "is this canon?".
So, to answer your question, I personally think that the canon will largely be just that: any new stories produced by the rightsholder is canon (even in the event Toriyama leaves the franchise in one way or the other). Whether or not they would fit into the main continuity is a different story (and whether or not Dragon Ball would flat out end the moment Toriyama is no longer working on Dragon Ball is also a different story, since the franchise is draining in quite a bit of dough over the years as of late).
PFM18 wrote:If Toriyama didnt write it then I dont care about it.
To me "canon" is a shorter way of saying "Toriyama's work" or "Toriyama wrote it.
I mean I would probably watch it eventually but I wouldn't have any kind of "emotional investment" like if it was AT's work if that makes sense. I would go in with very low expectations watching something without Toriyama's influence.Mister_Popo wrote:PFM18 wrote:If Toriyama didnt write it then I dont care about it.
To me "canon" is a shorter way of saying "Toriyama's work" or "Toriyama wrote it.
It's a personal choice that i respect. But why would you deprive yourself of the enjoyment of new DB-content if it's good after Toriyama?
That's basically the same if you were a heavy collector of Spider-Man comics, you'd stop reading and collecting after Stan Lee quit.
ABED wrote:How long did Stan Lee actually write Spider-Man stories? DC / Marvel comics are typically written by many people over time. DB is one story with one single writer for the bulk of its existence.