The Manga is no more canon than the anime right?

Discussion specifically regarding the "Dragon Ball Super" TV series premiering July 2015 in Japan, including individual threads for each episode.

Moderators: General Help, Kanzenshuu Staff

User avatar
miguelnuva1
I Live Here
Posts: 2673
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 9:23 pm

Re: The Manga is no more canon than the anime right?

Post by miguelnuva1 » Wed Sep 01, 2021 8:12 pm

Manga continuity

Original 52 vols- DBS Manga- Broly Movie

Anime continuity 1

DB- DBZ- DBGT- some movies

Anime continuity 2

DB- DBZ:Kai- DBS Anime- Broly movie

Movie continuity

Certain DB movies

Game continuity

Xenoverse
Heroes

This is how I see it, all of these are canon but separated by continuity
Dragon Wukong wrote: Wed Sep 01, 2021 8:00 am
miguelnuva1 wrote: Wed Sep 01, 2021 3:17 am Black does have Supereme Ksi biology in the anime. That's why he goes Rose and his ki feels like Zamasu's.
Why Black goes Rose in the anime is never explained in that continuity. The only explanation provided is the manga's which suggests it's just the color SSGSS takes when the user is already a proper deity.

And Black's ki feels like Zamasu because ki is a property of the spirit, not the body. It's not intrinsically tied to him being a Kai.
Ki as far as I know is apart of your Biological factors as you are the only one who has you own ki signature. While the anime doesn't make it clear it seems bases on Gowasu and Zamasu that once you are declared a Supreme Kai with the proper earrings you are one. Gowasu makes Zamasu one in the anime to take him to the future and it looks like Zamasu made himself one and then made Black a temporary one.

Black's use of the ring in the Anime seems to be becasue he still has enough of Zamasu in him(the ki and Rose show this) or Zamasu who has anointed himself one has given black the rank.

User avatar
Hellspawn28
Patreon Supporter
Posts: 15191
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 9:50 pm
Location: Maryland, USA

Re: The Manga is no more canon than the anime right?

Post by Hellspawn28 » Wed Sep 01, 2021 8:35 pm

I just view them as their own thing, but I do feel like some stuff that happens in the manga can be applied for the anime. For example, we didn't see Kibto and Shin die from Dabra in the anime, but it's very likely that they did because Trunks said that many lives were lost that day.
She/Her
PS5 username: Guyver_Spawn_27
LB Profile: https://letterboxd.com/Hellspawn28/

User avatar
Grimlock
Kicks it Old-School
Posts: 8241
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 4:11 pm
Location: Cybertron.

Re: The Manga is no more canon than the anime right?

Post by Grimlock » Wed Sep 01, 2021 9:13 pm

Koitsukai wrote: Wed Sep 01, 2021 3:30 pmI think people consider the retellings because they "correct" stuff from the movie, at least that's the case with the RoF retelling.
And what's there to be corrected? Does the retelling features a new villain and presents a plot? Because that's the only thing that could/should be corrected about Movie 15. If not, then there's nothing "corrected" in regards to the movie.

In fact, it's quite the contrary, it seems according to the retelling, Freeza has a degree of knowledge about fusion, as he saw Gotenks. Movie 1 goes out of its way to establish Freeza's first interaction with a fusion through Gogeta's dialogue.
pepd wrote: Wed Sep 01, 2021 4:07 pmThere is nothing to suggest the namekuseijin book was in Toriyamas script, it was just mentioned in an interview like many other information that was never mentioned in canon.
Maybe, or maybe not. But considering that the book was first mentioned in the anime and then we see Toriyama also mentioning it implies that the existence of the book had to come from somewhere else. Not a random addition from nowhere that was made on the fly.
pepd wrote: Wed Sep 01, 2021 4:07 pmTable's mention is also gratuitous and could be a Toei addition, its omission only supports this.
Why would Toei make a "gratuitous" mention to Tarble in Movie 14, then omit said mention in the retelling and then "gratuitously" mention him again in Movie 1? :crazy:
pepd wrote: Wed Sep 01, 2021 4:07 pmThey didn't acknowledged filler SSKK, but since the equivalent manga chapter (that was released 8 months after and would have included SSBKK if it was in the outlines) didn't, yes it should.
Then we should also disregard Future Trunks saga as well as Universe Survival saga, both feature Super Saiyan God Super Saiyan with Kaio-Ken. But who is going to do that besides manga fans? Who is going to tell those who consider the anime that they are "wrong"? The fans? Who have no right to state what's canonical and what's not?
Miracles wrote: Wed Sep 01, 2021 7:43 pmThink of it this way; if anyone wants to know what Bulma's favorite ice cream is [or whether she even eats it] they would have to get the answer from her creator. Since he is the authority [canon] of Dragonball, Akira Toriyama.
But is that how things really work, though? Because Dragon Ball Z Kakarot adapted the Majin Buu saga for Trunks that only exists in the manga so far. We have no confirmation that said saga was based on a Toriyama outline, for all we know, Toyotaro could have been the one who wrote it all (especially if we take into consideration how Toei handled this in the anime). That may imply Toyotaro could also be the one answering what Bulma's favorite ice cream is. In other words, Toyotaro may also have a voice in certain things.
Goodbye friend. You are weak, so you must be destroyed!

~ War of the Dinobots ~

User avatar
ZombieVito
Born 'n Bred Here
Posts: 5900
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 12:18 pm

Re: The Manga is no more canon than the anime right?

Post by ZombieVito » Wed Sep 01, 2021 11:20 pm

Hellspawn28 wrote: Wed Sep 01, 2021 8:35 pm I just view them as their own thing, but I do feel like some stuff that happens in the manga can be applied for the anime. For example, we didn't see Kibto and Shin die from Dabra in the anime, but it's very likely that they did because Trunks said that many lives were lost that day.
I do hope Toei does an Ova expanding that brief flashback we had in episode 49 one day.

Perfect opportunity to see Black again.

Cipher
Born 'n Bred Here
Posts: 6333
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 11:54 pm
Location: Nagano
Contact:

Re: The Manga is no more canon than the anime right?

Post by Cipher » Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:09 am

DSB wrote: Wed Sep 01, 2021 3:20 pmFixed that for you and everyone.

Id prefer a product that at least the veterans over at Toei developed under toriyama's direction than some guy who wrote DB AF of all fan fics.
I too am strangely willing to attribute extra legitimacy in crafting a sequel work to a rotating handful of for-hire weekly script-writers not particularly passionate about the material, working on a production too rushed to even have solid communication between one another and show-runners, than I am to a single author deeply familiar with the series and working in its original medium under direct oversight and scene-by-scene edits from the original author, because he happened to like the series so much he had once published a fanwork for it.

Sincerely enjoying the thing you’re helming a sequel for us bad, but not caring about and being part of a huge, frantically rushed team is legitimizing.

Or, to take this further, I’ll be so bold as to say it: Only people who don’t like the original at all can write a legitimate sequel. Otherwise it’s obviously just fanwork. But, uh ... not fanwork when it’s a bunch of people who care about it less. Obviously! Very important difference.

pepd
Beyond-the-Beyond Newbie
Posts: 385
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2020 6:52 pm

Re: The Manga is no more canon than the anime right?

Post by pepd » Thu Sep 02, 2021 4:26 am

Grimlock wrote: Wed Sep 01, 2021 9:13 pm But who is going to do that besides manga fans? Who is going to tell those who consider the anime that they are "wrong"? The fans? Who have no right to state what's canonical and what's not?
Well, no one has the right to dictate it unless they are Toriyama, but everyone can discuss it and try to figure out what has more sense to be considered canon, just like everyone can not care or choose to ignore it.

User avatar
Grimlock
Kicks it Old-School
Posts: 8241
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 4:11 pm
Location: Cybertron.

Re: The Manga is no more canon than the anime right?

Post by Grimlock » Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:00 pm

We can, but by that point we'd already be in the subjectivity territory. We'd be "figuring out" based on nothing concrete, nothing officially said or established, it would be a complete arbitrary thing to do. And what makes more sense to you may not make as much sense to another person.

The manga continuity makes more sense to you? Great for you, but that does not automatically mean the manga is the canonical version until someone states so. And until such statement comes out, I'd argue that "figuring this out" is utterly pointless.
Goodbye friend. You are weak, so you must be destroyed!

~ War of the Dinobots ~

User avatar
Tai Lung
I'm, pretty, cozy, here...
Posts: 1877
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2018 11:38 pm

Re: The Manga is no more canon than the anime right?

Post by Tai Lung » Thu Sep 02, 2021 7:11 pm

miguelnuva1 wrote: Wed Jul 08, 1970 12:32 pm I was arguing with someone who said the anime is Toei nonsense and the manga is the real stroy but that isn't correct because Toriyama makes one outline and sends it to Toyo and Toei right?
It is confirmed to us 2 times that DBS anime follows the OG manga.
Image

Image

anime is more canon than manga
Last edited by Tai Lung on Thu Sep 02, 2021 8:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Kataphrut
I'm, pretty, cozy, here...
Posts: 1704
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2017 8:12 pm

Re: The Manga is no more canon than the anime right?

Post by Kataphrut » Thu Sep 02, 2021 8:37 pm

Cipher wrote: Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:09 am
DSB wrote: Wed Sep 01, 2021 3:20 pmFixed that for you and everyone.

Id prefer a product that at least the veterans over at Toei developed under toriyama's direction than some guy who wrote DB AF of all fan fics.
I too am strangely willing to attribute extra legitimacy in crafting a sequel work to a rotating handful of for-hire weekly script-writers not particularly passionate about the material, working on a production too rushed to even have solid communication between one another and show-runners, than I am to a single author deeply familiar with the series and working in its original medium under direct oversight and scene-by-scene edits from the original author, because he happened to like the series so much he had once published a fanwork for it.

Sincerely enjoying the thing you’re helming a sequel for us bad, but not caring about and being part of a huge, frantically rushed team is legitimizing.

Or, to take this further, I’ll be so bold as to say it: Only people who don’t like the original at all can write a legitimate sequel. Otherwise it’s obviously just fanwork. But, uh ... not fanwork when it’s a bunch of people who care about it less. Obviously! Very important difference.
See, with this post you're falling into the trap a few people in this thread have made of dismissing one medium as lesser because you don't see the people involved with creating it as legitimate authours or passionate creators. The weekly script writers weren't "passionate about the material". They didn't care about it. And I suppose the manga authour was chiseling the panels onto stone tablets off nothing more than the sweat of his own back. Of course not! That would make the tracing very difficult...

It's either you're into the flawed modern auteur theory narrative (the authour is god, the studio is out to profit off their work, and everyone else is just there to realise the authour's vision), or you're a medium snob. But the fact is, all art, particularly commercial art like Dragon Ball is collaborative. And within those collaborations lie plenty of passionate people. You only have to look at the comments made by Nagamine about the Broly movie, Nakamura about the ToP arc, Ishitani about episode 131 or the work animators like Tate and Takahashi put into it to see that.

User avatar
VegettoEX
Kanzenshuu Co-Owner & Administrator
Posts: 17541
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2004 3:10 pm
Location: New Jersey
Contact:

Re: The Manga is no more canon than the anime right?

Post by VegettoEX » Thu Sep 02, 2021 8:55 pm

I find myself agreeing both with Cipher and Kataphrut, to the point that I just keep falling back on what I find myself posting (likely fairly obnoxiously) quite often with regard to this question:

At this point you have to just laugh about how silly the situation is, concede that there's no way to answer this question, acknowledge there simply can't be an authoritative answer that will be accepted by every party involved, and you then wander off to do something else.

This isn't a valid question anymore. It's existential nothingness.
:: [| Mike "VegettoEX" LaBrie |] ::
:: [| Kanzenshuu - Co-Founder/Administrator, Podcast Host, News Manager (note: our "job" titles are arbitrary and meaningless) |] ::
:: [| Website: January 1998 |] :: [| Podcast: November 2005 |] :: [| Fusion: April 2012 |] :: [| Wiki: 20XX |] ::

Cipher
Born 'n Bred Here
Posts: 6333
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 11:54 pm
Location: Nagano
Contact:

Re: The Manga is no more canon than the anime right?

Post by Cipher » Thu Sep 02, 2021 9:33 pm

Kataphrut wrote: Thu Sep 02, 2021 8:37 pm See, with this post you're falling into the trap a few people in this thread have made of dismissing one medium as lesser because you don't see the people involved with creating it as legitimate authours or passionate creators. The weekly script writers weren't "passionate about the material". They didn't care about it. And I suppose the manga authour was chiseling the panels onto stone tablets off nothing more than the sweat of his own back. Of course not! That would make the tracing very difficult...

It's either you're into the flawed modern auteur theory narrative (the authour is god, the studio is out to profit off their work, and everyone else is just there to realise the authour's vision), or you're a medium snob. But the fact is, all art, particularly commercial art like Dragon Ball is collaborative. And within those collaborations lie plenty of passionate people. You only have to look at the comments made by Nagamine about the Broly movie, Nakamura about the ToP arc, Ishitani about episode 131 or the work animators like Tate and Takahashi put into it to see that.
I am a medium snob, but my intent wasn’t to dismiss the efforts of any of the creators who worked—often against the odds—on the TV version of Super, nor to imply that none had genuine passion for the material. (At the same time, I think it’s hard to claim that all of them did, which is also no knock against them as people or creatives—it was a job.) That post was a bit of hyperbole responding to hyperbole. I do think it’s worth bringing up that the production environment of the series likely prevented them from doing their best work, which is relevant solely when it comes to addressing the attitudes I’ll get at below. It’s obvious—particularly in the Universal Survival arc—that as much as the series improved, it also never reached a point where it really felt like the right hand knew what the left was doing, writing-wise. Not the fault of the individual script-writers and likely not even the fault of the show-runners (possibly the fault of the suits who rushed into the production initially). I never touched on the animators or directors, whose work is independent of (to a certain extent, while of course being the expressive vehicle for) the writing and scripting, which I think is mostly what’s being addressed in fan attitudes like the one I was responding to.

But no, what I really meant that reply to quip at wasn’t the validity of the work by those creatives, but the fan attitudes that somehow take the opposite of that auteur fallacy, especially when it comes to sequel work—that the work of a studio or team, even ones working in horribly unfavorable environments for the final product, as with Super, must be the more legitimate/official/authoritative/what-have-you option or version, whereas the work of individual authors, or those with fan backgrounds, cannot be. At the logical end of which is the (I think very strange) assumption that prior investment in or passion toward the subject is a demerit, whereas a lack of it is somehow legitimizing. Or that singular authorship is delegitimizing in comparison, in a medium and in a sequel to a series founded on it.

I don’t take any issue with those who prefer the anime for whatever reason—it certainly has its appeals in ways the manga lacks, and vice versa. And I do not actually support questioning the creative talent or passion of any specific script-writers on an individual basis—they did not become script-writers because they hate fiction—however hamstrung the collective final product of Super was. But I will never miss an opportunity to quip back a bit at the specific kind of manga missives that are the “just a fanartist” comments to try to dismiss it in comparison, as the assumptions behind it are just too strange to not delve into. There are ways and reasons to offer critique of the manga or praise of the anime that aren’t quite so problematic in what they say about who the creators of derivative fiction should or should not be.

Suffice it to say, I think dismissing either the legitimacy of the studio-team approach or singular (even? especially?) former-fan-author one outright is problematic. At the end of the day, these are all creatives looking to do their best work and do right by the series—and they deserve the benefit of good-faith appraisal. But guess how many times the fandom presents the opportunity to point out the issues with the latter as opposed to the former.

EDIT— Also what Mike said. We’re kind of off the road from the original topic now, but I do think these are discussions worth having, to the extent that any discussions about sequel series for fantasy martial-arts comics are worth having (which is as much as they are for any other type of fiction—very).

EDIT EDIT— To further assure you of the intended hyperbole-as-response of that post, you can catch me just a page or so back in this thread noting that elements of Toyotaro’s manga are almost certainly responding to the anime having already aired, so it’s not like it existed in some creative vacuum, even though I think it reads fine independently, and on a recent Kanzenshuu podcast going through the different behind-the-scenes hints as to Super’s creative development in both mediums to note that it’s never been a clear-cut singular voice from the start—nor was even the original manga. I just meant to respond to one (frequently seen) kind of dismissal with its hyperbolic opposite. Both kinds of dismissal are problematic if you boil them down to what feeds into them and take it to its logical end:

If the singular, passionate author is legitimate and the studio team is not, does it suddenly delegitimize the work if you have two passionate authors working together? Three then? Five? Fifteen? More, and some other for-hire talent to help them complete the final product? At what point are you choosing to dismiss the group work of people whose enthusiasm you would have championed individually, and why?

And then, as referenced above, if the studio-team is always legitimate but a singular fan author not, how dispassionate, and how much of a singular creative voice must the project be lacking, for it to not be the same thing? The logical end becomes this strange “prior investment is bad, and/or (more) singular creative voices are bad” idea that I hope no one would actually cling to, even though it winds up being what they’re inadvertently arguing.

Either kind of extreme, automatic dismissal is bad. Just ... tend to only see the latter, in Super’s case, and you tend to see it a lot.
Last edited by Cipher on Thu Sep 02, 2021 10:19 pm, edited 4 times in total.

pepd
Beyond-the-Beyond Newbie
Posts: 385
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2020 6:52 pm

Re: The Manga is no more canon than the anime right?

Post by pepd » Thu Sep 02, 2021 9:56 pm

Grimlock wrote: Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:00 pm We can, but by that point we'd already be in the subjectivity territory. We'd be "figuring out" based on nothing concrete, nothing officially said or established, it would be a complete arbitrary thing to do. And what makes more sense to you may not make as much sense to another person.

The manga continuity makes more sense to you? Great for you, but that does not automatically mean the manga is the canonical version until someone states so. And until such statement comes out, I'd argue that "figuring this out" is utterly pointless.
Uncertainty yes, but (like most discussions) subjective only if you make it so.
There are concrete evidence that suggests more canon quality to the manga according to the most accepted definitions of canon (not all of them, obviously, since then there would be no discussion). If it was officially established there would be no need to deduce it.

Yes, I think it makes more sense to consider movies and manga, but I'm not arguing it is the canon (tho I can see the appeal of that simplification, and share the feeling), just about specific arguments you brought regarding some version-exclusive content and canon, and now against the utility/validity of analyzing what version has more merit to be considered canon even tho non fully is.
You don't care or want to know about "canon"? Good for you, but is only pointless if you don't care about its point, in which case... what is pointless is to point its pointlessness.

Kataphrut
I'm, pretty, cozy, here...
Posts: 1704
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2017 8:12 pm

Re: The Manga is no more canon than the anime right?

Post by Kataphrut » Thu Sep 02, 2021 10:25 pm

Cipher wrote: Thu Sep 02, 2021 9:33 pm
Kataphrut wrote: Thu Sep 02, 2021 8:37 pm See, with this post you're falling into the trap a few people in this thread have made of dismissing one medium as lesser because you don't see the people involved with creating it as legitimate authours or passionate creators. The weekly script writers weren't "passionate about the material". They didn't care about it. And I suppose the manga authour was chiseling the panels onto stone tablets off nothing more than the sweat of his own back. Of course not! That would make the tracing very difficult...

It's either you're into the flawed modern auteur theory narrative (the authour is god, the studio is out to profit off their work, and everyone else is just there to realise the authour's vision), or you're a medium snob. But the fact is, all art, particularly commercial art like Dragon Ball is collaborative. And within those collaborations lie plenty of passionate people. You only have to look at the comments made by Nagamine about the Broly movie, Nakamura about the ToP arc, Ishitani about episode 131 or the work animators like Tate and Takahashi put into it to see that.
I am a medium snob, but my intent wasn’t to dismiss the efforts of any of the creators who worked—often against the odds—on the TV version of Super, nor to imply that none had genuine passion for the material. (At the same time, I think it’s hard to claim that all of them did, which is also no knock against them as people or creatives—it was a job.) That post was a bit of hyperbole responding to hyperbole. I do think it’s worth bringing up that the production environment of the series likely prevented them from doing their best work, which is relevant solely when it comes to addressing the attitudes I’ll get at below. It’s obvious—particularly in the Universal Survival arc—that as much as the series improved, it also never reached a point where it really felt like the right hand knew what the left was doing, writing-wise. Not the fault of the individual script-writers and likely not even the fault of the show-runners (possibly the fault of the suits who rushed into the production initially). I never touched on the animators or directors, whose work is independent of (to a certain extent, while of course being the expressive vehicle for) the writing and scripting, which I think is mostly what’s being addressed in fan attitudes like the one I was responding to.

But no, what I really meant that reply to quip at wasn’t the validity of the work by those creatives, but the fan attitudes that somehow take the opposite of that auteur fallacy, especially when it comes to sequel work—that the work of a studio or team, even ones working in horribly unfavorable environments for the final product, as with Super, must be the more legitimate/official/authoritative/what-have-you option or version, whereas the work of individual authors, or those with fan backgrounds, cannot be. At the logical end of which is the (I think very strange) assumption that prior investment in or passion toward the subject is a demerit, whereas a lack of it is somehow legitimizing. Or that singular authorship is delegitimizing in comparison, in a medium and in a sequel to a series founded on it.

I don’t take any issue with those who prefer the anime for whatever reason—it certainly has its appeals in ways the manga lacks, and vice versa. And I do not actually support questioning the creative talent or passion of any specific script-writers on an individual basis—they did not become script-writers because they hate fiction—however hamstrung the collective final product of Super was. But I will never miss an opportunity to quip back a bit at the specific kind of manga missives that are the “just a fanartist” comments to try to dismiss it in comparison, as the assumptions behind it are just too strange to not delve into. There are ways and reasons to offer critique of the manga or praise of the anime that aren’t quite so problematic in what they say about who the creators of derivative fiction should or should not be.

Suffice it to say, I think dismissing either the legitimacy of the studio-team approach or singular (even? especially?) former-fan-author one outright is problematic. At the end of the day, these are all creatives looking to do their best work and do right by the series—and they deserve the benefit of good-faith appraisal. But guess how many times the fandom presents the opportunity to point out the issues with the latter as opposed to the former.

EDIT— Also what Mike said. We’re kind of off the road from the original topic now, but I do think these are discussions worth having, to the extent that any discussions about sequel series for fantasy martial-arts comics are worth having (which is as much as they are for any other type of fiction—very).
On that we can definitely agree- while I've been taking a defensive stance towards the anime in this thread, I don't dislike the manga by any means (the tracing comment was just being cheeky). I reckon Toyotaro's done a fine job of it, and I agree that dismissing him for his fan work is incredibly reductive. It's also impractical- as Dragon Ball gets older and more new people come on-board, be they writers, artists, producers, etc eventually it's going to get to the point where everybody who works on it is a fan. It's like with Doctor Who, which was practically being run by the fans in the 80s let alone by the reboot where everybody involved with it had grown up watching it when they were six.

At the end of the day, you got it right with your first post in this thread: I like this one more, therefore it's canon. That's kind of all it needs to be.

User avatar
Grimlock
Kicks it Old-School
Posts: 8241
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 4:11 pm
Location: Cybertron.

Re: The Manga is no more canon than the anime right?

Post by Grimlock » Fri Sep 03, 2021 12:26 am

pepd wrote: Thu Sep 02, 2021 9:56 pmUncertainty yes, but (like most discussions) subjective only if you make it so.
pepd wrote: Thu Sep 02, 2021 9:56 pmYou don't care or want to know about "canon"? Good for you, but is only pointless if you don't care about its point, in which case... what is pointless is to point its pointlessness.
That's absolutely not how things work. There is no "this doesn't matter because I don't care". It is factually subjective and a pointless thing because not even the "authorities" care about this, otherwise a canon would have already been established. You can't make something that is subjective into something factual just because you want to, without even having evidences to back you up. And you can't arbitrarily make evidences too, more below.
pepd wrote: Thu Sep 02, 2021 9:56 pmThere are concrete evidence that suggests more canon quality to the manga according to the most accepted definitions of canon
And what are these evidences? That Toriyama "corrects" manga panels? That he suggests things here and there? That he comes up with a few designs? That he may provide some story input to what seem to be mostly Toyotaro writing?

If those are the "concrete evidences", they scream "Toriyama's contributions" to me. Sure, he wasn't involved in the movies stories, but the reason for that is because he was busy with the manga, so who's to say he wouldn't do the same thing for Toei back then as he is doing for Toyotaro now? And we know people use the "lack of Toriyama" in regards to the movies to bizarrely say that they are "non-canonical". Would people say something different toward the movies if Toriyama wasn't so busy and provided some story input for the movies back then?

Taking this Toriyama's behavior towards the manga and using it as "evidence" seems arbitrary. But if everyone's willing to agree that just because Toriyama is "more involved" with the manga is enough to say such continuity is the canonical one, then all the questions from my previous post pop up again:
Grimlock wrote: Wed Sep 01, 2021 2:08 pm If that's true then why so many people don't consider the movies? The movies were written by Toriyama. Conversely, people seem to consider more the retellings, and they weren't written by Toriyama.

Shouldn't we disregard all of Dragon Ball Super in favor of Toriyama's outlines, then? Who knows what appears in the anime and the manga came from Toriyama. Toei and Toyotaro filling the gaps shouldn't be considered if just what Toriyama does is what should be considered.

Shouldn't we consider Dragon Ball Online? Sure, we don't have confirmation that he actually wrote the whole thing, but he was involved in its production for five years and he himself said it is a sequel to the manga.
if Toriyama's involvement is the ultimate factor, why do we still have these conversations? We should just ignore everything not made by Toriyama by default, but that also doesn't seem something everyone is willing to do (see people who prefer the anime continuity, the manga continuity, those who accept Toyotaro's-only addition/omission, those who accept Toei's-only addition/omission, etc).

Just something to think about: We know that bringing Vegetto back was a Toyotaro decision, it came directly from him. There was no Vegetto in Toriyama's outline whatsoever. And Toei also used Vegetto. Are we going to disregard Vegetto's entire comeback? Must we? What do we do here? We just assume/collectively dream that Goku and Vegeta fought Merged Zamasu separately (as originally intended by Toriyama)?
Goodbye friend. You are weak, so you must be destroyed!

~ War of the Dinobots ~

User avatar
Tai Lung
I'm, pretty, cozy, here...
Posts: 1877
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2018 11:38 pm

Re: The Manga is no more canon than the anime right?

Post by Tai Lung » Fri Sep 03, 2021 1:23 am

pepd wrote: Thu Sep 02, 2021 9:56 pm
Grimlock wrote: Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:00 pm We can, but by that point we'd already be in the subjectivity territory. We'd be "figuring out" based on nothing concrete, nothing officially said or established, it would be a complete arbitrary thing to do. And what makes more sense to you may not make as much sense to another person.

The manga continuity makes more sense to you? Great for you, but that does not automatically mean the manga is the canonical version until someone states so. And until such statement comes out, I'd argue that "figuring this out" is utterly pointless.
Uncertainty yes, but (like most discussions) subjective only if you make it so.
There are concrete evidence that suggests more canon quality to the manga according to the most accepted definitions of canon (not all of them, obviously, since then there would be no discussion). If it was officially established there would be no need to deduce it.

Yes, I think it makes more sense to consider movies and manga, but I'm not arguing it is the canon (tho I can see the appeal of that simplification, and share the feeling), just about specific arguments you brought regarding some version-exclusive content and canon, and now against the utility/validity of analyzing what version has more merit to be considered canon even tho non fully is.
You don't care or want to know about "canon"? Good for you, but is only pointless if you don't care about its point, in which case... what is pointless is to point its pointlessness.
that ... that doesn't exist at all -.....unless you explain what you mean

------------

the thieves that were only seen in the OG manga appear in Dragon Ball super Anime ... and they keep continuity only with the manga .. since they remember it
Image

Image

It does not change much ... the super manga originally existed only to promote the movies and anime then it continued because they want to reach a certain reading public ... but it is clear that it does not have priority unlike the movies (it skips stories) while the anime also tells them without skipping stories

the fact that the film for 2022 is not Moro arc should already confirm that

User avatar
Grimlock
Kicks it Old-School
Posts: 8241
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 4:11 pm
Location: Cybertron.

Re: The Manga is no more canon than the anime right?

Post by Grimlock » Fri Sep 03, 2021 1:40 am

Movie 2 doesn't confirm anything. It may not be about Moro, but it sure as heck can make references to Moro and Granola. We won't know until we see the movie. And who knows? If the anime ever comes back, they might even adapt these two sagas since the reference the movie might make would be weird to a lot of people.


I believe you're trying to make a point with those images, but I can't really understand what that may be. Maybe it's something like: "oh look, the anime features these manga-only characters, so that means the anime is in continuity with the manga and therefore it's cannon!11!1!!"?

If that's what you mean, you're wrong. In the grand scheme of things, that means nothing but a homage, a nice little "touch" Toei felt like doing. Dragon Ball Super sticks to the idea that Trunks achieved Super Saiyan thanks to Gohan's death, and we know that that isn't the case in the manga continuity. Gregory and other filler characters appear and many, many other examples of that not being the case at all.
Goodbye friend. You are weak, so you must be destroyed!

~ War of the Dinobots ~

User avatar
Tai Lung
I'm, pretty, cozy, here...
Posts: 1877
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2018 11:38 pm

Re: The Manga is no more canon than the anime right?

Post by Tai Lung » Fri Sep 03, 2021 1:56 am

Grimlock wrote: Fri Sep 03, 2021 1:40 am Movie 2 doesn't confirm anything. It may not be about Moro, but it sure as heck can make references to Moro and Granola. We won't know until we see the movie. And who knows? If the anime ever comes back, they might even adapt these two sagas since the reference the movie might make would be weird to a lot of people.


I believe you're trying to make a point with that image, but I can't really understand what that may be. Maybe it's something like: "oh look, the anime features these manga-only characters, so that means the anime is in continuity with the manga and therefore it's cannon!11!11".

If that's what you mean, you're wrong. In the grand scheme of things, that means nothing but a homage, a nice little "touch" Toei felt like doing. Dragon Ball Super (anime) sticks to the idea that Trunks achieved Super Saiyan thanks to Gohan's death, and we know that that isn't the case in the manga continuity. Gregory and other filler characters appear and many, many other examples of that being not the case at all.
confirms that the manga does not have priority when it comes to telling the events ... the movie will literally tell a separate story ...
the references is not that they change anything ... and I doubt that there is
In the movies Vegeta has a brother but in the manga he doesn't

Not a tribute would be something like a cooler cameo in GT
this is not ... This is a flashback; the scene depicted (the canon version of how Videl met Great Saiyaman, guessed his identity from him, and tricked him into revealing his ID from him) is from the manga.
They are literally clarifying what continuity they are taking in the series
not taking the version of Anime Z which was very different

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXXfwaQV7oc

Cipher
Born 'n Bred Here
Posts: 6333
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 11:54 pm
Location: Nagano
Contact:

Re: The Manga is no more canon than the anime right?

Post by Cipher » Fri Sep 03, 2021 2:11 am

Grimlock wrote: Fri Sep 03, 2021 12:26 am Just something to think about: We know that bringing Vegetto back was a Toyotaro decision, it came directly from him. There was no Vegetto in Toriyama's outline whatsoever. And Toei also used Vegetto. Are we going to disregard Vegetto's entire comeback? Must we? What do we do here? We just assume/collectively dream that Goku and Vegeta fought Merged Zamasu separately (as originally intended by Toriyama)?
This is an extra arbitrary game to play, because you can’t really do it with any part of Super. No part of it has been Toriyama locking himself away in a cabin, writing a plot outline without any outside input, then handing it off to be adapted.

He was adapting an existing script in Battle of Gods; the Future Trunks arc, Broly movie, and Granolah arc all started with or were inspired by others’ pitches; Caulifla is a Toriyama-original character who plays a significant role in the Universal Survival arc, but was created in response to the studio sending over Kale, presumably after the initial draft and ideas were solidified; the Galactic Patrol Prisoner arc contains Toriyama ideas and plot elements, and has elements used to segue directly into the following, Toriyama-drafted story, but does not appear to have been principally envisioned by him. Etc., etc.

There is and never has been a sort of “pure” Toriyama-only Super to suss out from behind-the-scenes content. Even if you only went by whatever notes he had for his story outlines, there are already other parties involved in co-ideation at that point—Shueisha, Toei, and Toyotaro all at various points. Just as, even in the original series, you had editors making suggestions for plot direction, etc.

I think you can absolutely play a game of “What was a Toriyama idea here?” with specific, minor plot beats. But I don’t think that the idea of a Toriyama-“only” Super, free of any creative input from the parties fans usually try to separate his contributions from—Shueisha (the Dragon Room), Toei and Toyotaro—is something that really exists. So if the myth is that that would be the “canon” ... again, I don’t think it’s anything more than a myth.

pepd
Beyond-the-Beyond Newbie
Posts: 385
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2020 6:52 pm

Re: The Manga is no more canon than the anime right?

Post by pepd » Fri Sep 03, 2021 2:47 am

Grimlock wrote: Fri Sep 03, 2021 12:26 am
It is absolutely how things are (unless there is a misunderstanding on the used concepts, in which case, hopefully will be clarified):
Things matter to people, not by itself. Nothing just matters, it matters to people (or to a logic construct, etc). The presented arguments for the manga and movies being "more canon" not only matter, but are essential to the objective of determining which version has more canon qualities, other thing is that it doesn't matter to you.

On the subjectivity, you only say that it is, so here's an analogy to illustrate what what I was referring to: one could say (1)this candy tastes bad, (2)I don't like this candy, (3)This candy "tastes bad" according to [x] definition. In (2) and (3) the statement itself (and a discussion that follows this structure) are not subjective.


I didn't say that it is evidence that it is canon; in fact, I explicitly said that I was not arguing that it is canon. What it is, is evidence of different facts that are relevant and decisive for the discussion (more involvement and satisfaction by Toriyama, more fidelity from Toyotaro, continuity in/consistencies, etc)


As much as I'm interested in the topic, I'm one more not interested in these discussions since they can be really be reduced to what DB you are talking about (Tori's, manga, franchise), and your definition of "canon", and in both people are usually set on (which is why I usually limit myself to give my reasoning and conclusion for those who are talking about the same as me and, in this topic, to comment only on specific arguments), so I'll leave it here.

User avatar
Grimlock
Kicks it Old-School
Posts: 8241
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 4:11 pm
Location: Cybertron.

Re: The Manga is no more canon than the anime right?

Post by Grimlock » Fri Sep 03, 2021 4:00 am

Cipher wrote: Fri Sep 03, 2021 2:11 amThis is an extra arbitrary game to play, because you can’t really do it with any part of Super. No part of it has been Toriyama locking himself away in a cabin, writing a plot outline without any outside input, then handing it off to be adapted.
It isn't. Firstly because we (me alone?) don't know that Toriyama got input from outside sources for his outilines. Any suggestions and whatnot would come after handing off such outlines. This isn't really like it was during the serialization. And given the situation we live in nowadays, that's almost exactly how I imagine things to be, Toriyama barely leaves his home and do almost everything home alone.

But be that as it may, outside input wouldn't really matter (according to people's logic) if Toriyama didn't put such inputs in the actual outline. I'll elaborate more below.
Cipher wrote: Fri Sep 03, 2021 2:11 amHe was adapting an existing script in Battle of Gods; the Future Trunks arc, Broly movie, and Granolah arc all started with or were inspired by others’ pitches; Caulifla is a Toriyama-original character who plays a significant role in the Universal Survival arc, but was created in response to the studio sending over Kale, presumably after the initial draft and ideas were solidified; the Galactic Patrol Prisoner arc contains Toriyama ideas and plot elements, and has elements used to segue directly into the following, Toriyama-drafted story, but does not appear to have been principally envisioned by him. Etc., etc.
Cipher wrote: Fri Sep 03, 2021 2:11 amThere is and never has been a sort of “pure” Toriyama-only Super to suss out from behind-the-scenes content. Even if you only went by whatever notes he had for his story outlines, there are already other parties involved in co-ideation at that point—Shueisha, Toei, and Toyotaro all at various points. Just as, even in the original series, you had editors making suggestions for plot direction, etc.
Exactly. Which proves my whole point: Dragon Ball is no longer just what Toriyama does, other parties have their voices. This renders the whole canonicity debate meaningless. Therefore, fans arguing like crazy about what's canonical and what's not in a way that feels like they are "spitting facts" (when they are not) is utterly pointless and a waste of everybody's time.

But if we follow people's logic, then only what Toriyama did come up with and put in an outline or manga is acceptable and so Caulifla would fall under the "Toriyama's contribution" category. He was the one who created her, yes, but does Caulifla exist in the outline? Was she originally intended to be there? Or is she a Gregory? However, if we accept that Caulifla is more than just "Toriyama's contribution", we are subscribing to the idea that other powers that be are also to be considered.

That's the tricky thing I always try to make people see, sticking to "only what the author does is valid", "the default canon is only what the author says" and whatever is completely flawed in the face of the situation we find ourselves in when it comes to Dragon Ball Super and modern Dragon Ball in general.

And without a proper canon established, people shouldn't really think about this that much. It doesn't matter. It is precisely what you said: "I like this continuity and therefore that's the canon one to me".
pepd wrote: Fri Sep 03, 2021 2:47 amIt is absolutely how things are (unless there is a misunderstanding on the used concepts, in which case, hopefully will be clarified):
Things matter to people, not by itself. Nothing just matters, it matters to people (or to a logic construct, etc). The presented arguments for the manga and movies being "more canon" not only matter, but are essential to the objective of determining which version has more canon qualities, other thing is that it doesn't matter to you.
For some reason the "presented arguments" matter to people, but who or what will back them up? There's no official statement about anything so what are they going to do? How is everyone going to reach a consensus? How are they going to convince the ones in the "wrong side"? This is what I'd like to know.

Time placement matters to me. It is an essential part of the plot to determine certain aspects of the series. I'm always talking about years (AGE) in Dragon Ball. But that feeling doesn't seem to be shared among the "authorities" as lots of problems are made with it as well as among the fans, as not everyone (seems to be willing to) discuss about that. What am I going to do? How am I going to make everyone care about time placement? For now, I can only accept the reality that time placement isn't an important (as it should be) topic to discuss and I'm okay with that. So is it really that difficult to do the same with canon? To just accept that, like VegettoEX said, this is nothing but an "existencial nothingness" and move on?


The whole point is: there is no canon. No one (besides the fans) cares about canon. Nobody can answer questions like this thread's name. Pick a continuity you like the most and go be happy. But try not to vocalize an opinion as if it was a fact (like "that's not cannon!" - if you do, I'll be there to rhetorically ask for a source!).
Goodbye friend. You are weak, so you must be destroyed!

~ War of the Dinobots ~

Post Reply