Head Canon is DUMB

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

Moderators: Kanzenshuu Staff, General Help

rereboy
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 10261
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 8:42 pm

Re: Head Canon is DUMB

Post by rereboy » Mon Nov 28, 2016 8:05 am

ABED wrote: But you can't have your own canon. The fact that you think so, shows that it's a term that leads to confusion.
You can. In your head, as an hypothetical one. He isn't confused.
You said that "headcanon" can't refer to something subjective because "canon" doesn't refer to something subjective. AKA, you were saying that they can't refer to different things.
Not what I wrote.
Right, you said that one can't refer to an objective thing while the other refers to an subjective thing. Even though they are different things. Just because "canon" is part of the name.
TekTheNinja wrote:
ABED wrote: But you can't have your own canon.
Why the fuck not? -_-
Obviously, you can have your own hypothetical canon in your head, as long as you don't think that your preference actually applies, objectively, to the franchise and other people. ABED just believes that people should, painstakingly, go out of their way to state that they don't think that their preference actually applies to the franchise and other people because he believes people are confused about it.
Cetra wrote:Language is a living organism, not stagnating and which gets a lot of multiple meanings by common usage. You have to accept that there is a thing such as head-canon. Just as you have to accept that a strawberry is called a berry even though it is scientifically wrong.

The only dumb thing is when people say "won't accept it even if its canon" and therefore ignore what is true which can get annoying in arguments. Because that is what really is a waste of time. But that's it. As long as people don't annoy in such arguments or at least understand that authority decides what the real deal is, it is fine.
That's a pretty good example. And I agree with your point.

Dbzfan94
Born 'n Bred Here
Posts: 5300
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2013 5:16 pm
Location: Mt. Paozu

Re: Head Canon is DUMB

Post by Dbzfan94 » Mon Nov 28, 2016 10:00 am

I whole heartedly disagree. Head canon can be used to think of fun little things that we never see, like what happens at Christmas time at the Son house. If you don't like that type of thing that's fine but it's not dumb.

User avatar
Deathbringer
Beyond-the-Beyond Newbie
Posts: 373
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2015 12:27 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Head Canon is DUMB

Post by Deathbringer » Mon Nov 28, 2016 10:11 am

I have altered my signature as to not cause any further confusion, I also apologise for confusing everyone by using this dumb term that lumps together two opposing concepts.

User avatar
ABED
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 17396
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 10:23 am
Location: VA
Contact:

Re: Head Canon is DUMB

Post by ABED » Mon Nov 28, 2016 12:26 pm

TekTheNinja wrote:
ABED wrote: But you can't have your own canon.
Why the fuck not? -_-
Because it ceases to be canon. Canon is what some official body says it is. Why are you so desperate to want canon to be whatever you want?
Head canon can be used to think of fun little things that we never see, like what happens at Christmas time at the Son house
Not what I mean. If you want to create imaginary scenarios with characters you didn't create, more power to you. I have no problem with that, it can be fun, but that's not what I think is dumb.
In your head, as an hypothetical one
Then it ceases to be canon. It's simply what you would like to have happened.
Language is a living organism, not stagnating and which gets a lot of multiple meanings by common usage.
Your berry example is well taken, but it's benign in comparison to the ways in which people have used this excuse in order to change the way people thing of things by making them vague and creating package deals. Canon vs. "head canon" isn't as insideous as changing the meaning of liberal, but there's still no good reason to create such a term.
Right, you said that one can't refer to an objective thing while the other refers to an subjective thing. Even though they are different things. Just because "canon" is part of the name.
Still not what I wrote. It's partially true, but doesn't go to the heart of the matter.
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.

rereboy
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 10261
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 8:42 pm

Re: Head Canon is DUMB

Post by rereboy » Mon Nov 28, 2016 12:52 pm

Then it ceases to be canon. It's simply what you would like to have happened.
It's hypothetical canon, according to my preference.

If I imagine a female Goku, for example, it's obviously still Goku even though it's not the "real" Goku, it's just an hypothetical Goku because it doesn't exist in the franchise, but it exists in my head as an hypothetical version or take on Goku.

Hypothetical, by definition, means that it's not real. It's imagined, an "what if". And it does exist in my head, in my preference, in my imagination. That's the whole point of it. A personal take on canon, just like I might have a personal take on Goku within my head.
ABED wrote: Still not what I wrote. It's partially true, but doesn't go to the heart of the matter.
It's what you wrote, just in other words.

User avatar
kinisking
I Live Here
Posts: 4987
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2015 2:21 pm
Location: United States.

Re: Head Canon is DUMB

Post by kinisking » Mon Nov 28, 2016 2:21 pm

Head Canon is amazing. It fills in holes and enriches the experience! However, if actual Canon ends up going against it, they'res no need to freak out. Unfortunately, some people go to far.
Jinzoningen MULE wrote: Maybe I should start making it a point not to comment when I'm not sure of something. Too many people know what they're talking about around here.
Disclaimer: I might get into a disagreement with you. Sometimes I might even get feisty about it. I'll never harbor negative feelings because of it though. I hope you feel the same way!
I made a bet with Alee9977 that Vegeta won't be beaten quickly by an opponent. If I lose, I switch my avatar to Vegeta getting beat by hit. If I win, he switches it to Vegeta holding Black by his hair. This will last a month.

User avatar
Anime Kitten
I Live Here
Posts: 4260
Joined: Mon May 23, 2016 3:53 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Head Canon is DUMB

Post by Anime Kitten » Mon Nov 28, 2016 3:46 pm

ABED wrote:Canon is what some official body says it is.
And what does one do when some official body has not declared a canon?
MyAnimeList | Naruto Forums
Discord: Nagareboshi#5185

User avatar
Lord Beerus
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 20897
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2014 5:20 pm
Location: A temple on a giant tree
Contact:

Re: Head Canon is DUMB

Post by Lord Beerus » Mon Nov 28, 2016 4:38 pm

I have to admit that I've never really liked the term "head canon". But people only really say that term because it's a much simpler and abbreviated fashion of expressing their own interpretation of a story. It doesn't make it what they say to be any more factual than what is stated in the actual story they are providing their interpretation of. The term itself really has no real weight or meaning to it. It's basically another way of saying, "In my opinion".

User avatar
Cetra
I Live Here
Posts: 3856
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 3:01 pm

Re: Head Canon is DUMB

Post by Cetra » Mon Nov 28, 2016 5:19 pm

Lord Beerus wrote:I have to admit that I've never really liked the term "head canon". But people only really say that term because it's a much simpler and abbreviated fashion of expressing their own interpretation of a story. It doesn't make it what they say to be any more factual than what is stated in the actual story they are providing their interpretation of. The term itself really has no real weight or meaning to it. It's basically another way of saying, "In my opinion".
Yeah, I hate whenever people actually act like them ignoring something would play any role for a franchise but as long as they don't, fine by me.
"Citation needed."
"too lazy

feel free to take it with grain of salt or discredit me altogether, I'm not losing any sleep"

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

Re: Head Canon is DUMB

Post by sintzu » Mon Nov 28, 2016 7:59 pm

TekTheNinja wrote:
ABED wrote: But you can't have your own canon.
Why the fuck not? -_-
I have one. 8)
July 9th 2018 will be remembered as the day Broly became canon.

Zephyr
I Live Here
Posts: 3562
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 9:20 pm

Re: Head Canon is DUMB

Post by Zephyr » Mon Nov 28, 2016 10:25 pm

Image

There's no way that someone who is helping to Make Sonic Great Again™ could possibly be dumb.

User avatar
TheGreatness25
I Live Here
Posts: 4233
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 9:36 am

Re: Head Canon is DUMB

Post by TheGreatness25 » Mon Nov 28, 2016 10:59 pm

"Head canon" and "personal canon" are now in the urban dictionary, so regardless of their proper use, they have become acceptable terms with a particular definition assigned to them. This thread was literally opened up with the words "I hate." "Hate?" Seriously? Hate is a really strong word for something like this. And yet it was used the way people generally use it... kind of like "headcanon" has been used on here.

People are just using these terms the way they have been conditioned to using them; starting a crusade on here against the semantics of the terms is not going to change them in general society... or whoever uses them.

User avatar
simtek34
OMG CRAZY REG
Posts: 927
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Location: Mount Paozu (Twin Cities, MN)
Contact:

Re: Head Canon is DUMB

Post by simtek34 » Tue Nov 29, 2016 8:25 am

Zephyr wrote:Image

There's no way that someone who is helping to Make Sonic Great Again™ could possibly be dumb.

HAHA! We really need Sonic 3&K Remastered.
Xbox Live: PlushGerm24109
Everywhere else: simtek34

User avatar
ABED
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 17396
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 10:23 am
Location: VA
Contact:

Re: Head Canon is DUMB

Post by ABED » Tue Nov 29, 2016 11:24 am

TheGreatness25 wrote:"Head canon" and "personal canon" are now in the urban dictionary, so regardless of their proper use, they have become acceptable terms with a particular definition assigned to them. This thread was literally opened up with the words "I hate." "Hate?" Seriously? Hate is a really strong word for something like this. And yet it was used the way people generally use it... kind of like "headcanon" has been used on here.

People are just using these terms the way they have been conditioned to using them; starting a crusade on here against the semantics of the terms is not going to change them in general society... or whoever uses them.
You're using urban dictionary as proof? And fair enough about hate. I dislike it.
And what does one do when some official body has not declared a canon?
Go on with your life? Does anything have to be explicitly declared as canon? Were Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's original Sherlock Holmes stories not canon even though the term was not used in such contexts during his lifetime (as far as I know?)
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.

Ssenrof
Newbie
Posts: 34
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2016 9:39 pm

Re: Head Canon is DUMB

Post by Ssenrof » Tue Nov 29, 2016 11:32 am

Wow, I've had many debates regarding canon- it's kinda a staple in the DB community. Never have I encountered someone who argued that head-canon is a confusing/redundant/irrelevant term.

However, I will take your word for it for the sake of argument.

An oxymoron is a set of words that have contrary definitions. A shining darkness, smart stupid personality, etc...

Just because two words have contradicting definitions doesn't mean they can't accurately respresent a real word situation. For example: Fictional Reality.

1) Fictional: Not depicting reality
2) Reality: Depicts Reality

1 and 2 have condradicting definitions. That doesn't mean they can't be used in conjunction to describe something beyond their independent usage:

Fictional Reality - the reality that exists within a non real world.

Dragon Ball Z takes place in a fictional reality.

Does that statement make sense to you? Is the fact that reality and fictional are used together confusing or without purpose? Should we not use the term Fictional Reality?

Is the fact that Dragon Ball is fictional imply that it cannot be a type of reality? Similar to how ones personal thoughts cannot be a type of Cannon?

Let's compare this example to head-cannon.

1) head - refers to Ones personal opinions/thoughts
2) cannon- refers to a entities official product/continuity.

Head-cannon: refers to Ones personal interpretations
Regarding another's works.

The word has been expanded in the community to discuss all things related to wishes/explanations regarding cannon that have not been officially explained.

Let me elaborate by detailing a situation where the term head-canon would make sense to use.

It's my head-cannon that Child Trunks/Goten "inherited" Their fathers ability to to turn Super Sayain.

Here is another version of the same idea without the use of the word head-canon.

I believe that it would be reasonable to assume that a theoretical in universe explanation for why Goten and Trunks transform into Super Sayains so easily could be that they inherited their fathers strength.

Both statements accuratly depict a a real world thought process that many fans have gone through. In order to easily communicate these ideas on message boards fans use colloquial interpretations of words for simplicity. Head-canon simply refers to ones own personal views/interpretations on a canonical work.

Headcannon is to cannon like Fictional Reality is to

_________.

Similar words describe identical processes in other contexts.

Historiography describes ones personal interpretations on history. How do historians think Rome fell? What was the greatest factor? The term historiography refers to the theories on the how and why certain events happened throughout history. Historians developed theories as to how certain events came about- these theories aren't strictly "history" since it's unknown what the actual reason is.

This process directly parallels how fans develope theories as to how/why certain Events happened in the canonical work of An author/agency.

Just because historical events are objective doesn't stop individual humans from interpreting them in a subjective fashion.


Hopefully, I have explained the reasoning and usage of the word adequately for you.

If not please elaborate on exactly what is confusing so they we can continue discussion and I could
Try to explain the situation more Clearly.
Last edited by Ssenrof on Tue Nov 29, 2016 11:48 am, edited 4 times in total.

User avatar
Ki Breaker
Born 'n Bred Here
Posts: 6570
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 12:15 am
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Re: Head Canon is DUMB

Post by Ki Breaker » Tue Nov 29, 2016 11:37 am

:D :D
Sorry that made me crack up..
Yes, I was also confused when I first joined the community..
What a head canon? What does canon even freaking mean.. how do I confirm these mean what I think it means? Dictionary definition doesn't do it for these things most of the times, so it's confusing at first..

But it actually does have its own charm.. as you dive deeper into this community you being to get familiar with these terms.. head canon is a stupid word but it gets the job done, its kind of a common word, happens to be created when you need to repeat a sentence over and over again..
I personally never use the term head canon..

Another word like this is saying 'I had a brain fart'
Something about this grinds my gears
The Lord moves in mysterious ways but you don't have to. Please use your blinker

User avatar
TheGreatness25
I Live Here
Posts: 4233
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 9:36 am

Re: Head Canon is DUMB

Post by TheGreatness25 » Tue Nov 29, 2016 12:50 pm

ABED wrote: You're using urban dictionary as proof?
As proof that it's exists in our society and used and understood in a certain way enough to justify people using if? Yes.

User avatar
TekTheNinja
I'm pretty cozy, here...
Posts: 1639
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2016 11:36 pm
Location: The realm of annoyance.

Re: Head Canon is DUMB

Post by TekTheNinja » Tue Nov 29, 2016 1:00 pm

ABED wrote:
And what does one do when some official body has not declared a canon?
Go on with your life? Does anything have to be explicitly declared as canon? Were Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's original Sherlock Holmes stories not canon even though the term was not used in such contexts during his lifetime (as far as I know?)
I think you missed his entire point. :lolno:
-A bitter fan of the human characters of Dragon Ball.
Chris Sabat wrote:#YamchaForever
saiyanvegetable wrote:Trunks slowly realizes this is not the past he came to when he fought Cell, instead he finds himself trapped in a world with hollow caricatures, a talking cat, and a Goku who beat the heart virus but is suffering from retardation.

TheMohawkAndroid
Newbie
Posts: 18
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 1:12 pm
Contact:

Re: Head Canon is DUMB

Post by TheMohawkAndroid » Tue Nov 29, 2016 2:08 pm

That's why I say "in my head movies" instead

User avatar
RedRibbonSoldier#42
Regular
Posts: 713
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 12:37 am

Re: Head Canon is DUMB

Post by RedRibbonSoldier#42 » Tue Nov 29, 2016 2:32 pm

TheGreatness25 wrote:
ABED wrote: You're using urban dictionary as proof?
As proof that it's exists in our society and used and understood in a certain way enough to justify people using if? Yes.
"head-canon" is not in my head-dictionary.

I agree with ABED. It's a nonsense term. It also does nothing. What happens to works not a part of you head-canon? Do you forget they exist? Can't do any more VS battles about it? Burn your DVD's?

Post Reply