Canon and Dragonball

[Luke Groundwalker]

So a lot of discussion from the fanbase is constantly being thrown around about what is canon, and what isn't canon. In the fanbase, there is a sense of exclusivity and more often than not at times, the term is grossly misused and misplaced. Let's get this straight for once.

There is no canon.

As far as we know, there's never been an official recognition of what's canon and what's non-canon. In all the guidebooks we've gotten timelines for various parts of the Dragonball series, but there's never been a real distinction of what is truth to the series and what isn't. Oftentimes, for example, TOEI will randomly shove things like Movie 5 (Cooler's Revenge) into the mix out of nowhere, and even Plan to Eradicate the Saiyans was placed on the timeline in the past. Both of which nowadays if you ask most Dragonball fans, they would be called "non-canon."

However Dragonball isn't the only series like this. Dr. Who as well doesn't quite have a defined canon, with BBC going on record saying that canon in Dr. Who really isn't important. Despite this, like Dragonball, Dr. Who is in constant debate over what's canon and what's not-canon. Some fans of Dr. Who even exclude the entire 2005 relaunch of the franchise as being non-canon for example, despite there not really being any truth to that.

Y'see there is a very distinct difference between "continuity" and "canon." Continuity is more about how things all fit into a larger story, however canon on the other hand represents a body of work deemed "truth" by whoever has power over said work. Going by that definition, literally every official product in the entire series (including the aforementioned Dragonball Evolution) can be defined as being part of the larger canon until stated otherwise by an official source. Afterall, it's not like TOEI is ashamed of their original content when they consistently merchandise and make millions of dollars using characters like Broli and SSJ4 Goku in the next Dragonball Heroes expansion.

However I have a proposition, one based on the old Star Wars EU, which started out as a mere fan-classification system yet became official (well...until Disney took over, RIP EU). What I propose is that we create tiers for the "canon" of Dragonball. Note, these tiers do not necessarily share the same continuity, but rather it will create a more distinct and fleshed out idea of how we can structure the known canon.

T-Canon (Toriyama Canon) - The original Dragonball manga and related material written by Toriyama (such as Jaco and Dr. Slump).
nA-Canon (New Anime Canon) - Dragonball Kai, Dragonball Super, Battle of Gods, Resurrection F, Episode of Bardock, Yo! Son Goku Special, and etc.
A-Canon (Anime Canon) - The original Dragonball and Dragonball Z anime, Dragonball GT, the TV specials, and some of the more in-continuity movies such as Movie 13 (Wrath of the Dragon).
O-Canon (Original Story Canon) - Original stories that come from outside both the manga and the anime such as Plan to Eradicate All Saiyans (video game), Xenoverse, Heroes, and Dragonball Online.
P-Canon (Parallel Story Canon) - Movies that take a different route from either the anime or the manga (Movie 3, Movie 4, and similar).
N-Canon (Non-Canon) - Adaptations of the above material such as Dragonball Evolution and/or what-if storylines in video games.

Now I will state that the above tier isn't meant to be definitive by any means, but I feel like something like this could be a good way to classify things and segment things apart to make some more sense out of them. Not all things sharing the same tier of canon would be in the same continuity, but would have a similar level of importance. Some things such as the Battle of Gods movie for example would probably crossover a bit into both T-Canon and nA-Canon, as well as Episode of Bardock crossing over between the nA-Canon and the A-Canon.

What do you guys think? Would you guys like to see a structure to Dragonball's canon like this to end the countless debates about it?

[dbgtFO]

Yes, it makes sense that way you've written it up there.
Kinda like how in Dc, they have stand alone films, falling under the umbrella DC Universe Animated Original Movies, but not necessarily being in the same continuity, the DB and DBZ films before BoG and RoF could be viewed like that.

[DuckBoy]

As with anything, it kinda becomes hard to see what connects, especially with a huge franchise like this, haha!

Let me ask some of you: could you connect every Donald Duck and Uncle Scrooge comic with no issues? Nah haha

[Herms]

My big thing with this topic is that the only reason to try and define a canon is if you have some specific objective in mind. What is this canon for? Only once you've worked that out does it become productive to start labeling things "canon" or otherwise. Too often people approach this topic with only some vague idea that a "canon" is something any self-respecting franchise ought to have. Apparently just so that you can point at it and say "look, canon!"

So with that in mind, what exactly is the point of labeling stuff written by Toriyama as the "T-Canon"? How is that better/different than simply calling it "stuff written by Toriyama"?

[sintzu]

What exactly is the point of labeling stuff written by Toriyama as the "T-Canon"? How is that better/different than simply calling it "stuff written by Toriyama"?

It's easier to say and write.

[VegettoEX]

While this is all well and good, and I certainly enjoy reading parts of this discussion, I kinda feel weird having "THERE IS NO CANON!" regurgitated back at me when I'm fairly certain I'm the one who popularized that exact phrase a few years ago (and by "fairly certain" I mean "It was me 100% without a doubt").

Don't really have anything to add. It's just really weird. That's all!

[B]

I don't see a whole lot of value, from a business point-of-view, in doing this, as there's a vague hint of "you can ignore such and such product." I wouldn't disparage it if something like it ever came to be, though. (Unless, I didn't agree with it )

And that, I think, is the crux of the conversation. It's all personal feelings. If you personally don't like GT, it's incredibly fortunate to have "Toriyama didn't write it!" in your back pocket as a scapegoat. If you don't like the newer Toriyama-approved material, you're probably poo-pooing in a corner somewhere. Canon debates are so lively and continue to pop up because the fans having them are ultimately looking for answers. Why doesn't this movie fit with the proper storyline? Why does Goku act like this when he previously acted like that, with no provocation? Dragon Ball's not purposely trying to confuse people... but it can feel that way at times. The fact that the official companies aren't doing that almost makes it worse; why didn't anyone care enough to make sure things fit or characters behaved in a recognizable way? Of course, that leads questions such as "why is it important to you that there's an easy-to-follow proper timeline of events with no contradictions?" and that's just more opinions. The conversation seems to always eventually lead to a nihilistic rabbit hole. "Why don't these things fit?" -> "Why does it matter if it fits?" -> "Why does anything matter?"

Basically, GT is bad and I, foolishly in hindsight, became so attached to these characters that I don't want to think that is what happened to them, and it would be great if somebody involved came out and said "we were just kidding." But, that is my problem, and I assume the problem of anyone who doesn't like any given wonky story progression(the outcry of "Videl sucks in Super and isn't a badass tomboy anymore" is what sticks out to me the most). It feels like we are in a weird purgatory now where if you have any expectations at all you'll probably end up with egg on your face.

(I notice I keep using the word "proper" which is basically my substitute for "canon." Obviously there is no canon, but there's a springboard from which virtually every adaptation and new story uses to launch itself, and that's Toriyama's manga. I think that's what people want; some kind of confirmation or validiation of "yes, that definitely happened for realsies no joke," and Toriyama's manga gets that treatment in every way except explicitly)

[ABED]

I know a lot will claim that there's no canon because a few things like the alternate ending, but I don't think that's enough to claim there isn't a canon. I think there is. Hell, one could even argue that the anime adaptation has its own canon, given that scenes are often done differently from the manga.

[Luke Groundwalker]

My big thing with this topic is that the only reason to try and define a canon is if you have some specific objective in mind. What is this canon for? Only once you've worked that out does it become productive to start labeling things "canon" or otherwise. Too often people approach this topic with only some vague idea that a "canon" is something any self-respecting franchise ought to have. Apparently just so that you can point at it and say "look, canon!"

So with that in mind, what exactly is the point of labeling stuff written by Toriyama as the "T-Canon"? How is that better/different than simply calling it "stuff written by Toriyama"?

Well technically, what I'm proposing in the OP is to create a fanon classification system of some sort. It isn't really REAL canon unless it's officially endorsed obviously.

The objective of establishing a canon would be for clarification purposes. There's no reason why people are spreading things online such as, "Dragonball GT isn't canon!" or "End of Z isn't canon anymore!" and etc. It just leads to a lot of misinformation about what the franchise entails and what it's about. Misinformation is a huge issue in the Dragonball community as seen by the countless amount of hoaxes and fanon names (some of the later even going into official material such as video games and Funimation's dub). Then there's some modern things such as "Frost Demon" or "Arcosian" being the name of Freeza's race.

I agree with you, Dragonball doesn't NEED a canon, but the fanbase at large seems to think there is one despite no official sources backing this up. That's why I'm proposing to establish one, for the fans, by the fans, to clarify these issues by observing the body of work Toriyama, Bird Studio, TOEI and etc. have given us.

[LuckyCat]

Can't say I like all these categories. I only think continuity becomes an issue when a medium contradicts itself (like Cell and his nucleus). All these adaptations and recuts are going to feel like different canons, but the reasons for these divisions come off as arbitrary. Like, is there a hard and fast reason I can't place Kai in the A-canon and the Super anime in a different canon? Could Toyotaro's Super manga also belong in the T-Canon because it's written material?

[Neo-Makaiōshin]

While Toriyama never used the word "canon", didn't he use the term "continuity" (which is not the same as canon), did he? I believe, he used that term when talking about the Battle of Gods movie (and the other 17 movies) and how it was "connected" to the manga.

[Xeztin]

I've sort of adopted the idea of no canon, no matter what way you try to sort out the continuity your always going to run into a problem or something someone doesn't agree with. In my opinion, if somethings not a "reboot" and there is more than one possible timeline of continuity under the same author,with the same cast of characters,then there is no canon. The only way I could justify multiple timelines of continuity, is if the author rebooted the series, or a different author took over the story sort of like the Star Wars films. Then you would have 2 different continuity's under the category's of the 2 different authors. I think it is set in stone at this point that Toriyama doesn't care about continuity or canon, just the material itself. I know some will point to Super being called the continuation of the series, but so was GT. I more or less look at everything as "DB material" now, rather than trying to make it fit together. In other words you get to pick what actually "Happened" and what did not from all this material. Toriyama probably doesn't have a canon simply because it'd step on the toes of Broly fans and such so he let us pick. I think spiting it up in the category's like in the OP is pretty neat, but there are going to be those that try to take the movies and stick them into Toriyama's timeline and so on.

[successoroffate]

Canon it's what makes you excited about the franchise and makes you a fan, if you like something everyone (most of them) else despises, doesn't make their argument better than yours. Take my example, I'm always forcing the SSJ 4 transformation as a canon element of the franchise, when technically it isn't (Trust me, I've tried Duct tape but it doesn't work). I agree with your point of view as taking everything individually as oppose as looking at it as a whole and see what fits. Instead of saying there is no canon, I would say there is more than one canon instead.

[DemonRin]

I like the general gist of the original post, but if I may suggest something:

You seem to be basing this on Star Wars canon, which tended to disregard things once they had too many contradictions. IE, a thing could be canon until a "Higher Level" of canon contradicted it too much, then it got bumped down to non canon or a much lower level of Canon.

Wouldn't GT count as one of these at this point?

The existence of SSG pretty much destroys GT, wouldn't GT have to be a lower ring of Canon, maybe even Non Canon at this point if DBSuper/RoF is now the second highest level?

[ABED]

I'm not sure how there are different levels. It either is or isn't canon. With Star Wars, the extended universe was considered canon by Lucasfilm wasn't it? It was until it was sold, in which case, those stories were thrown out of the canon by Disney so the writers could craft their own stories without having to take into account years worth of books.

DB is similar to something like Harry Potter. There are the original novels and then there's the adaptation. The adaptation has its own canon even though it follows the books very closely.

[successoroffate]

I like the general gist of the original post, but if I may suggest something:

You seem to be basing this on Star Wars canon, which tended to disregard things once they had too many contradictions. IE, a thing could be canon until a "Higher Level" of canon contradicted it too much, then it got bumped down to non canon or a much lower level of Canon.

Wouldn't GT count as one of these at this point?

The existence of SSG pretty much destroys GT, wouldn't GT have to be a lower ring of Canon, maybe even Non Canon at this point if DBSuper/RoF is now the second highest level?

I still hope that by the time Super catches up with the "Ending of Z", something like "Men In Black with the flash light" happens and everyone forgets about what happened and therefore the SSG transformation dissapear. I see it as Goku gets to powerful and Beerus begins to grow concern that he may lose to him so he just erases everyones mind and Beerus and Whis disappear forever and GT remains alive

[Dragon Ball Ireland]

I'm not sure how there are different levels. It either is or isn't canon. With Star Wars, the extended universe was considered canon by Lucasfilm wasn't it? It was until it was sold, in which case, those stories were thrown out of the canon by Disney so the writers could craft their own stories without having to take into account years worth of books.

DB is similar to something like Harry Potter. There are the original novels and then there's the adaptation. The adaptation has its own canon even though it follows the books very closely.

No, the old Star Wars Expanded Universe was never canon, hence the new term its filed under being "Legends". Legends are stories that contain elements of truth, but overall they don't fully correspond to reality. That's why the new novels, comics, cartoons, etc incorporate elements of the older EU but not exactly as they were presented. Terms like "T-Canon, C-Canon, etc were just nice ways of saying those stories were not pat of George Lucas' artistic vision, but alas we don't have to worry about that anymore.

Canon is dead for Dragon Ball.

[ABED]

I'm not sure how there are different levels. It either is or isn't canon. With Star Wars, the extended universe was considered canon by Lucasfilm wasn't it? It was until it was sold, in which case, those stories were thrown out of the canon by Disney so the writers could craft their own stories without having to take into account years worth of books.

DB is similar to something like Harry Potter. There are the original novels and then there's the adaptation. The adaptation has its own canon even though it follows the books very closely.

No, the old Star Wars Expanded Universe was never canon, hence the new term its filed under being "Legends". Legends are stories that contain elements of truth, but overall they don't fully correspond to reality. That's why the new novels, comics, cartoons, etc incorporate elements of the older EU but not exactly as they were presented. Terms like "T-Canon, C-Canon, etc were just nice ways of saying those stories were not pat of George Lucas' artistic vision, but alas we don't have to worry about that anymore.

Canon is dead for Dragon Ball.

Everyone's quick to bash his vision but without it, we wouldn't have gotten Star Wars to begin with and say what you will about the prequels, at least he didn't retread his own story. Good lord, they had ANOTHER Death Star. We had the Death Star twice already in the originals. Back to DB, no, canon isn't dead. Contradictions and a different ending doesn't make that so. No one has answered this, but what does it means to say there is no canon?

[Dragon Ball Ireland]

I'm not sure how there are different levels. It either is or isn't canon. With Star Wars, the extended universe was considered canon by Lucasfilm wasn't it? It was until it was sold, in which case, those stories were thrown out of the canon by Disney so the writers could craft their own stories without having to take into account years worth of books.

DB is similar to something like Harry Potter. There are the original novels and then there's the adaptation. The adaptation has its own canon even though it follows the books very closely.

No, the old Star Wars Expanded Universe was never canon, hence the new term its filed under being "Legends". Legends are stories that contain elements of truth, but overall they don't fully correspond to reality. That's why the new novels, comics, cartoons, etc incorporate elements of the older EU but not exactly as they were presented. Terms like "T-Canon, C-Canon, etc were just nice ways of saying those stories were not pat of George Lucas' artistic vision, but alas we don't have to worry about that anymore.

Canon is dead for Dragon Ball.

Everyone's quick to bash his vision but without it, we wouldn't have gotten Star Wars to begin with and say what you will about the prequels, at least he didn't retread his own story. Good lord, they had ANOTHER Death Star. We had the Death Star twice already in the originals. Back to DB, no, canon isn't dead. Contradictions and a different ending doesn't make that so. No one has answered this, but what does it means to say there is no canon?

I wasn't making a sly dig at Lucas. I have no problem with the vision he had for episodes I-VI, and I respect and honour him no end for creating Star Wars in the first place. My point was that since Lucasfilm now has a story group they don't need to worry too much about the material outside the films contradicting them, that problem was there with the old EU, hence there was no canon pre-2014, Lucasfilm weren't willing to take the chance back then.

I said canon is dead because thee will be contradictions no matter how you organize it. TOEI tried to put together a timeline recently but there were a lot of problems with that, its best to just enjoy what you like and not worry about whether or not it is "official".

[ABED]

I said canon is dead because thee will be contradictions no matter how you organize it

Contradictions aren't enough to throw out canon. In pretty much any long running series there are going to be contradictions. Canon is about separating the main story from things like fan fiction and elseworld tales. For instance, Sherlock Holmes stories written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle are considered canon, where as anything written by other authors isn't.

hence there was no canon pre-2014

I'd say there was - The trilogy.

What does it mean to say a series has no canon? I have yet to get a direct response to that question. To be clear, this isn't posed specifically to you, but to anyone. I'd like to know what that actually means in practice for something to have no canon.