What is your canon policy? Do you have one?

BlueSky · Post by **Kaboom** » Sat Aug 15, 2009 12:53 am

DemonRin wrote:Why are the Daizenshuu and guidebooks from Toriyama not canon?

I suppose because at times they can contradict the manga, or at least not make much sense at certain points.

I view those sort of things as supplementary material. If they add some neat extra info, then cool. If they don't make any sense or contradict something, then...

Scarz · Post by **Scarz** » Sat Aug 15, 2009 1:17 am

Anything that makes sense to me is canon. I get so confused just reading half the shit that comes out of this forum I've decided to go with whatever make sense in my head, don't care if majority calls it canon or not.

Therefore none of the DBZ movies are canon (not including the specials), most of the anime is canon even the fillers, GT is canon... Don't you dare judge me! I believe most fans would've called it canon if the show wasn't so repulsive.

NeptuneKai · Post by **NeptuneKai** » Sat Aug 15, 2009 2:12 am

I think each variation of DBZ has its own canon.

There's manga canon, anime canon and movie canon.

Thanos · Post by **Thanos** » Sat Aug 15, 2009 3:05 am

Scarz wrote:Anything that makes sense to me is canon. I get so confused just reading half the shit that comes out of this forum I've decided to go with whatever make sense in my head, don't care if majority calls it canon or not.

Therefore none of the DBZ movies are canon (not including the specials), most of the anime is canon even the fillers, GT is canon... Don't you dare judge me! I believe most fans would've called it canon if the show wasn't so repulsive.

Yeah, either that or its the little-to-no Toriyama involvement... or maybe its the gaping plot holes the size of Uranus... wait, that didn't come out right.

Bussani · Post by **Bussani** » Sat Aug 15, 2009 3:11 am

Canon is a tricky subject. You can't really talk about it without a context. So you could say 'canon from Toriyama's position when writing it', or 'anime canon' or whatever.

Personally, I'm only usually interested in the canon from the writer's point of view. In the case of manga this is fairly simple, since there's a single author. In the case of Dragon Ball I consider the guidebooks to be canon too, but the manga trumps everything else, of course.

In other things it's a bit harder. In the case of something like Star Trek, Paramount spells out their own canon policy pretty clearly (the TV series' and movies, nothing else unless they say so), but something else like Star Wars is a bit messier.

Scarz · Post by **Scarz** » Sat Aug 15, 2009 3:39 am

Bussani wrote:In other things it's a bit harder. In the case of something like Star Trek, Paramount spells out their own canon policy pretty clearly (the TV series' and movies, nothing else unless they say so), but something else like Star Wars is a bit messier.

I have this strange feeling, or maybe it's false hope, that Dragonball will some day become a franchise very similar to Star Trek, Stars Wars, or even something a little smaller like any major on-going comic books today. Even when the creator is long gone and fans like me are old wrinkly farts, DB will still be around with different variations to the story written by new fresh faced writers or artist. Or maybe it will still be on going (Like the superman comics or the Gundam series). By then it would be meaningless to try to connect the story together or call it canon.

Maybe it is false hope I'm feeling.

Bussani · Post by **Bussani** » Sat Aug 15, 2009 3:47 am

Scarz wrote:
Bussani wrote:In other things it's a bit harder. In the case of something like Star Trek, Paramount spells out their own canon policy pretty clearly (the TV series' and movies, nothing else unless they say so), but something else like Star Wars is a bit messier.
I have this strange feeling, or maybe it's false hope, that Dragonball will some day become a franchise very similar to Star Trek, Stars Wars, or even something a little smaller like any major on-going comic books today. Even when the creator is long gone and fans like me are old wrinkly farts, DB will still be around with different variations to the story written by new fresh faced writers or artist. Or maybe it will still be on going (Like the superman comics or the Gundam series). By then it would be meaningless to try to connect the story together or call it canon.

Maybe it is false hope I'm feeling.

It's rarer in anime, but it could happen. I wonder how many of us would accept a Dragon Ball by someone other than Toriyama. What if someone remade a series without him, kind of like the latest version of Astro Boy? That would be considered its own separate canon, I suppose.

B · Post by B » Sat Aug 15, 2009 8:13 am

Kanzenban and guidebooks that accompany the manga.

DragonBalllKaiHD · Post by **DragonBalllKaiHD** » Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:44 am

Kanzenban

Anime and guides that blend well with manga

Olivier Hague · Post by **Olivier Hague** » Sat Aug 15, 2009 12:00 pm

Scarz wrote:Maybe it is false hope I'm feeling.

"False hope"? It's like you're channeling my nightmares...

JulieYBM · Post by **JulieYBM** » Sat Aug 15, 2009 12:40 pm

The Manga is the main canon, with details from the databooks next.

Rocketman · Post by **Rocketman** » Sat Aug 15, 2009 3:59 pm

DemonRin wrote:
Rocketman wrote:The manga alone. The Daizenshuu and anything Toriyama has said are on the same level as the anime, i.e. not canon at all.
Why are the Daizenshuu and guidebooks from Toriyama not canon?

Because Toriyama doesn't remember half of what he's written. The Daizenshuu also gets basic information from the series wrong, so I don't trust it.

johnboy1 · Post by **johnboy1** » Sat Aug 15, 2009 4:14 pm

Rocketman wrote:Because Toriyama doesn't remember half of what he's written. The Daizenshuu also gets basic information from the series wrong, so I don't trust it.

My qualm with the Daizenshuu is that Toriyama didn't actually write them. Well, he kind of "wrote" the first one in that the pictures, intoductory note, and interview are his, but there's so little actual information that it's not really worth mentioning.

Kendamu · Post by **Kendamu** » Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:09 pm

My personal canon is the manga and the Jump Special.

Olivier Hague · Post by **Olivier Hague** » Sat Aug 15, 2009 11:08 pm

Rocketman wrote:
DemonRin wrote:Why are the Daizenshuu and guidebooks from Toriyama not canon?
Because Toriyama doesn't remember half of what he's written.

So you shouldn't consider the manga to be canonical either, by the same logic...

dragonfist · Post by **dragonfist** » Sat Aug 15, 2009 11:12 pm

I try not to be bothered due to Toriyama's laziness and simply because it's fiction. I am just suppose to enjoy it; now Harry Potter on the other hand...

Bussani · Post by **Bussani** » Sun Aug 16, 2009 1:01 am

Oh, I forgot to say earlier; the reason I'm only really interested in canon from the writers' or 'official' point of view on a subject is because that's what I think should be taken into account when trying to figure out things. Like, "why do you think this character did this?" It's useless to take filler or outside material (again, in the case of Star Trek, there are thousands of novels written by different people that Paramount doesn't consider canon when producing episodes and movies) since only the author themselves could know what was going on inside the person's head.

It's fine and dandy to have 'personal canon' on something, but I don't see much of a point myself. If you're not wondering about stuff like the example above, then does it really matter what is and isn't canon? If it's just for yourself, then you can consider whatever you want to be canon.

Kendamu · Post by **Kendamu** » Sun Aug 16, 2009 1:19 am

Bussani wrote:Oh, I forgot to say earlier; the reason I'm only really interested in canon from the writers' or 'official' point of view on a subject is because that's what I think should be taken into account when trying to figure out things. Like, "why do you think this character did this?" It's useless to take filler or outside material (again, in the case of Star Trek, there are thousands of novels written by different people that Paramount doesn't consider canon when producing episodes and movies) since only the author themselves could know what was going on inside the person's head.

It's fine and dandy to have 'personal canon' on something, but I don't see much of a point myself. If you're not wondering about stuff like the example above, then does it really matter what is and isn't canon? If it's just for yourself, then you can consider whatever you want to be canon.

A lot of the conversation around here as to why so-and-so did such-and-such is out-of-universe. Rather than looking at it from the characters' perspectives, we look at it from Toriyama's writing perspective. That's why we can have our "personal canon."

Bussani · Post by **Bussani** » Sun Aug 16, 2009 1:29 am

Kendamu wrote:
Bussani wrote:Oh, I forgot to say earlier; the reason I'm only really interested in canon from the writers' or 'official' point of view on a subject is because that's what I think should be taken into account when trying to figure out things. Like, "why do you think this character did this?" It's useless to take filler or outside material (again, in the case of Star Trek, there are thousands of novels written by different people that Paramount doesn't consider canon when producing episodes and movies) since only the author themselves could know what was going on inside the person's head.

It's fine and dandy to have 'personal canon' on something, but I don't see much of a point myself. If you're not wondering about stuff like the example above, then does it really matter what is and isn't canon? If it's just for yourself, then you can consider whatever you want to be canon.
A lot of the conversation around here as to why so-and-so did such-and-such is out-of-universe. Rather than looking at it from the characters' perspectives, we look at it from Toriyama's writing perspective. That's why we can have our "personal canon."

I get what you're saying, but I'm not sure why that would be called "personal canon"? It's still more like you're trying to see it from the writer's point of view. Oh well, just semantics I guess.

Kendamu · Post by **Kendamu** » Sun Aug 16, 2009 1:44 am

Bussani wrote:
Kendamu wrote:
Bussani wrote:Oh, I forgot to say earlier; the reason I'm only really interested in canon from the writers' or 'official' point of view on a subject is because that's what I think should be taken into account when trying to figure out things. Like, "why do you think this character did this?" It's useless to take filler or outside material (again, in the case of Star Trek, there are thousands of novels written by different people that Paramount doesn't consider canon when producing episodes and movies) since only the author themselves could know what was going on inside the person's head.

It's fine and dandy to have 'personal canon' on something, but I don't see much of a point myself. If you're not wondering about stuff like the example above, then does it really matter what is and isn't canon? If it's just for yourself, then you can consider whatever you want to be canon.
A lot of the conversation around here as to why so-and-so did such-and-such is out-of-universe. Rather than looking at it from the characters' perspectives, we look at it from Toriyama's writing perspective. That's why we can have our "personal canon."
I get what you're saying, but I'm not sure why that would be called "personal canon"? It's still more like you're trying to see it from the writer's point of view. Oh well, just semantics I guess.

Despite seeing it from the writer's point-of-view, we all still have our own outlook on what the real story is despite whatever the writer thinks. An example would be the famous driving episode filler. While it's filler, it doesn't get in the way of anything and a lot of people like it. So, maybe they'll take that in as their own personal canon.

Not everyone believes the Jump Special to be canon, but I do. Akira Toriyama hasn't said either way as to if it was canon or not and some people have found some inconsistencies, but I still consider it canon.