Is Yo! Son Goku and his friend return! Canon?

[MasenkoHA]

If it is definitively "both", then how come a large portion of the fanbase argues which one is more canonical than the other?

Because fans argue about dumb shit?

For pete sake this is a fandom where people will put their own “power level list” in direct contradiction to what’s stated in the manga because they think they understand Toriyama’s made up numerical system better than he does.

Sure, there are things that the fanbase agrees at large what is canonical, but for specific instances like these, it's a matter of opinion.

But fans don’t get to declare what is canon and non-canon. That’s not how any of that works. Fans can universally agree that Dragon Ball Minus is non-canon and they would still be wrong.

[PurestEvil]

Sure, there are things that the fanbase agrees at large what is canonical, but for specific instances like these, it's a matter of opinion.

But fans don’t get to declare what is canon and non-canon. That’s not how any of that works. Fans can universally agree that Dragon Ball Minus is non-canon and they would still be wrong.

Has there been any official statement from Toriyama, Toyo, or whoever about the canonicity of the DBS media? The discourse about canonicity in Dragon Ball has always been based on the fanbase's observations.

[TheGreatness25]

Not "continuity," but canon is the foundation that influences the story going forward. But there has to be that foundation. There has to be canon. It's not like a Buggs Bunny cartoon where every episode is its own story. There is clearly something constantly being built upon to form the future of the story. That's canon.

Except that in Dragon Ball, there's nothing to say what is official canon or not. Some people will say anything with Toriyama involved with the writing, but it's still fan conjecture. He's never come out and declared his works as canon; he probably isn't even familiar with the term.

Works constantly being built upon doesn't necessarily constitute a clear canon, unless you're defining canon as a collection of closely-to-loosely-related works that don't have to perfectly line up narratively. In which case...anything can fit, and it's up to you to decide what you want to go with.

Toriyama doesn't have to know the word for there to be canon. The work dictates what canon is. The original author is involved in the current product--that's canon. The rest, you have to piece together from the work presented. Clearly the origins 42 volumes of the manga (Kanzenban) are canon. Toriyama is showing no indication of considering any of the DB/Z filler nor the movies nor GT as the foundation of the story. If tomorrow, there's a Coola reference, then guess he's canon. Just like the question presented, if they're referencing Table, then he's canon. If Super overtly removed mention of Table, then you can deduce that he's not canon.

Yes, both anime and manga of Super are canon because the creator is involved with both. Until one is contradicted, we have to just go with it even if we're uncomfortable with that idea.

What do you think is canon: the DBS anime or the DBS manga? Hint: it's a trick question.

Both, the answer is both. Again not subjective.

If it is definitively "both", then how come a large portion of the fanbase argues which one is more canonical than the other?
Sure, there are things that the fanbase agrees at large what is canonical, but for specific instances like these, it's a matter of opinion.

"A large portion of the fandom" does not determine what is and is not canon. I think it's human nature to feel uncomfortable with two "truths," which is essentially what this situation is. The story clearly doesn't hinge on fan interpretation and opinion. It's clear that the story is being woven by Toriyama. Therefore, what he believes is integral to the story is what's canon. Until further evidence, both the manga and anime of Super are in the same boat with regard to Toriyama's involvement. Therefore, they're both "canon."

It's such a weird shift. I feel like 10 years ago, you couldn't get away from the canon talk. Now, it's, "Oh, there's no canon!" Of course there is. If in this episode, Vegeta had a pet giraffe while living on the moon and in the next episode, he was in Japan racing cars, then you can say there's no canon. But clearly there is some bedrock in which the story takes place, which is the canon.

I think that it's just fans reconciling all of the contradicting material. Let's simplify: 42 volumes of DB and Super (take your pick). That's it.

[Demon Prince Piccolo]

Sure, whatever floats your fancy, but that's all a whole lot more complicated than it's worth for Dragon Ball.

[VegettoEX]

Let's simplify: 42 volumes of DB and Super (take your pick). That's it.

How does the manga end? Does Oob get Kinto'un? What's the last thing Vegeta says?

[JulieYBM]

Canon is fake. Everything happens where everything happens.

[pepd]

Both, the answer is both. Again not subjective.

If it is definitively "both", then how come a large portion of the fanbase argues which one is more canonical than the other?
Sure, there are things that the fanbase agrees at large what is canonical, but for specific instances like these, it's a matter of opinion.

"A large portion of the fandom" does not determine what is and is not canon. I think it's human nature to feel uncomfortable with two "truths," which is essentially what this situation is.

Is not just people feeling uncomfortable with it, it is logically impossible for two contradictory truths to be truth.

Until further evidence, both the manga and anime of Super are in the same boat with regard to Toriyama's involvement. Therefore, they're both "canon."

Even IF we went with that premise, it's impossible for two contradictory truths(stories) to be truth(canon) at the same time. The consequence of any argument that goes in that direction is either that we don't know which one is canon or that none is canon (or which one is more canon, if you want to go with gradual truths), but never that multiple are.

That is, one term meaning one thing at a time, of course. One could say that different versions/continuities are "canon" to their "canon", but apart from rendering the term meaningless, it impossibilitates real/honest/valid discussions to use one term undefined and interchangeably in the same discussion.

Let's simplify: 42 volumes of DB and Super (take your pick). That's it.

How does the manga end? Does Oob get Kinto'un? What's the last thing Vegeta says?

There are two manga endings, the old one and the edited one. Since Toriyama changed it, the later is his current version of the story.

[ABED]

Let's simplify: 42 volumes of DB and Super (take your pick). That's it.

How does the manga end? Does Oob get Kinto'un? What's the last thing Vegeta says?

That's your argument? There's no canon because minor changes at the end? I'm honestly asking because I don't get that line of reasoning.

[JulieYBM]

What's more canon, Heaven's Feel or Unlimited Blade Works? The answer is....the amount of money flowing into the bank accounts of the licensors.

There's no right answer but greed for the licensors. Capitalism has taught us this since the beginning.

[TheGreatness25]

Let's simplify: 42 volumes of DB and Super (take your pick). That's it.

How does the manga end? Does Oob get Kinto'un? What's the last thing Vegeta says?

I would say the Kanzenban ending. An author could change their mind and retcon things. It's not on the fans to determine what the "true" story is. Doesn't mean that non-canon is bad or doesn't exist or whatever--just means that it doesn't influence the author's story going forward. Things like the movies, the Bardock special, Ginyu Special Forces on Kaio's planet, and GT aren't going to influence the story going forward, so they're not canon. If the next chapter comes out and Goku goes, "And remember that time that Tullece came!?" then that movie will become canon because it just popped up in the story. But until then, I think we have to assume that Toriyama's vision of the story--what came from his pen--is the canon. Just because there's a ton of material out there doesn't mean that it's all canon or there's no canon. That's silly. If there's no canon, then what's the current story built on?

Why is this a popular trend? "No canon!" Is it because it's too hard to reconcile all of the material? Is it a way to preserve the importance of all of it? I don't get it. Clearly there must be a basis for the story. The Bardock special and Broly movie didn't both happen in the current story. GT couldn't possibly be the outcome of the current story. The movies clearly didn't happen in the current story. Hell, even Battle of Gods didn't happen in the current story (even though that came from Toriyama, but he later re-wrote it). Thus, they're all non-canon. And while tomorrow with the stroke of the pen, Toriyama could change the entire notion of what's canon, the fact is that today, we have clear markers for what isn't canon i.e. part of the current story.

[Demon Prince Piccolo]

I would say the Kanzenban ending. An author could change their mind and retcon things. It's not on the fans to determine what the "true" story is. Doesn't mean that non-canon is bad or doesn't exist or whatever--just means that it doesn't influence the author's story going forward. Things like the movies, the Bardock special, Ginyu Special Forces on Kaio's planet, and GT aren't going to influence the story going forward, so they're not canon. If the next chapter comes out and Goku goes, "And remember that time that Tullece came!?" then that movie will become canon because it just popped up in the story. But until then, I think we have to assume that Toriyama's vision of the story--what came from his pen--is the canon. Just because there's a ton of material out there doesn't mean that it's all canon or there's no canon. That's silly. If there's no canon, then what's the current story built on?

Why is this a popular trend? "No canon!" Is it because it's too hard to reconcile all of the material? Is it a way to preserve the importance of all of it? I don't get it. Clearly there must be a basis for the story. The Bardock special and Broly movie didn't both happen in the current story. GT couldn't possibly be the outcome of the current story. The movies clearly didn't happen in the current story. Hell, even Battle of Gods didn't happen in the current story (even though that came from Toriyama, but he later re-wrote it). Thus, they're all non-canon. And while tomorrow with the stroke of the pen, Toriyama could change the entire notion of what's canon, the fact is that today, we have clear markers for what isn't canon i.e. part of the current story.

What is the endgame of all this? This sounds way more complicated than anything Dragon Ball-related should be. I understand it more if we're looking at, say, JRR Tolkien works, where it's clearly intentional and where there's a largely singular body of work. Why is it so important for fans to acknowledge a clear "canon" or "non-canon?" The people making this argument can't even agree on a clear, consistent definition of the word "canon," nor over what works are actually canon. I'm just not sure what these discussions are meant to accomplish. Genuinely wondering here.

[TheGreatness25]

I would say the Kanzenban ending. An author could change their mind and retcon things. It's not on the fans to determine what the "true" story is. Doesn't mean that non-canon is bad or doesn't exist or whatever--just means that it doesn't influence the author's story going forward. Things like the movies, the Bardock special, Ginyu Special Forces on Kaio's planet, and GT aren't going to influence the story going forward, so they're not canon. If the next chapter comes out and Goku goes, "And remember that time that Tullece came!?" then that movie will become canon because it just popped up in the story. But until then, I think we have to assume that Toriyama's vision of the story--what came from his pen--is the canon. Just because there's a ton of material out there doesn't mean that it's all canon or there's no canon. That's silly. If there's no canon, then what's the current story built on?

Why is this a popular trend? "No canon!" Is it because it's too hard to reconcile all of the material? Is it a way to preserve the importance of all of it? I don't get it. Clearly there must be a basis for the story. The Bardock special and Broly movie didn't both happen in the current story. GT couldn't possibly be the outcome of the current story. The movies clearly didn't happen in the current story. Hell, even Battle of Gods didn't happen in the current story (even though that came from Toriyama, but he later re-wrote it). Thus, they're all non-canon. And while tomorrow with the stroke of the pen, Toriyama could change the entire notion of what's canon, the fact is that today, we have clear markers for what isn't canon i.e. part of the current story.

What is the endgame of all this? This sounds way more complicated than anything Dragon Ball-related should be. I understand it more if we're looking at, say, JRR Tolkien works, where it's clearly intentional and where there's a largely singular body of work. Why is it so important for fans to acknowledge a clear "canon" or "non-canon?" The people making this argument can't even agree on a clear, consistent definition of the word "canon," nor over what works are actually canon. I'm just not sure what these discussions are meant to accomplish. Genuinely wondering here.

Why is it so complicated? Kanzenban, Jaco, both versions of Super. Everything else is fair game to be ignored when thinking about the main story. Why is it complicated? I think it's far more complicated trying to say that all of the various, contradicting material has equal weight in the story. That's silly.

The topic at hand is whether the Yo Son Goku and his Friends Return special is canon. Some people chimed in that there's no canon or it's all canon. I'm offering my opinion that such a stance is silly. Of course there is canon. Battle of Gods was canon until Toriyama had it retconed. Now, it's not. Thus, Table's mention in the series was wiped out, so we can't say that it is canon. The Broli movie is canon. Was Table mentioned? If yes, then the special could be canon. If not, then it's right back to square one.

I'm not sure why you think this is so complicated.

[Demon Prince Piccolo]

Why is it so complicated? Kanzenban, Jaco, both versions of Super. Everything else is fair game to be ignored when thinking about the main story. Why is it complicated? I think it's far more complicated trying to say that all of the various, contradicting material has equal weight in the story. That's silly.

The topic at hand is whether the Yo Son Goku and his Friends Return special is canon. Some people chimed in that there's no canon or it's all canon. I'm offering my opinion that such a stance is silly. Of course there is canon. Battle of Gods was canon until Toriyama had it retconed. Now, it's not. Thus, Table's mention in the series was wiped out, so we can't say that it is canon. The Broli movie is canon. Was Table mentioned? If yes, then the special could be canon. If not, then it's right back to square one.

I'm not sure why you think this is so complicated.

Maybe complicated is the wrong word, but moreso convoluted and unnecessary. And why do you keep throwing around words like silly? What is so silly about saying there's not a clearly defined canon across all the media in this series? Again, your definition of the term canon isn't even the same as some of the others I've seen here. People can also ignore Super and follow GT if they really want to; I'm not sure why it even matters if GT isn't being developed...because technically Z ended also. Or they can ignore Super and GT and just acknowledge the original series. Super is the current product being developed, but the notion of canon for this series is still something the fans have brought into it; neither Toei nor Toriyama have forced the issue. And if "canon" can be so easily undone by succeeding works or changes, then it's not that strong of a concept to begin with.

I'll admit here that I don't think either version of Super (manga or anime) is meant to take precedence over the other. So both are canon, right? I mean, sure. But is the idea of canon here a through line where everything lines up, or does it open itself up to different interpretations of the same events? That's where it becomes hazy to people with everything from the old DB and Z movies to everything else. If the Super manga and anime are both canon, couldn't it stand to reason that the original manga ending and the Kanzenban are also both canon? I think that's what most people mean when they use the term "no canon," or when they say "it's all canon," the through line here is just Dragon Ball, and it's never been outright stated that there is a defined canon where all Dragon Ball media perfectly matches up, or where any has more or less weight than the other.

At least you clarified that what you're saying is your opinion, though. I'll end my contribution to this topic by saying I wouldn't call anything we've gotten "non-canon" unless we're talking about fanmade material.

[TheGreatness25]

Why is it so complicated? Kanzenban, Jaco, both versions of Super. Everything else is fair game to be ignored when thinking about the main story. Why is it complicated? I think it's far more complicated trying to say that all of the various, contradicting material has equal weight in the story. That's silly.

The topic at hand is whether the Yo Son Goku and his Friends Return special is canon. Some people chimed in that there's no canon or it's all canon. I'm offering my opinion that such a stance is silly. Of course there is canon. Battle of Gods was canon until Toriyama had it retconed. Now, it's not. Thus, Table's mention in the series was wiped out, so we can't say that it is canon. The Broli movie is canon. Was Table mentioned? If yes, then the special could be canon. If not, then it's right back to square one.

I'm not sure why you think this is so complicated.

Maybe complicated is the wrong word, but moreso convoluted and unnecessary. And why do you keep throwing around words like silly? What is so silly about saying there's not a clearly defined canon across all the media in this series? Again, your definition of the term canon isn't even the same as some of the others I've seen here. People can also ignore Super and follow GT if they really want to; I'm not sure why it even matters if GT isn't being developed...because technically Z ended also. Or they can ignore Super and GT and just acknowledge the original series. Super is the current product being developed, but the notion of canon for this series is still something the fans have brought into it; neither Toei nor Toriyama have forced the issue. And if "canon" can be so easily undone by succeeding works or changes, then it's not that strong of a concept to begin with.

I'll admit here that I don't think either version of Super (manga or anime) is meant to take precedence over the other. So both are canon, right? I mean, sure. But is the idea of canon here a through line where everything lines up, or does it open itself up to different interpretations of the same events? That's where it becomes hazy to people with everything from the old DB and Z movies to everything else. If the Super manga and anime are both canon, couldn't it stand to reason that the original manga ending and the Kanzenban are also both canon? I think that's what most people mean when they use the term "no canon," or when they say "it's all canon," the through line here is just Dragon Ball, and it's never been outright stated that there is a defined canon where all Dragon Ball media perfectly matches up, or where any has more or less weight than the other.

At least you clarified that what you're saying is your opinion, though. I'll end my contribution to this topic by saying I wouldn't call anything we've gotten "non-canon" unless we're talking about fanmade material.

I think that it's silly to believe that there's no foundation to the story. I'm not trying to be hurtful or anything. Also, I am not trying to say that people can't choose to like and follow whatever they'd like. But I do think that there's certain material that is taken into consideration when building the current story (canon) and clearly material that isn't considered at all (non-canon). Maybe my idea of what canon is isn't correct?

[Demon Prince Piccolo]

I think that it's silly to believe that there's no foundation to the story. I'm not trying to be hurtful or anything. Also, I am not trying to say that people can't choose to like and follow whatever they'd like. But I do think that there's certain material that is taken into consideration when building the current story (canon) and clearly material that isn't considered at all (non-canon). Maybe my idea of what canon is isn't correct?

That wasn't really my point at all. Of course you can say there's a foundation. It's just my belief that the foundation is Dragon Ball...and Goku? I just don't think we can definitively say anything is non-canon, if you do want to declare a canon with this franchise. If it hasn't been outright stated by Toei or Toriyama (or, hell, Toyotaro), it's all fan conjecture anyway. I think of canon as a through line where everything fits (which, because this isn't the case in this franchise, would lead me to declaring multiple canons in Dragon Ball, which is personally silly to me and defeats the whole purpose of a canon), although it can also be considered a collection of works that make up the official product? Through the latter definition, everything officially produced with the name Dragon Ball can be called canon.

It's not on the fans to determine what the "true" story is.

I find it interesting that you said this when this is exactly what you've been doing this entire time.

[Grimlock]

It's not like a Buggs Bunny cartoon where every episode is its own story.

If in this episode, Vegeta had a pet giraffe while living on the moon and in the next episode, he was in Japan racing cars, then you can say there's no canon

Gotta love when people make these kind of comparisons. It blatantly shows that they don't know and refuse to learn the difference between canonicity and continuity at all cost.

The original author is involved in the current product--that's canon.

Just so we are clear: Neko Majin and Dragon Ball Online are both canonical too, right? ... Right?

if they're referencing Table, then he's canon. If Super overtly removed mention of Table, then you can deduce that he's not canon.

Let's make a timeline of that, shall we:

2008-2012 - Tarble is not cannon!1!11!1! (not mentioned/acknowledged anywhere by anything or anyone).

2013-2014 - Tarble is cannon!1!11!1! (mentioned in Movie 14).

2015-2017 - Tarble is not cannon!11!1!1! (ignored by Toei and Toyotaro).

2018-Today - Tarble is cannon!1!1!1!11! (mentioned in Movie 1).

Is that how you see things? Is that how you approach this situation? If the next movie doesn't make a Tarble reference, you will go back to say he's not "cannon"? Do you really intend to go back and forth on this? Can't you see how foolish this whole thing is? I know I'm making a lot of questions, but I really would like to understand the mentality behind all of this and what leads a person to deal with the subject like this.

Yes, both anime and manga of Super are canon because the creator is involved with both. Until one is contradicted,

(...)

I think it's human nature to feel uncomfortable with two "truths," which is essentially what this situation is

Oh trust me, there have been plenty of contradictions between one another.

Let's assume we live in a reality where both continuities, anime and manga, are actually canonical. They are both valid, they both happened in-universe. Uh... How? Where did Bulma's birthday party take place? In a ship or in her house? Which form did Gotenks use against Beerus? Did Goku fight Hit using Super Saiyan God or not? Because that certainly would make a lot of difference. How do you reconcile the power level/scaling between both continuities (I imagine you are one of these people who care about power level, so... What do you do here?)?

Can you rationally explain to me how can there be "two truths"? Especially when one truth contradicts the other? How can the characters experience the same events more than once and with differences between one another?

If the next chapter comes out and Goku goes, "And remember that time that Tullece came!?" then that movie will become canon because it just popped up in the story.

And what if the next chapter Turles (from Movie 3) just shows up and Goku doesn't recognize him? Will Turles become canonical? If so, why? How? Following your logic, he shouldn't. Because Goku didn't remember/acknowledge him. Will just the character "become canonical" but his movie won't? If so, why? How? Because that's a Turles who experienced the events of Movie 3, from Turles' perspective, he knows Goku.

How do you explain this?

Hell, even Battle of Gods didn't happen in the current story (...), he later re-wrote it)

That is some bold claim to make. And one I hope you have a way to back it up. May you provide a source?

Thus, they're all non-canon.

I see. You think only what the author does is canonical. Then tell me, when Toriyama retires and/or passes away, what's the status of Toei's, Toyotaro's and whoever else was brought on board to come up with stories for Dragon Ball gonna be? Are they all going to be deemed "non-canonical" by default? If so, by whom? What if Toriyama after no longer coming up with stories also doesn't say that only his works are canonical? What if Shueisha also doesn't say a single word about this? What's it gonna be?

I mean, judging by the fact that they never talked about canon, I think a scenario like this is bound to become a reality at some point... What if I want to consider someone else's work as part of what Toriyama crafted? Who is going to say I'm wrong by doing so when neither Toriyama nor Shueisha ever stated a thing about "only what Toriyama/author does is valid"?

Maybe my idea of what canon is isn't correct?

I don't think "correct" is the right word here, I'd say, uh... "inaccurate" (?). Maybe that's the one. Not only that, you should also know that what you think canon is it's actually very flexible, it can and most likely will change at any time, more often than not by people you weren't even expecting it (that is if these people ever decide on what constitutes a canon). And that the canon you think Dragon Ball has isn't supported by anyone (so far).

[dva_raza]

Legitimately asking. I always thought it was, but I recently came across some threads from years ago and now I’m confused

My confirmation that it was canon was the fact that trable is mentioned in Broly and Broly is canon.
Although now that I think about it, them canonizing a character in a canon movie doesn't necessarily mean that the movie the character is originated from is canon. An example of that is the old Broly movie. Broly as a character is now canon but the movie itself (the old one) is not

[Skar]

It's deliberately a totally inconsequential story that fits into established canon but will never be referenced because it's so insignificant.

Yeah that's the way I see. He was referenced
in BoG and Broly so maybe the DBS manga and anime just forgot to mention him but it doesn't really matter since he probably won't appear again. Some people might confuse him with Cabba who is more likely to appear again but probably won't.

[nhienphan2808]

I guess it's canon until Toriyama decides the Tarble reffed in Battle of Gods and Broly is a different character.

[TheGreatness25]

I mean, I've made my points as to how I see canon. I don't think that anything that didn't come from Toriyama's pen is canon because it will never be considered in building future material. Until Toriyama is not the person driving the story, it won't be anyone else's decision either. The story can change (like the Kanzenban ending and Battle of Gods being deliberately rewritten). The new, latest material takes precedent, so if a character is rebooted, that's going to be the canon. Meanwhile, if an old story is referenced, that is canon too. Super--both of them--is the sequel to the manga. Obviously a lot of what came out cannot be thought of when making the story going forward.

It's cool, though. If you want to think that everything or nothing is canon, that's cool. I just find it funny that pre-2015, "Only the manga matters!" but not, everything is canon or its own. But I'm curious how far this extends. Are all of the dubs their own canon? That's all official and they changed the story ranging from minor things to big things. Are the video games their own canon? Are commercials their own canon? If yes, then wow! If not, why not? What's the difference?