What does "Daizenshuu" mean to you?

[Phenomenol]

Can you show me where in my post where I even considered the Daizenshuu over the manga?

[SonEric84]

I don't know what to say in this thread anymore...seems to me like words keep getting twisted. In the end each person is going to interpret what is being said in their own way....but I still don't see how some people go so far out of their way to manipulate the words of others into what they want to hear. Kind of ridiculous to even bother talking about it if any time someone has an opposing opinion it turns into a petty insult war. Phenomenol, you've made plenty of threads asking questions in the past, and whenever someone answers that question with an answer you don't like it seems like you either take what you want to hear from it or just argue that you have the "FACTS". Now, don't think I am attacking you because I'm not... and from an unbiased point of view it just seems like sometimes you're trying to challenge the forum members rather than get answers to your questions.

[Cypher]

Phenomenol, essentially I agree with you on the status of the Daizenshuu; the only problems I have with them are that:

1) that statement by Toriyama seems to be more of a 'congratulations and thanks' to the staff for completing the works than anything else; it seems to me that even if he had looked over it all upon completion, one with a memory as fallible as his can hardly be relied upon just because he says 'it's 100% accurate, I would certainly have used it!'

2)say the Daizenshuu were all produced by the time Toriyama-sensei had reached, I don't know, book 35, giving him the chance to put his words into practise, to actually USE the Daizenshuu. He gets to writing book 36, and realizes he can't remember a character's name, let's say Yamcha. He looks in the Daizenshuu, and through some error he is listed as, say, 'Ernie'. Book 36 is released with every reference to the character we all KNOW is Yamcha, as 'Ernie'. Does this mean that since Toriyama-sensei took this information from the Daizenshuu to use in his 'first-level canon', the manga, it now supersedes the manga itself as the highest level of canon?
And given the errors we know about, and others such as matching pictures to the wrong names in Daizenshuu 7, for example, just how much power should we attribute to the information they contain?

I am not trying to argue, as I say I too think the Daizenshuu are important, I am just trying to figure out the logic here and it's always good to hear others' thoughts too.

[Phenomenol]

@Son Eric84: Are you in love with Phenomenol or something?

What's your post got to do with this thread?

[Cypher]

EDITED

[SonEric84]

@Son Eric84: Are you in love with Phenomenol or something?

What's your post got to do with this thread?

.....This is an example of why you're not being taken very seriously.

o_O Huh? I thought it addressed things being discussed here...?

He was talking to me...but I also addressed things that were being discussed here so yeah..

[Phenomenol]

I wan't posting at you Cypher I was talking to a secret Admirer , here you go....

Phenomenol, essentially I agree with you on the status of the Daizenshuu; the only problems I have with them are that:

1) that statement by Toriyama seems to be more of a 'congratulations and thanks' to the staff for completing the works than anything else; it seems to me that even if he had looked over it all upon completion, one with a memory as fallible as his can hardly be relied upon just because he says 'it's 100% accurate, I would certainly have used it!'

Yes he does thank them but he did say he would use it! Like you said with the memory Toriyama has, he said he would have used it while writing the series.

2)say the Daizenshuu were all produced by the time Toriyama-sensei had reached, I don't know, book 35, giving him the chance to put his words into practise, to actually USE the Daizenshuu. He gets to writing book 36, and realizes he can't remember a character's name, let's say Yamcha. He looks in the Daizenshuu, and through some error he is listed as, say, 'Ernie'. Book 36 is released with every reference to the character we all KNOW is Yamcha, as 'Ernie'. Does this mean that since Toriyama-sensei took this information from the Daizenshuu to use in his 'first-level canon', the manga, it now supersedes the manga itself as the highest level of canon? And given the errors we know about, and others such as matching pictures to the wrong names in Daizenshuu 7, for example, just how much power should we attribute to the information they contain?

I never said it exceeds the manga but it can be used along with the manga as canon if Toriyama would use it.

I am not trying to argue, as I say I too think the Daizenshuu are important, I am just trying to figure out the logic here and it's always good to hear other's thoughts too.

Your right, so true.

Edit: @SonEric84: What did you address exactly with out trying to nitpicking what you think Phenomenol does? You didn't address any of my points.

[Olivier Hague]

You don't understand, Toriyama (the author) using the Daizenshuu's can be considered canon.

You're right: I don't understand. There's nothing to understand, here.

There's a difference between using a guidebook and conforming to a guidebook. When Toriyama says he would have used the guides, it could just mean that they would have been convenient for him, not necessarily that he considers them to be "canonic", perfect, 100% reliable or whatever.

In this case, the term canon means "The works of an author that are considered authentic." In this sense, only the manga itself, is truly canon.

Well... It's not really that simple, is it? ^_^;
For one thing, "considered authentic" by who? The majority? The fans? The "true fans"? ^^
And when Toriyama himself explains a few things in the Daizenshû (or any other official outlet, really), couldn't you consider these explanations to be "canonic"?

Surely, it would be hard to argue against the original manga being canonic, but apart from that... I'm afraid opinions can and will differ.

in the manga the Saibamen were stated directly to be "equal to Raditz", but in the Daizenshuu, Raditz is given a 1500 reading and the Saibamen a 1200 reading. Your only response to this is "who cares", but I think you should care, because that is a contradiction to what we are told in the manga.

While I appreciate that kind of real arguments a lot more than "they don't say that Tenshinhan descends from aliens in the TV series therefore it's ridiculous!", I'm not entirely sure that one is really a mistake...
I mean, when they say "equal", maybe they just mean they were more or less "on the same level" (1200 or 1500... compared to their own "power levels", it's pretty much the same thing : "kinda low")...

(and I'm not saying that in an effort to "prove" that the Daizenshû are 100% reliable, infallible, or whatever... I'm sure there are mistakes)

[SonEric84]

Your right, so true.

Edit: @SonEric84: What did you address exactly with out trying to nitpicking what you think Phenomenol does? You didn't address any of my points.

Again, it's "you're." And I addressed what was being said about you in this thread in relation to the way you act when the FACTS don't match yours. I wasn't trying to argue with you, but since it seems to be pointing in that direction I'm simply going to end this conversation.

[Phenomenol]

You're right: I don't understand. There's nothing to understand, here.

There's a difference between using a guidebook and conforming to a guidebook. When Toriyama says he would have used the guides, it could just mean that they would have been convenient for him, not necessarily that he considers them to be "canonic", perfect, 100% reliable or whatever.

Again, I never said they were infallible. I asked you something the Author would have used during the series is something you wouldn't use and consider it canon? That doesn't make sense.

Again, it's "you're." And I addressed what was being said about you in this thread in relation to the way you act when the FACTS don't match yours. I wasn't trying to argue with you, but since it seems to be pointing in that direction I'm simply going to end this conversation.

Thank you.

"You're" too kind.

[Olivier Hague]

Again, something the Author would have used during the series is something you wouldn't use and consider it canon? That doesn't make sense.

Yes, it does. I'm sure a well-informed fan could write a Dragon Ball guidebook/FAQ/whatever that Toriyama would deem to be "useful" as well. Would that statement make it canonic though?

[Kaboom]

There's a difference between using a guidebook and conforming to a guidebook. When Toriyama says he would have used the guides, it could just mean that they would have been convenient for him, not necessarily that he considers them to be "canonic", perfect, 100% reliable or whatever.

Again, I never said they were infallible. I asked you something the Author would have used during the series is something you wouldn't use and consider it canon? That doesn't make sense.

You're either ignoring or not understanding what he's saying. Toriyama's comments on the Daizenshuu were a compliment, not a commitment. Saying "yeah, these books are nice and helpful, but they got a few things wrong" doesn't make for good, supportive commentary on something.

[Phenomenol]

Yes, it does. I'm sure a well-informed fan could write a Dragon Ball guidebook/FAQ/whatever that Toriyama would deem to be "useful" as well. Would that statement make it canonic though?

Sorry, but the Daizenshuu's wasn't written by "well-informed Fans," it was written by Toriyama's staff and approved by him.

[Olivier Hague]

I'm sure a well-informed fan could write a Dragon Ball guidebook/FAQ/whatever that Toriyama would deem to be "useful" as well. Would that statement make it canonic though?

Sorry, but the Daizenshuu's wasn't written by "well-informedFans," it was written by his staff and approved by him.

The point fucking remains.
Dude. Brain. Use brain.

"Official" doesn't necessarily mean "canonic".
Toriyama saying a guidebook is useful doesn't necessarily mean that guidebook is canonic.
Therefore, Toriyama saying that an official guidebook is useful doesn't necessarily mean that the guidebook is canonic, contrarily to what you're claiming. Yes, it could be canonic (even if it's flawed... even the author himself is fallible, after all). But not necessarily.
You're jumping to conclusions.

[Casual Matt]

Um, I don't mean to sound stupid, but how can the Daizenshuu be considered canon, anyway? They're reference books. Not a story or something. And being such, isn't "official" like the highest order they can be considered.

Anyway, like I said, they're just reference books. Good for checking some info or backing up an argument on something that's ambiguous in the manga / anime. But they're certainly not infallible, as has been stated here with reasons. I kinda think they could be compared to Simon Furman's "The Ultimate Guide" for Transformers. It contains a lot of good info, but there are mistakes in there, too. (Well, everything's easier with Transformers, anyway. Since the Transformers stories are told in a multitude of different Universes all making up the one Multiverse, literally everything is canon. But I digress, I'm getting a little off topic.)

As for the Tenshinhan alien thing. Sure, that can be ignored because of the lack of "canon" evidence (since there's no reference to it in either the manga canon or the anime canon.) But I think people should maybe consider that if Tenshinhan did have "alien ancestry" or whatever, that doesn't mean he isn't (mostly) human.

And Phenomenol. I don't want to tear into your posts or anything, but might I suggest being a little more careful about throwing around the word "fact". Goku transformed into a Super Saiyajin against Freeza. That's a fact. The Daizenshuu are "canon" because your interpretation of a translation of a little note by Toriyama that was obviously meant to make the Daizenshuu seem good, saying that he would use them as a reference if he had them while writing the manga. Not so much. Little more ambiguous than an all caps FACT.

[Olivier Hague]

Um, I don't mean to sound stupid, but how can the Daizenshuu be considered canon, anyway? They're reference books. Not a story or something.

I wouldn't say that matters, myself?

[FindKenshi]

Phenomenol:

You say "The Daizenshuu's mistakes are Toriyama's mistakes."
How can you say this? He did not write the books. It doesn't matter if he approved them... if there is a mistake in there, it was the mistake of the one who wrote that onto that page. SHUEISHA Inc, who was the original legal owner of Dragonball (at least, I think they were) approved the anime too? Now I know it's a little bit different, but still the anime is just as official and its license was just as legally valid.. so do you consider anime-filler to be canon?

The point I'm trying to make is, that you are twisting things around BIG TIME if you dare to say "The Daizenshuu's mistakes are Toriyama's mistakes." He did not write the books. No one ever said he sat down and read each of them page for page before they were released. We'd like to think that he did that, but do we really know? And even if he had, it's no secret that Toriyama-sensei can be forgetfully at times. how do we know he wasn't just looking at the pretty pictures and thinking to himself "My, how lovely these books are, I really gotta hand it to the guys" and not worrying about what may be right and wrong info inside.

Japan is a very humble nation at times, and Mr. Toriyama is a very humble man, it's not really in his personality, as far as I've heard from interviews and biographies I've read about the man, to storm into Bird Studio slam the Daiz down on the table and say "No, this is wrong, it happened this way, fix this I don't want my name on something with lies in it."

Now again, I'm using extreme examples here, but you really seem to be clinging to one little "Thank you" from Mr. Toriyama to his staff for producing these awesome books, just because he appreciates them doesn't make them all 100% accurate.

Toriyama himself said he would use these books WHILE writing the series are you telling me that something the Author would use is not canon? I think something the author would use to WRITE his story with certainly is canon.

We're talking about the man who forgot who Tao Pai Pai was. He admits himself how forgetful he tends to be. You are taking his statement a little too much out of context. You are "desperately clinging" to the statement, if you will. All he said is that it would have made a great reference for him. That statement does not amount to "these books should be placed on the same level as my story itself, because their word is law."

There's a difference between using a guidebook and conforming to a guidebook

The man knows what he's talking about, Phenom, I suggest you listen.

Oliver

Well... It's not really that simple, is it? ^_^;
For one thing, "considered authentic" by who? The majority? The fans? The "true fans"? ^^

Well we have a bit of a misunderstanding that I am to blame for. There is the strict definition of what canon means, and then there is the definition that most of us are using a lot in casual discussion. The STRICT definition of "canon" would mean that only those stories written directly by Akira Toriyama's own hand, and published as "Dragonball". The loose defined version of canon is just "what counts as being official." I'm saying the TRUE canon is just the manga, by the strict definition of the word. The Daizenshuu can still "count as fact" and still not be canon. Meh, no point to really split hairs, as all I care about here is the acceptance of what the books present as indisputable fact. That is what I have a problem accepting.

While I appreciate that kind of real arguments a lot more than "they don't say that Tenshinhan descends from aliens in the TV series therefore it's ridiculous!", I'm not entirely sure that one is really a mistake...
I mean, when they say "equal", maybe they just mean they were more or less "on the same level" (1200 or 1500... compared to their own "power levels", it's pretty much the same thing : "kinda low")...

Well, the thing is.. and I apologize in advance; because, again, I'm splitting hairs here... 1200 and 1500 aren't really "on the same level" when you think about it. You see, there is a 20% difference between those two numbers. Now, I know that 20% seems somewhat low, but when we see things in the manga like Vegeta wrecking Goku easily, despite Vegeta being (an assumed) 18,000 and Goku being (an estimated) 16,000 ( This is only about an 11% difference (give or take a few infinitely repeating digits)! Lower then the difference between Daiz Saibaman and Daiz Raditz!] we can see that 1200 to 1500 is not "on the same level" at all. Especially since the canonical statement out of Nappa's mouth is that they are "equal" to him.

Judging from examples we see with our own eyes in the manga...

Vegeta walks all over Kaioken Goku (stated to be double his power) [11.2% difference]
Vegeta effortlessly destroys Kiwi (24,000 vs 18,000 (assumed)) [25% difference]
Vegeta destroys Dodoria easily, after physically overpowering him (24,000 vs (esitmated) ~20,000ish) [10% difference]

...we can see that although a mere difference of 20% may SEEM insignificant, from every example we have in the manga a difference of that level is enough for the superior to clearly dominate the inferior, probably without too much effort needed.

Now I know that is splitting hairs, and as VegettoEX was saying earlier in this thread back on page one, that analysis of Dragonball to such an acute extent can indeed take one's enjoyment out of the series, and it's probably splitting hairs more then necessary.. but you have to at least a little empathy with what I’m saying here… Nappa states they are equal, but the Daizenshuu lists Raditz as being decisively more powerful. And it's not even the numbers I care about. It's just the basic of "who's stronger then who." We are given one statement in the manga, and then that statement is contradicted in the Daizenshuu.

(and I'm not saying that in an effort to "prove" that the Daizenshû are 100% reliable, infallible, or whatever... I'm sure there are mistakes)

And I do realize that.

Roshi:

Um, I don't mean to sound stupid, but how can the Daizenshuu be considered canon, anyway? They're reference books. Not a story or something.

Allow me to clarify the subject for you then. It's because the Daizenshuu do not just compile information from the manga/anime. It also presents new information that did not appear anywhere in the manga/anime. It is that info that is being disputed. It is that info that we question whether or not we would consider it "canon".

And also, sorry guys, for the large posts. I'm just a newbie here and I'm already crushing you all with walls of text.

[Phenomenol]

The point fucking remains. Dude. Brain. Use brain.

"Official" doesn't necessarily mean "canonic".
Toriyama saying a guidebook is useful doesn't necessarily mean that guidebook is canonic.
Therefore, Toriyama saying that an official guidebook is useful doesn't necessarily mean that the guidebook is canonic, contrarily to what you're claiming. Yes, it could be canonic (even if it's flawed... even the author himself is fallible, after all). But not necessarily.
You're jumping to conclusions.

I understand what your saying but to say that the Daizenshuu's aren't canon is ALSO specualtion.

The only statements I have seen where Toriyama ever labeled anything was the Dragonball anime and Manga (stating both were the same), labeling the Dragonball movies non-canon and DBGT non-canon.

[VegettoEX]

Daizenshuu's

Beyond anything else, *this* is actually what's bugging me the most.

The word is already plural. It also doesn't need to be possessive. For the love of god. Please.

[TripleRach]

Now I know it's a little bit different, but still the anime is just as official and its license was just as legally valid.. so do you consider anime-filler to be canon?

Uh oh... This is another can of worms. Scary, flesh-eating worms that carry the bubonic plague.