Quote:
|
When we write our fanfics or our RPG stories it can never be canon or 'canonical' for many reasons.
|
I agree. The problem with describing fanfics and RPGs as "canon" is that, as I understand it, this word generally refers to the body of an author's work which has been published (ie is accessible to all who wish to read it). Fanfics and RPGs fail on both counts because they have not been written by the author and because they are not generally available. So, if you were to turn round and tell me that Legolas owned a hare (to use a random example
) because you read it in a fanfic, I would be fully justified in disregarding your information completely. It is simply not canon, and that is that.
Having said that, I do agree to some extent with whoever (
Aiwendil?) said that a fanfic can be "canon-
ish" in the sense that it adheres to the "spirit of Tolkien". But you have amply illustrated the problem with this concept,
Novnarwen. Who is to say what is in the spirit of Tolkien and what is not? There are obvious areas where we can agree, but there will also be many areas where we will not.
Which takes me back to my (hackneyed) mantra concerning the freedom of the reader. If I read a piece of fanfic, like it and see it as being within the spirit of Tolkien (and provided that it does not conflict with anything Tolkien wrote), I can choose to believe that in
my Middle-earth, the events described in it
did happen. But for another person who reads the same fanfic, such events may well be events that they cannot accept as having occurred in
their Middle-earth because they do not accord with their conception of Tolkien's vision.
Of course, I agree with
Child that there are some things that we would all agree do not, and could never be, within the spirit of Tolkien's Middle-earth writings. But she and I clearly differ when it comes to fifteen foot high rabbits and homosexuality (although I would hasten to add that there are in fact no fifteen foot rodents (whether owned by Legolas or not) in
my Middle-earth).
So, to a greater or lesser degree, we will all have different conceptions of Middle-earth. Which means that, when we come together to discuss Tolkien's works, the only things that we can
all agree on are those facts which are expressly stated in the text. And even then there is room for interpretation, which brings us back to ...
*Saucepan is overcome with deja vu and falls to the floor noisily in a heap of pots and pans*
I'll give up before I start repeating myself any further ...
Quote:
|
Why are we putting so much effort into worrying about whether our writings are 'canonical' or not?
|
Because ... er ... um ... anyone?
