[Mithadan]

If there is not some negative connotation to "not canon," (triple negative, woo hoo!) then we are about to enter the Twilight Zone. The LoTR and Hobbit movies did enough violence to the Tolkien "canon" (if anyone can suggest another word for it, I'm open to considering it; but it's been used in discussions here since around 2001). Now we will soon have one or more series that are, at best, loosely based upon the mythos.

Try visiting even the most "reputable" wikis for Star Trek, Harry Potter and Star Wars and you will find entries for video game storylines, fan-produced movies, etc. In a short time, we will see at least one Middle Earth series set in the Second Age and possibly some version of the Silmarillion as well. I am hoping they will be well-crafted. I will not refuse to watch them (until I cannot bring myself to do so, as is generally the case with the Hobbit movies). But will their interpretations someday be part of a future canon (maybe the word is legitimate or faithful?) debate? Will people someday read Tolkien's actual writings and be disappointed that they differ from the Hollywood depictions?

In my mind, this is why a discussion of "canon" is an abundantly appropriate topic for discussion here.