![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatI'm offline for the next two-three days for the Thanksgiving Holiday. When I get back will hopefully do a meta on poll results and respond to comments. Sorry about delay.
Thank you for answering my poll. If you friended me and are a fan of Buffy? And haven't seen or answered the poll? Please take the time to answer at least the first three questions of the poll. I really would like to see how many Buffy fans actually have read the comics, and how many gave up on them. I know it can't possibly be an accurate or scientific sampling (as I myself stated recently to someone else doing polls - such a thing may well be impossible)...but I'd like to get a snapshot, see the degree to which the mileage differs. Thanks!!
Regarding the canon question?
"I think how you answer that question has a great deal to do with whether you consider Joss Whedon the sole creator of Buffy the Vampire Slayer series, or a co-creator/part of a larger collaborative effort. Think of it this way - you've written part of book, say one chapter, and there's a guy, JW, who hired you to write that chapter, he may have even edited portions, and given you notes , and he does the same with other people, including writing a few chapters himself, and he puts his name on the book - edited/created by J.W. Your name is listed in the table of contents, you are credited as a writer for hire. J.W does a sequel, he hires different writers, you either decline to contribute or aren't invited. He chooses to take the characters or information in the chapter that you wrote and write a sequel based on it, and states that his sequel is canon. It is a continuation of what you wrote - even though you haven't been consulted in any way. Since he or the publisher own the copyright, and you are a mere "work-for-hire" writer, you can't claim copyright infringement. He can do whatever he wants. Would you consider what he does with your characters, story, and/or ideas/information that you have concieved and written a true continuation of the work (ie. canon), if you are no longer part of the collaboration purely because he combined the original combination of stories, edited and put them together and is the one credited with coming up with the title and main concept?
Happy Thanksgiving for those in US who celebrate, elsewhere, have a great weekend!
Thank you for answering my poll. If you friended me and are a fan of Buffy? And haven't seen or answered the poll? Please take the time to answer at least the first three questions of the poll. I really would like to see how many Buffy fans actually have read the comics, and how many gave up on them. I know it can't possibly be an accurate or scientific sampling (as I myself stated recently to someone else doing polls - such a thing may well be impossible)...but I'd like to get a snapshot, see the degree to which the mileage differs. Thanks!!
Regarding the canon question?
"I think how you answer that question has a great deal to do with whether you consider Joss Whedon the sole creator of Buffy the Vampire Slayer series, or a co-creator/part of a larger collaborative effort. Think of it this way - you've written part of book, say one chapter, and there's a guy, JW, who hired you to write that chapter, he may have even edited portions, and given you notes , and he does the same with other people, including writing a few chapters himself, and he puts his name on the book - edited/created by J.W. Your name is listed in the table of contents, you are credited as a writer for hire. J.W does a sequel, he hires different writers, you either decline to contribute or aren't invited. He chooses to take the characters or information in the chapter that you wrote and write a sequel based on it, and states that his sequel is canon. It is a continuation of what you wrote - even though you haven't been consulted in any way. Since he or the publisher own the copyright, and you are a mere "work-for-hire" writer, you can't claim copyright infringement. He can do whatever he wants. Would you consider what he does with your characters, story, and/or ideas/information that you have concieved and written a true continuation of the work (ie. canon), if you are no longer part of the collaboration purely because he combined the original combination of stories, edited and put them together and is the one credited with coming up with the title and main concept?
Happy Thanksgiving for those in US who celebrate, elsewhere, have a great weekend!
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Re: Long Comment (this always happens with canon)
Date: 2009-11-29 03:18 am (UTC)I was comparing the author versus the reader/audience. Because it's not the actors and fellow writers of Season 8 that are denouncing it as not canon, but the readers who are doing so. As for collaboration, we do have Goddard, Vaughan and Espenson collaborating with Whedon and to a lesser extent Doug Petrie and Steven Deknight. But still the point I was drawing between my own experience as an author and the audience is that the audience doesn't get to determine canon or the range of the series. I get to do that. I get to say this one-shot is a continuation of the Phlebotinum Jello series. And if I say it and I'm writing it and I'm the creator (and frankly, Whedon still gets top billing no matter what - because he did create the character of Buffy and its modeled on him to the extent that his speech patterns are Buffyspeak) then that's the story.
I reject the notion that the audience determines canon when a creator authority is there to determine it. In the absence of the creator(s), then yes the only authority present is the audience. But that to me is not the default option. Because again, canon is about a shared understanding - it's not based upon the individual beliefs of the reader - it's accepted as an authoritative decree on the work. The solid foundation upon which all other subjective interpretation may stand - it anchors discussion and evaluation. Like when one is spinning in a circle, you look at a point in the distance so as to remain standing.