![[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: Part I - Canon doesn't matter to all of us
Date: 2009-11-29 03:57 am (UTC)Regarding the canon argument? Whedon did not write Buffy the Vampire Slayer. He was not Rod Serling - who wrote 85% of Twilight Zone. He wrote far less than that. He only wrote one episode of S6. Two episodes of S7. And I think 4 episodes of S5. He blocked out each arc with his other writers. He did it as a collaboration. This one he is doing as a collaboration.
Media analysts who replied to this poll and do this for a living, stated it was not canon.
Until you can prove to me that Whedon wrote the show by himself, that all the decisions were his alone, and he controlled the rights and what they could or could not do - we are not going to agree. Also, I'm sorry, mediums do change the story, one writer leaping off, with three others, to continue a tv show in book form doesn't automatically make it a continuation of the tv show just because he says it is. (Ironically Whedon said as much himself when he indicated he didn't consider the Battlestar Galatica comics canon and would not read any produced by Moore because he only looked at the tv series in that respect and a comic continuation would ruin for him. )
If he had done all those things - then yes, I'd say it was canon and yes, he could dictate this was the continuation of his story. But he did not. He just decided to call it canon to sell comics, so you'd buy them. It was a marketing tactic.
Re: Part I - Canon doesn't matter to all of us
Date: 2009-11-29 04:49 am (UTC)And again, I'll point above to my other examples about how my view of canon is creator authority based. The people who are denouncing it as canon are the audience. So like I said, if Noxon or someone wants to come out and call them "not canon" then we'd have a game. And actually Fury admitted in an interview he didn't really see them as canon, but then immediately backtracked to say that Joss says they're canon, so then they are canon.
That's my point really. That the people in authority to determine canon, all the writers, the actors, the crew, all bow to Joss authority. Even JM who disagrees with many develoments for Spike's character says that it was Joss' choice in the end. Every person with authority over what's 'real' in the Buffyverse accedes dominant authority to Joss. So for me, that's the greatest recognized authority. And canon, by its nature, needs to be something determined outside of the audience's individual perspective or else it serves no purpose - if everyone who watches/reads has a different canon, then the shared understanding and basis of canon ceases to exist. If there are one million canons, then there are no canons.
Re: Part I - Canon doesn't matter to all of us
Date: 2009-11-29 08:46 pm (UTC)I will accept that the comics is how Whedon would continue the series if he could do whatever he damn well pleased with it - no budget limitations, no actors, no network notes (although I'm guessing Scott Allie is now in that function.).
But accepting Whedon as the sole creator of the series the only one who counts? That is akin to stating that the blood sweat and tears the others put in is worthless. And that is not true. They did more and worked harder at times than Whedon ever did. Sorry,
no, the comics are not canon. They merely show us how Joss Whedon and the writers, editors and artists that he has hired would have continued this storyline. If that is how you define canon? Than yes, I agree that is true. I do not agree that they show us anything other than that. Nor do I require them to.