![[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 04:01 am (UTC)The concept of canon has nothing to do with my enjoyment of the comics. What canon affects is my enjoyment of the Season 8 fandom. It affects my enjoyment of discussion of the comics, not the comics themselves. Because I still get the same excitement every first Wednesday of the month that I go to buy the comics. And I still read the comics in the car before I leave my comic store's parking lot. Canon, to me, is only relevant in joint discussion and shared consciousness of the series. It it is a concept useful to for shared understanding of the story. And shared understanding is not the basis for my enjoyment of the series, nor was it ever a reason for me to enjoy the show. I enjoyed the series and watched it on my own before ever hearing of the word "canon" as I also enjoyed the comics before entering fandom almost two years ago.
And why do you have to believe that the comics are not canon to not enjoy them?
Well, I personally don't believe this. And I actually don't think I've seen anyone with this belief. Rather, I think people first don't enjoy the comics, then find shelter in the label of "not canon" to protect and shield their enjoyment of the show. I have seen views expressed that the developments of Season 8 have shaken the views of the tv series. I think it's the natural tendency to put distance between what one enjoys (the seven seasons) and what one dislikes (Season 8) - and the way to do this within fandom is to use the phrase "not canon". If one were alone in reading the series and watching the show, one would just say "I don't like this" and put the book down, dismissing it from one's mind. But within fandom, shared understanding of canon is necessary for useful discussion. We must acknowledge that Giles sang the song "Standing Still" in OMWF in order to debate the subjective meaning of the song and the motivation behind the character - so it's "canon" that Giles sand "Standing Still" in that episode.
Re: Part I - Canon doesn't matter to all of us
Date: 2009-11-29 04:34 am (UTC)Because that would make discussion easier.
You don't have to believe to that the comics are canon to discuss them in fandom. I've been discussing them from the very beginning as non-canon. I've NEVER considered the comics as canon. I ALWAYS saw them as another medium.
It never bothered me.
What I see the comics as - is a continuation of the story as Joss Whedon would have written it. So I analyze and discuss and critique them based as a continuation of the story as written by Joss Whedon. I enjoy them because I'm curious what he would have done. I want to know how Whedon would have continued it. (I may have read Greenwalt's, Fury's, Noxon's, Sarah Michelle Gellar, James Marsters, Nick Brendon, Hannigan and Espenson's versions as well, and I would not have called them canon either.)
See, we're thinking about this differently. You need everyone to agree that they are canon by your definition of the term - because you see it as simple as agreeing Giles sang Still Standing. You see it as a fact. I don't see it that way at all.
My perspective on this is completely different. My definition of canon is different for one thing. I think you can discuss it as a possible continuation of the story as Whedon saw it without agreeing on the canon bit. And I can enjoy it and enjoy fandom's speculation and discussion without having fandom agreeing on the definition of canon or that the story is great or that it is canon.
Does the fact that I don't believe it is canon really change our discussion of plot points, characters or story? Isn't it enough that I agree that it is how Joss Whedon would have continued Buffy's story and leave it at that?