Text 470, 73 rader
Skriven 2006-05-25 07:46:00 av Robert E Starr JR (916.babylon5)
Ärende: Re: Anything new going on
=================================
* * * This message was from Joseph DeMartino to rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.m * * *
         * * * and has been forwarded to you by Lord Time * * *         
            -----------------------------------------------             

@MSGID: <1148104578.663904.269500@j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
@REPLY: <0001HW.C093EE4807065B96F0407530@news.verizon.net>
"Canon" in this contect means "an accepted part of the whole" - As JMS
has defined it, a story that is considered every bit as much a part of
the "Babylon 5" story and universe as the filmed episodes.   He's very
particular about that designation.  At one time he declared "To Dream
in the City of Sorrows" to be 100% canon.  He later backed off that a
bit, and dscribed it as about 95% canon.  "To Dream" was publiished
while the show was still in production.  He may have changed some of
his thinking about the Sinclair story in a way that invalidated some
small details of the book.  As he has also said what's on the screen
trumps everything else, including his own usenet posts.  Unlike the Del
Rey books, the Dell novels were based on outlines by JMS and written
with some input from him in the form of e-mails or phone calls from the
writers.  But these also are not 100% canon, as he has said he does not
feel bound by every detail in all the books.  Should he ever do another
film or TV project set in the "B5" universe and he'll contradict the
books if he thinks it best for the story.

Fans also determine and keep the "canon" for certain series and
characters.  There is a vast network of Sherlock Holmes fans across the
globe, and a similar bunch of devotees of "Tarzan".  For those fans
only the author's original texts are canon. nothing else, not stories,
not novels, not movies or TV "counts - however good or bad they might
be.  (And there have been a number of wonderful Holmes pastiches,
including one by Ellery Queen that pitted Holmes against Jack the
Ripper, and of course "The Seven Percent Solution" which teamed him
with Sigmund Freud.)  For Holmes fans certain "facts" deduced from the
stories are also canon, as are some attempts to deal with internal
inconsistencies.  (Thus it is widely accepted that the "H" in "John H.
Watson" stands for "Haimish", a Scottish form of "James", although it
is never stated anyhwere in the stories.  But since Watson's wife
refers to him as "James" for one entire story, an explanation was
required and having Mrs. Watson base a nickname for her husband on his
middle name fit the bill.  Similarly most serious Holmes fans accept
that Watson was married twice, both times to women named Mary, and that
he returned to Baker street after his first wife died and before he
married his second.  This to explain oddities in the internal
chronology of the stories.)

This whole thing reminds me of Tolkein's note to the authorized
Ballantine paperback edition of "The Lord of the Rings" in the U.S.
(Some ambiguity of copyright had allowed Ace Books to publish its own
edition based on a published text that did not have all of Tolkein's
corrections.  Ace ultimately lost a lawsuit and had to stop publishing
and pay some sort of penalty.) Tolkein wrote of the Ballentine edition
that "those who approve of courtesy - at least - to living authors
will buy it and no other."

Whatever the legalities, I think that those who respect JMS and his
wishes will accept his definition of what is and is not "canon".   And
his right to make that choice.

> But I think that statement [about Lyta being "gone"] was intended to be
fairly definitive.

> Amy

I think Andreas's line reading made it more so.  And I'm not such a
fool as to dispute the acting choices of that particular thespian. <g>
 

Regards, 

Joe
                                                                               
                    
--- SBBSecho 2.11-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)