Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts
|
|
|
||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
| Frequently Asked Forum Questions | |
|||
|
||||
|
|
|||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Search Older Posts on This Forum: Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts | ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Re: Halo Wars Q and A interview | |
| Posted By: Narcogen <narcogen@rampancy.net> | Date: 9/29/06 10:46 a.m. |
In Response To: Re: Halo Wars Q and A interview (Sep7imus [subnova]) : Fair enough. I've always been a big proponent of the "include ILB in
Just out of curiosity, since you've phrased it this way, might the converse actually be a more reasonable attitude? To describe it by way of a technical analogy, the method you describe is rather like an ALLOW before DENY firewall rule. Everything is allowed except that which is explicitly denied. Might I suggest that the opposite-- a policy of DENY before ALLOW, makes more sense in this case? Here's what I mean: The exclusion of a source from the accepted canon is not a denial that those things might be true. It is an admission that they are not known to be true and thus cannot be relied on. Take, for example, the planet mentioned earlier in the thread: Coral. It was used in ILB before Halo 2 was published. Later, it was mentioned in the Conversations booklet. If Bungie were tomorrow to declare, with no ambiguity, that ILB was not canon, the planet Coral would not be erased from the Haloverse. Even if the Conversations booklet had not been published-- and as only Limited Edition purchasers have it and Bungie has asked no one to post it online, not everyone has seen it in its entirety-- even if the booklet did not exist, I submit that Coral would not be obliterated. It's not that Coral wouldn't exist. It's just that we could not be SURE that it did exist. When I point out to people that I don't think ILB is canon, and I cite Staten's statements, I don't mean to say that ILB doesn't exist, or that it shouldn't be discussed, or that it doesn't take place in the Halo universe. I mean that it cannot stand up to conflict with sources that are "more canon" than itself-- which by this I would mean the games, and then the novels. By the most literal (and admittedly ridiculous) extension of your policy of calling everything canon until you're told it isn't, this would apply equally well to fan fiction. Bungie was involved in ILB, but they didn't write it and they didn't perform it. And as far as the canon distinction being made only by Staten-- who else at Bungie is better positioned to make that distinction than possibly Jason Jones himself? With all due respect for Frankie I'm not entirely certain making those distinctions falls precisely within his purview. Quite possibly not everyone at Bungie agrees. : In any case, my point is that we are intelligent enough to understand that
I suppose because the further those universes diverge, the less pleasant the knowledge of the divergence is for the audience. I don't think the effort required to distinguish is the point; these are entertainments, and there is something in human nature that rebels against variations of this type.
| |
|
| Replies: |
The HBO Forum Archive is maintained with WebBBS 4.33. |