Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts
|
|
|
||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
| Frequently Asked Forum Questions | |
|||
|
||||
|
|
|||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Search Older Posts on This Forum: Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts | ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| When life gives you canon, make cannonade | |
| Posted By: Narcogen <narcogen@rampancy.net> | Date: 10/29/09 10:55 p.m. |
In Response To: Re: Lol you're funny (Frankie) : Bungie created Halo. Halo Wars is canon, Bungie's output is canon, things : that MS makes that are designed to be canon, are canon. : We are still a greowing franchise and the Canon is mostly cooked, but still
: There is also off-canon stuff. RvB, Mister Chief, etc., etc., etc. : Canon is decided, created and morphed in partnership with the creators. In an ideal world, yes. The problem is that over time, what seems to be a monolithic concept, "creators" turns into a many-headed hydra. People leave a company. Others join. Who is the "creator"? The company? Or the people? Companies are bought and sold. Who is the "creator"? The legal entity and its ownership at the time of creation? Subsequent owners? Whether right or wrong, ultimately the audience itself inevitably becomes the arbiter of what is canon and what isn't, and who is considered a "creator" and who isn't. Not because this is necessarily desirable or logical, but simply because the audience is the group that is least susceptible to change over time because of its sheer size. Fans lose interest and drop away and new fans join the ranks every day, but the shape and character of the audience changes much more slowly than creators or owners. Sometimes even when the creators don't change, a large audience over time can begin to reject some of the additions and changes made to a canon-- look at the latter three Star Wars films compared to the initial three. Portions of the audience reject those latter three films because, despite having the same nominal creator, George Lucas, they are so different in tone, content and character, that some are led to reject it. Perhaps this is going to sound unnecessarily harsh, but I'd say at this moment, with Bungie a different group than it was when Halo was announced, having now entered into and emerged from the embrace of Microsoft, and having handed over the keys to the franchise to them in exchange for independence, it seems inescapable to me to conclude that while Bungie certainly still are the creators, the potential conflicts of interest that exist between the franchise's creators (Bungie) and its owners (Microsoft) as well as its stewards (343 Industries) seem to leave the audience as the only remaining unbiased arbiter of what is and what is not canon. Even when these three elements were one, during Microsoft's ownership of Bungie Studios, materials were created by third parties, in conjunction with the creators and with the approval of the owners, the canonicity of which was never completely defined and even today is the subject of argument (I Love Bees). This was a relatively minor conflict, as ILB was made with, but not by, Bungie Studios, and was not a primary source, but rather additional materials intended for promotion. However, so far we have seen new primary sources created by developers separate from the creators but also owned by the franchise owners (Ensemble's Halo Wars). With the closure of Ensemble and the divestiture in Bungie, it seems likely that if there are to be Halo games published by Microsoft after Reach, they will be developed by still other parties, perhaps this time third party developers, making them still further removed from the creators, regardless of what kind of supervision by 343 and/or cooperation with Bungie might be possible. I don't suppose I disagree with you on any particular point, except perhaps to add that anon is decided, created and morphed in partnership with the creators and the audience. It seems possible to imagine that at some point, a fact might be entered into canon that is decided, created and morphed into being by the current incarnations (at that time) of Bungie LLC, Microsoft and 343 Industries, but that would not be accepted by the audience at large. Should that be the case, in what sense could it be called canon?
| |
|
| Replies: |
The HBO Forum Archive is maintained with WebBBS 4.33. |