Is Canon really so important?

Post Reply New Topic

The word canon, as applied to a series of TV shows or print novels, always makes smile because it seems so... fusty, so ecclesiastical. You know, abbey bells sounding vespers, Gregorian chanting, monks toiling over old manuscripts, that kind of thing.

Another word I like is retcon, i.e. retroactive continuity, whereby a convoluted and often highly-improbable narrative twist is presented to "explain" a logical inconsistency, a gap in a timeline, or the sudden appearance/disappearance of a character.

JK Rowling once commented that because she tended not to reread her own books, some of the fandom had a far more exact, encyclopaedic knowledge of the Potterverse than she herself did.

My favorite use of the word retcon is on the British TV series Torchwood. If someone has picked up some knowledge of Torchwood or the Rift that they don't really need, they get dosed with a drug developed by the Torchwood Institute, one that erases the unwanted memories and substitutes a preferred set. The drug is called Retcon.

Then again, Canon can pose problems, Stargate SG-1 fans will know this one, the Zat'n'ktel.

In the first season finale 'Within the Serpent's Grasp', the Zat gun was shown to have the following effects -

1) Shot one stuns, or causes pain
2) Shot two kills you
3) Shot three vapourises you... Hold the phone!

Yeah, shot three disintegrates you, but it's too late, it was shown on screen, it's canon! It's also now the source of an in-joke on the later episode 'Wormhole X-treme' (Man, they jumped the shark with the Martin Lloyd arc!)

Ah, a fellow SG-1 fan.

Canon is important.