Let’s Talk Bookish: What Makes Something Canon?

Let’s Talk Bookish is a weekly meme hosted by Rukky @ Eternity Books and Dani @ Literary Lion. Today’s topic is What Makes Something Canon?

This is a very interesting topic for me, because I’ve spent quite a bit of time pondering this myself, so here goes. I could honestly talk about this for pages and pages, but I’ll stick to the questions to keep it concise.

Is something canon even if it never appears in the actual work?

Canon obviously begins with the original books themselves, but I do consider material in published novellas as canon too, even if I don’t much like the idea of side stories. The concept of canon vs non-canon is why I usually have so much trouble reading novellas. If they’re not released chronologically along with the books or doesn’t very obviously tie into the main storyline, it never feels like canon to me, even though it logically is. My opinion on this is that as long as the fact is in a properly published work, I consider it canon.

Can an author tweet something and it becomes retroactively canon?

No way, absolutely not. If the author were to tweet something leading up to the release of a book as a teaser or spoiler, that I can accept, but when they decide to drop tidbits long after the series has ended, that will never be canon to me *cough*Harry Potter*cough*. With social media, it is so easy to interact with authors and ask questions, and the answers are not always very well thought out and might contradict the facts in their books. I’m of the opinion that a good fictional universe doesn’t need to be described point by point, for characters or world-building, and only needs to provide enough of a picture that readers can fill in the gaps with their imagination – and when authors drop ‘canon’ facts much later, I actually find it really annoying.

When a company like Disney buys something and decides to declare previously canon things non-canon is that to be respected? If events differ in different adaptations which events are the “true” canon?

Again, no. In the case of movie adaptations, when a company buys the rights, there’s no guarantee that the original creator has any say in the new version at all. I mean, look at the disaster that was the Percy Jackson movies. And even if the author does have a say, it’s rarely possible to translate from book to screen exactly, so there are always differences, or added facts to fill in the plotholes that didn’t matter in the books, making it non canon. Even one of my favourite movies of all time, Lord of the Rings, did not escape from this – I still fret about the fact that Arwen rescued the hobbits in the movies instead of Glorfindel as in the books.

As much as I enjoy adaptations – book or movie, I tend to consider them as retellings, putting a twist on the original story for any number of reasons such as catering to present day audiences, or making it appealing across age groups. And retellings are hugely entertaining – for example, look at Cinderella is Dead – I actually liked it better than the original since I’ve never really been a fan of Cinderella, but that doesn’t make it fact. The original should be considered the true canon.

What do you consider canon? Share your thoughts in the comments below!

9 thoughts on “Let’s Talk Bookish: What Makes Something Canon?

  1. Georgia Husselbee January 8, 2021 / 1:36 pm

    I agree with you, if it’s a novella that’s included in the series it’s canon. And tweets definitely do not count, it makes it seem like an afterthought!

    Liked by 2 people

    • Raji (@journeyintofantasy) January 10, 2021 / 10:41 am

      I totally agree! Authors revealing additional information about their fictional universes through tweets doesn’t feel authentic, because if it really was that important, it should have been in the books themselves!

      Liked by 2 people

  2. bibliomavens January 8, 2021 / 10:27 pm

    As soon as I read the title of this blog all I could think of was Harry Potter and J.K. Rowling. It annoys me to now end. I agree with you, unless it is in the published work it isn’t canon. Things added in as an afterthought do not count. I like your point about adaptations being retellings and not canon.- Amber

    Liked by 1 person

    • Raji (@journeyintofantasy) January 10, 2021 / 10:39 am

      Thanks for reading! I used Harry Potter as a basis for answering this post too! It’s honestly the fictional world that annoys me the most when it comes to canon vs non-canon, and I find it ridiculous that the author is tossing out new facts more than ten years after the final book was released. Canon really should end with the books.


      • bibliomavens January 14, 2021 / 10:42 am

        Agreed! If it’s not written in the book it doesn’t count. Especially when the author throw things out the reader can’t even infer from the book, like it doesn’t even make sense. There’s definitely this blurred line now, but I just accept what I read on paper.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Raji (@journeyintofantasy) January 10, 2021 / 10:45 am

      Canon in books is usually used to refer to facts or material that are considered true and part of the fictional universe of that story. Of course, every person you talk to will have a different idea of what exactly constitutes canon which makes it a constant debate 😅

      Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s