What's up w/ the rampant canonization?

[believe victims]

Wally:

 

"'That's all fair, but doesn't knowing the powers available to the Toa Mangai team help understand the 2004 story year?'

 

...how?"

 

First, note that being able to ask how is not the same as disproving the possibility. Anyways, because Lhikan and Nidhiki were prominent characters in it, and the Toa Mangai backstory was built off of 2004. It feeds into the why and so forth that things became that way in 2004. Understanding what life would have been like on the island just prior to that for the Matoran seeing those Toa in action helps understand them as people. Even if admittedly in a very minimal way (but a lot of other things already established are also minimal, esp. more distant past events like the Matoran Civil War, and were established). It can help us envision the team dynamics in battle, too, for the Toa Mangai, with the Kanohi Dragon and other possible incidents later. I'm guessing you don't personally care about these things, and that's okay, but others do, and it's still true that they do add to our understanding, even if in small ways.

 

It's similar to Radagast the Brown. We could also ask "how?" to him helping to understand Tolkien's universe. But he felt that it did help and that's why he included it.

 

"The character didn't even exist. His existence had absolutely no impact whatsoever on any story year, but especially not 2004."

 

Then everything DV admitted to about the relevance of backstory and history goes out the window. That would be contradictory... I say 2004 because it's the one it's most relevant to, since Lhikan and Nidhiki were in it, and it was the move from the Toa Metru being forced (in large part due to the deaths of this team) to go from Matoran enjoying these particular characters' protection to having to step up to replace them.

 

It's certainly true this is more trivial than other things, but it does impact it and using hyperbole to claim it doesn't at all is not fair. A good argument, if that's what you're aiming for, should not have to resort to inaccuracies to defend it...

 

Okay, first of all, this is the second time you've mentioned Radagast the Brown, and I just thought I'd mention that the two things about him you claimed were "worldbuilding" (his name and his color-rank) were also things that, by the conventions wizards are mentioned by, also obligatory when mentioning their name. If Tolkien invoked any wizard name of the top of his head, that wizard would also likely have had their name and color rank established. Pringlehorn the Golden. Snuffstubble the Blue. Babblehat the Chartreuse.

 

You made a compelling case for the Toa Mangai's history being important, though not quite one for why members besides Lhikan and Nidhiki would influence the 2004 story, but none whatsoever for the argument I presented, which is that this Toa's element and mask had no impact whatsoever. It does nothing to help define the way the Kanohi Dragon battle went down, because even knowing masks and elements, anything outside of what was written about it is pure conjecture. Sure, you can say "oh, but a mask of healing would have been essential to this battle" but where's your proof? If it wasn't worth mentioning in the first place that there was a Toa of Plantlife with the Mask of Healing, what makes it so important now to our understanding?

 

You haven't proven how it helps our understanding to know this. You've prove how it can help you make theories as to what would happen with little to no basis in the actual written story, and it'll probably help you choke something out for your big grand fanfiction, but it doesn't aid in understanding the actual story at all.

[Iblis]

 Wally:

 

"'That's all fair, but doesn't knowing the powers available to the Toa Mangai team help understand the 2004 story year?'

 

...how?"

 

First, note that being able to ask how is not the same as disproving the possibility. Anyways, because Lhikan and Nidhiki were prominent characters in it, and the Toa Mangai backstory was built off of 2004. It feeds into the why and so forth that things became that way in 2004. Understanding what life would have been like on the island just prior to that for the Matoran seeing those Toa in action helps understand them as people. Even if admittedly in a very minimal way (but a lot of other things already established are also minimal, esp. more distant past events like the Matoran Civil War, and were established). It can help us envision the team dynamics in battle, too, for the Toa Mangai, with the Kanohi Dragon and other possible incidents later. I'm guessing you don't personally care about these things, and that's okay, but others do, and it's still true that they do add to our understanding, even if in small ways.

 

It's similar to Radagast the Brown. We could also ask "how?" to him helping to understand Tolkien's universe. But he felt that it did help and that's why he included it.

 

"The character didn't even exist. His existence had absolutely no impact whatsoever on any story year, but especially not 2004."

 

Then everything DV admitted to about the relevance of backstory and history goes out the window. That would be contradictory... I say 2004 because it's the one it's most relevant to, since Lhikan and Nidhiki were in it, and it was the move from the Toa Metru being forced (in large part due to the deaths of this team) to go from Matoran enjoying these particular characters' protection to having to step up to replace them.

 

It's certainly true this is more trivial than other things, but it does impact it and using hyperbole to claim it doesn't at all is not fair. A good argument, if that's what you're aiming for, should not have to resort to inaccuracies to defend it...

 

...So people are going to extrapolate all of this from Mask powers (& maybe a weapons).

Right. 'Cause unnamed Toas of X, Y, & Z with Masks A, B & C; who were all part of a team with two known Toa who were omportant to the year instantly makes them relevant, because a background even designed to give some depth to a setting, doesn't actually really noticeably change the anyones understanding of the year overall in and of itself; "Understanding what life would have been like on the island just prior to that for the Matoran seeing those Toa in action helps understand them as people. Even if admittedly in a very minimal way (but a lot of other things already established are also minimal, esp. more distant past events like the Matoran Civil War, and were established). It can help us envision the team dynamics in battle, too, for the Toa Mangai, with the Kanohi Dragon and other possible incidents later."

 

Well, exactly, it is a few more data points, but fundamentally it doesn't change the plot of 2004; the general event (Toa Mangai [which included Lhikan & Nidhiki] fought giant Dragon, monumental battle, etc.) serves as a reminder that the Toa have always been important to the the (safety of) the Matoran, & that Lhikan is awesome.

 

Knowing what masks his other allies at that given point in time doesn't add anything more than narrowing down some of the potential team dynamics they had going on; that teams fighting dynamics in one (very important) battle, aren't really that telling of anyone, as it doesn't connect with enough other data in a way that we can say that X or Y probably felt this because of __...

It's still going to be very much a case of wild mass guessing, there are plenty of dynamics that could of happened.

 

So yes, of course data affects something by some small amount; but it isn't going to change anyones perspective radically; you can dress it up as much as you want but;

 

"because Lhikan and Nidhiki were prominent characters in it, and the Toa Mangai backstory was built off of 2004. It feeds into the why and so forth that things became that way in 2004. Understanding what life would have been like on the island just prior to that for the Matoran seeing those Toa in action helps understand them as people. Even if admittedly in a very minimal way (but a lot of other things already established are also minimal, esp. more distant past events like the Matoran Civil War, and were established)."

 

Doesn't really add anything to your possible point(?) (knowing the masks of the Toa Mangai changes [some of] our understanding of 2004 as a whole), it is just waffle; we do it from time to time. But whilst you might not be wrong about it changing something; it's seems misleading at best to say it changes the year. It was a background event; this is highly unlikey to create fridge logic of oh dear this menas X, Y, & Z & that makes Lhikans sacifice so much more meaningful! et cetera, et cetera.

 

So you might not be wrong, but only by reducing your position here to something so small & with so little weight that it means next to nothing rather than nothing.

 

 

 

arbitrarily associating being in the vicinity of toa lhikan with actually being worth describing in detail.

 

The thing that I'm confused about is that bonesiii seems to be actually saying not (just) that adding detail here is worth it, (or that it helps), but that it helps change our understanding of the year; which certainly seems to imply it is a change that carries a fair amount of weight; where too me at least, it's probably as good an example as any for a detail being added to a character without accomplishing anything other than being able to say it's now more detailed.

 

Unless I've got bonesiii all wrong? (which wouldn't be a first) :s

Edited December 9, 2014 by Iblis

[bonesiii]

Quisoves:


"Before I plunge into the fray, I have a question. Given that BZPower has no power over canonization, as far as I know, why we are debating this so vehemently? Place a moratorium on Gen1 canonization, and folks will simply migrate to some other forum"

To the question, we're not the only place that discusses the proposal of a moratorium. But the discussion certainly makes sense here since we are the place Greg has allowed polls to go on for canonizations. Even without that, though, since canon affects everybody, and BZP is part of everybody () surely it makes sense to have the conversation here too.

I agree with your last point and that's a big concern I have that people may be missing (or not giving as much emphasis as is needed). Since we do have a strong focus here on story consistency and have a lot of people who know a lot about it to avoid errors, we're at least one good place where making sure suggestions fit can go (for now; I think it'll eventually fade away, possibly faster once Gen2 really starts getting going and we may risk confusing facts from the two). Greg seems, for good or ill, intent on continuing to (as he sees it, or as the goal) keep refining certain major gaps. All we have the power to do is try to persuade him what he should do, or control what happens here.

So I think as long as he continues to want to add to the canon with fan input, we should allow it here and try to regulate it. And those who think the time has come to end it can make their arguments as to why, although honestly the LMB is really the place they should be primarily taking that (although they can also persuade others here).

"The only way to truly stop that from happening is to ban anyone who dismisses someone's work on its lack of canonicitiy, which seems a bit extreme."

We can warn/advise too. It's not either/or; most people are able to learn to improve (I hope), and can be taught why that behavior is bad.

"That said, I don't see why canon-snobbery shouldn't be a minor offense, the sort that could lead to banishment if continued against the mods' warnings."

It could if it consists of continued flaming and/or trolling.


"But assuming that BZPower did somehow succeed in stopping all Gen-1 Canonization, I fail to see how it would be such a loss."

I agree there too. I was all geared up for it to be totally over with, and then LMB happened lol. But there is the thing about care for the story including wanting it to be consistent with LEGO's goals, and if the perception is  (hopefully due to it being reality) that some things were missed that really should have been established, it would still be a loss, even if small.

The example I always think of is the Av-Matoran masks. In 2001 any new shape was given a detailed mask bio. By 2008 it seemed like emphasis had wrongly shifted to too much running updates, and the worldbuilding was being somewhat neglected, and those weren't established (even if it makes a little bit of sense as they were powerless, but Matoran mask shapes were established as usually being of either a Great or a Noble form). So I suggested for them to be the Nobles of those matching-color Toa's masks, and it was accepted. This was before polling was implemented, but still, as much as people complain about the Sayger/World masks, I haven't seen a lot of complaining about this one.

Silence proves nothing (generally lol), but I do think had these not been given some explanation, that would have been a fairly large loss.

"This seems to me to be a cum-hoc-ergo-propter-hoc fallacy. When a person decides to build a BIONICLE MOC, his primary motivation is his love of BIONICLE."

In reverse order:

1) And what Bionicle is like is logically bound to influence how much fans love it. Having a rich canon is a commonly cited reason for why fans like it.

2) Arguments like this do bear superficial similarity to that fallacy (and due to the timing, post-hoc), but they aren't the same thing as they involve positive evidence rather than just assumption (like people attesting to reasons why they like it, and understanding of human psychology), and are treating it in an evidentiary sense rather than a definitely proving sense. Correlation is "possible evidence" of a causal relationship, not proof, but also not definitely coincidence either.

"For my part, my love BIONICLE is not because of its extensive canon. I like the sets, the world, the story, etc. But if I didn't care for those things, then I certainly wouldn't care for its canon."

Right, but that wasn't what I was talking about (and that to an extent is based on subjective tastes; there are people who don't care for those things and don't care for the canon). I'm talking about, once it's settled that we're considering people who do like (most of / enough of to want to follow it) Bionicle, then looking at whether more canon or less canon is likely to inspire more fan productions. It's a complicated subject, though.

"if what you are saying is true, then canon is too overbearing a force, stifling imagination"

This is a very one-sided approach, though. While it's true that some canon-fit gap-focused fan works may seem stifled, others are also encouraged. What I said doesn't support your conclusion here. You have to have to add some assumptions to get there that I'm not seeing supported, and seemingly contradicted.

And what practical alternative is there, really? I'm seeing two main other options; have no LEGO-produced story at all (lest it be confused for a canon), or have no coherent version of it and produce a lot of inconsistent things, irking a lot of people because of that. (They actually did release multiple versions of some things, but picked one in many cases as the canon one.)

Whichever way it goes, there would be some downsides.

"where it ought to be stoked by ambiguity"

Well, I think there's a place for that too. I guess what I'm saying is, there should generally be some of both.

BTW, I may as well ask, though it's probably my fault for getting drowned in tons of quotes, but I didn't follow what you meant by this part:

"I'm not at all sure of the veracity of your statement, given the number of continuations of the original story I've seen in the Epics forum."

Probably just me being dense, but what did you mean that to be related to and how so?




RL:

"First things first. this post was so long, i had to skip to the part where you responded to me without reading anything else."

I'm gonna use this as an opportunity to clarify something from earlier, about why it's important for critics to deal with opposing points logically -- obviously I understand when it gets crazy complex and long like this if people just don't have time (part of why we don't want canonizations to be rushed). Still, eventually if a proposal (whether to add to canon or to close it) is to be accepted it should be carefully supported and withstand scrutiny. Whenever time permits. And we should all be realistic and realize that it's possible it is too early to close it, and (for now) that proposal will not pass the test.

"arbitrarily associating being in the vicinity of toa lhikan"

It's not arbitrary -- they're on the same team!

Personally I would draw the line with the Mangai -- and not include this reasoning for Lesovikk's team, for reasons mentioned. But it's not fair to make it sound like they just happened to be standing near him occasionally. They weren't just "in the vicinity of" (and of course, pointing out this problem in your reasoning should be expected too...).

All I'm saying there is that people shouldn't be pretending small influence equals literally zero influence, especially if they don't clarify that they're being hyperbolic for emphasis, and repeat it several times.



Wally:

"If Tolkien invoked any wizard name of the top of his head, that wizard would also likely have had their name and color rank established. Pringlehorn the Golden. Snuffstubble the Blue. Babblehat the Chartreuse."

Agreed. Still...

"You made a compelling case for the Toa Mangai's history being important, though not quite one for why members besides Lhikan and Nidhiki would influence the 2004 story, but none whatsoever for the argument I presented, which is that this Toa's element and mask had no impact whatsoever."

Here we go again with the "no" thing instead of "small."

If understanding the history behind a story year helps understand that year (as DV's own reasoning supports), then understanding the powers of such a closely connected Toa Team does help understand that year. In a small way, but not nothing!

I don't see why people are resisting acknowledging this. Just say "none" isn't meant literally and that even though it's not nothing you think it's still too small to be added. Which is okay... but then there's a gray area and how do we tell where the line is?

Discussing that important question is being delayed every time people distract from it by claiming it's no relevance at all.

"It does nothing to help define the way the Kanohi Dragon battle went down, because even knowing masks and elements"

I don't see how you figure here. It doesn't tell the story, and it doesn't summarize specific events, but it does give us a better idea of what's possible for it. The subject has already come up about the Mask of Rahi Control.

"Sure, you can say "oh, but a mask of healing would have been essential to this battle" but where's your proof?"

This looks like false dichotomy, that we can only either have no idea at all, or have absolute proof. You seem to be forgetting the option (that I meant) of something along the lines of "here are ways this mask power could work or not work in this battle based on what we know of the Kanohi Dragon, the rest of the team, etc." That could inspire a fan fic. Discussions like this have done that often.

Admittedly it now can't inspire a canon writing (assuming that decision stands indefinitely, which at this point I think is wisest to expect), though.


"f it wasn't worth mentioning in the first place that there was a Toa of Plantlife with the Mask of Healing, what makes it so important now to our understanding?"

Well as I said, I think the timing here is probably not a coincidence; likely the major reason they delayed for so long was that it was possible there might be future sets of it, and now that the reboot is revealed they can safely turn that down. Even if they weren't planning that, interest in Bionicle has gone up again now due to the reboot announcement, so it makes sense renewed interest in Gen1 would happen now too.

(But I dispute "so important." I don't think this example is all that super important.)


Iblis:

"So yes, of course data affects something by some small amount; but it isn't going to change anyones perspective radically"

Kudos for acknowledging it. And to the last bit, nobody is arguing otherwise. The idea that is does have some slight positive relevance came up only in response to people hyperbolically making it sound like it had none at all.

"The thing that I'm confused about is that bonesiii seems to be actually saying not (just) that adding detail here is worth it, (or that it helps), but that it helps change our understanding of the year; which certainly seems to imply it is a change that carries a fair amount of weight"

This doesn't make sense as I have clarified over and over I think it's barely any weight, but I'm disputing that it's zero weight. This should be an easy agreement and moving on, folks!

[BioGio]

"arbitrarily associating being in the vicinity of toa lhikan"

 

It's not arbitrary -- they're on the same team!

 

That's not what Rahkshi Lalonde was calling arbitrary.  S/he wrote, "arbitrarily associating being in the vicinity of toa lhikan with actually being worth describing in detail."  That is to say, [nearness to Toa Lhikan] is arbitrarily associated with [being worth detail].

 

(Feel free to delete this post, BTW.  Clarifying a misread probably isn't worth taking up too much space.)

 

EDIT:  Or wait, are you trying to say that "it's not arbitrary--they're on the same team" in the sense that "if they're on the same team as Lhikan, they deserve detail, so it's not arbitrary to give this guy detail"?

Edited December 9, 2014 by BioGio

[Quisoves Potoo]

Quisoves:

 

 

"Before I plunge into the fray, I have a question. Given that BZPower has no power over canonization, as far as I know, why we are debating this so vehemently? Place a moratorium on Gen1 canonization, and folks will simply migrate to some other forum"

 

To the question, we're not the only place that discusses the proposal of a moratorium. But the discussion certainly makes sense here since we are the place Greg has allowed polls to go on for canonizations. Even without that, though, since canon affects everybody, and BZP is part of everybody ( ) surely it makes sense to have the conversation here too.

But does it make sense? BZPower might be troubled enough to try to stamp out the canon-hunting subculture, but there will inevitably be another website that won't, be it the TTV forums, Reddit, or Rock Raiders United. And as long as the canon-hunters aren't scattered to the four winds (a possibility in the event of a moratorium, but hardly a certainty,) Greg should see no problem in allowing their new home to post canonization polls. And there would be nothing stopping canon-hunters from being active on BZPower. Ultimately, a moratorium is likely not to stop the problem, merely make it harder to monitor.

 

And I'm not sure that "canon affects everyone." Gen1 Story contests are a thing of the past, so the only real direct effect is on those who care about new minutiae for Gen1 (surely not everyone, else we'd not have this whole debate.) There is an indirect effect on those who are harrassed for not adhering to said minutiae (meaning those who create representations of canon-characters, places, events, etc.) but surely that is a behavioral issue, not a fictional one.

 

"The only way to truly stop that from happening is to ban anyone who dismisses someone's work on its lack of canonicitiy, which seems a bit extreme."

 

We can warn/advise too. It's not either/or; most people are able to learn to improve (I hope), and can be taught why that behavior is bad.

I agree. What I meant was that the only way to eliminate virtually any instance of canon-snobbery would be to make it absolutely verboten. In retrospect, I suppose I should have been clearer. My point was that the moratorium alone would not eliminate the problem.

 

"But assuming that BZPower did somehow succeed in stopping all Gen-1 Canonization, I fail to see how it would be such a loss."

 

I agree there too. I was all geared up for it to be totally over with, and then LMB happened lol. But there is the thing about care for the story including wanting it to be consistent with LEGO's goals, and if the perception is  (hopefully due to it being reality) that some things were missed that really should have been established, it would still be a loss, even if small.

 

The example I always think of is the Av-Matoran masks. In 2001 any new shape was given a detailed mask bio. By 2008 it seemed like emphasis had wrongly shifted to too much running updates, and the worldbuilding was being somewhat neglected, and those weren't established (even if it makes a little bit of sense as they were powerless, but Matoran mask shapes were established as usually being of either a Great or a Noble form). So I suggested for them to be the Nobles of those matching-color Toa's masks, and it was accepted. This was before polling was implemented, but still, as much as people complain about the Sayger/World masks, I haven't seen a lot of complaining about this one.

 

Silence proves nothing (generally lol), but I do think had these not been given some explanation, that would have been a fairly large loss.

Perhaps not "fairly large," but a loss nonetheless, since, at the time, there was an ongoing story. Now that the story is long-concluded, there would be no purpose for such information.

 

"This seems to me to be a cum-hoc-ergo-propter-hoc fallacy. When a person decides to build a BIONICLE MOC, his primary motivation is his love of BIONICLE."

 

In reverse order:

 

1) And what Bionicle is like is logically bound to influence how much fans love it. Having a rich canon is a commonly cited reason for why fans like it.

 

2) Arguments like this do bear superficial similarity to that fallacy (and due to the timing, post-hoc), but they aren't the same thing as they involve positive evidence rather than just assumption (like people attesting to reasons why they like it, and understanding of human psychology), and are treating it in an evidentiary sense rather than a definitely proving sense. Correlation is "possible evidence" of a causal relationship, not proof, but also not definitely coincidence either.

1) The world and characters that the canon depicts are what matter primarily. The extent of the canon is only a secondary factor. It may make them love the theme even more, but to do so they already had to love it.

 

2) You wrote "If there was no canon at all, you'd think there would be more MOCs,  but lots of LEGO lines have had little to no story, and few of them have had anywhere near the interest in MOCing that Bionicle does."

To my mind, that assumes a correlation. No evidence was given save the lack of MOCs depicting those themes. If you had claimed that LEGO fans cite the lack of canon in most LEGO lines as the reason they make less MOCs for them, that would have been different. As it is, you have a textbook example of a correlation-causation error. A is B. A is also C. D is not B. D is also not C. Therefore, C causes B.

 

"if what you are saying is true, then canon is too overbearing a force, stifling imagination"

 

This is a very one-sided approach, though. While it's true that some canon-fit gap-focused fan works may seem stifled, others are also encouraged. What I said doesn't support your conclusion here. You have to have to add some assumptions to get there that I'm not seeing supported, and seemingly contradicted.

 

You said

I've seen this especially at work with fanfics, and the Mangai example works here too. Because we don't know their masks or tools, a lot of people would rather tell stories about some other team than deal with the "danger of gaps" if they want to seem canonically plausible or close to it (and this desire is common, and not wrong). But once something is established, although it is mildly unfortunate that it has the downside of making "work in the gaps" stories less canonically consistent, it's also true that it can make it feel like telling fan stories about them loosely attached to canonicity is now more enjoyable.

So, you've got fan-fic writers not depicting something because it is described canonically in a less than complete way. If it is canonically-detailed to their satisfaction, then they feel comfortable writing about it. This mindset rather limits the pool of inspiration. Chances are, the incompletely-detailed elements are going to outnumber the completely detailed elements.

 

So you've got an official confirmation as to what masks the Toa Mangai wore. Yay! But be careful, lest you feature one of them having an adventure in the southern reaches of the Matoran Universe, because Greg might decide that no Toa ever visited the region prior to Takanuva escaping onto Bara Magna. And don't depict him allying with a rebel Makuta, because Greg hasn't determined whether any Brotherhood rebellions occurred after Teridax's coup.

 

Trying to make your story not contradict canon is not inherently a bad idea, but doing so to the detriment of your fanfic is. Limiting your non-canonical work because of canon is patently absurd.

 

So, the detriments of said mindset almost certainly outweigh the benefits.

 

 

And what practical alternative is there, really? I'm seeing two main other options; have no LEGO-produced story at all (lest it be confused for a canon), or have no coherent version of it and produce a lot of inconsistent things, irking a lot of people because of that. (They actually did release multiple versions of some things, but picked one in many cases as the canon one.)

It is perfectly possible for a LEGO story to have a single canon without stifling creativity. However, if the canon is actually stifling creativity, then it ought to be changed in some way. It's as simple as that.

 

 

BTW, I may as well ask, though it's probably my fault for getting drowned in tons of quotes, but I didn't follow what you meant by this part:

 

"I'm not at all sure of the veracity of your statement, given the number of continuations of the original story I've seen in the Epics forum."

 

Probably just me being dense, but what did you mean that to be related to and how so?

 

You stated that fan-fic writers were discouraged from writing about certain things due to their lack of canonical detail. I found that somewhat hard to believe, given that the writers in the Epics forum seem to have no inhibition about writing about future events in the story, despite the huge canonical gap present there. Is Velika capable of killing the Gold Skinned Being? If most writers worried what Greg might say about such a thing, I think that you'd see a lot less such fanfics.

Edited December 10, 2014 by Quisoves Pugnat

[Boidoh]

Actually the TTV Message Boards banned canonization polls.

[Quisoves Potoo]

Actually the TTV Message Boards banned canonization polls.

Bad example, then.

 

My point still stands, though, that inevitably there is a website that won't mind canonization polls and the like.  More solid, less spur of the moment, examples would, I think, be Reddit and the LMBs.

[Boidoh]

 

Actually the TTV Message Boards banned canonization polls.

Bad example, then.

 

My point still stands, though, that inevitably there is a website that won't mind canonization polls and the like.  More solid, less spur of the moment, examples would, I think, be Reddit and the LMBs.

 

Exactly. I mean, how do you think they got banned on the TTV message boards?

[bonesiii]

BG, I was saying that associating them being near him a lot (because they're on the same team and this has been treated as important before in Bionicle story, they have three important members, yadda) with being worth describing is not arbitrary. I can see how my wording could come across the other way, though.



Q:

 

But does it make sense? BZPower might be troubled enough to try to stamp out the canon-hunting subculture, but there will inevitably be another website that won't

But unless that site is in the habit of banning people for opposing canonization (!), surely they would take this discussion to that site...

"And I'm not sure that "canon affects everyone.""

Well I'm also arguing elsewhere that it doesn't much. But it does to some extent.

"You wrote "If there was no canon at all, you'd think there would be more MOCs,  but lots of LEGO lines have had little to no story, and few of them have had anywhere near the interest in MOCing that Bionicle does."
To my mind, that assumes a correlation."

No, other way around. It is part of the logic arguing for a correlation (evidence for it, but not absolute proof mind you).

Basically, a correlation is the most reasonable, Ockham's Razor explanation of these things.(And it's an observation repeated across multiple story franchises, not just Bionicle, although to be fair some have raised some examples where the pattern doesn't seem to fit as well. Whether this is due to mitigating circumstances or this observation not being correct is not so simple, though.)

"No evidence was given save the lack of MOCs depicting those themes."

It's been mentioned for especially for fanfics, art, etc. MOCs aren't the only example. (They're possibly even the least example, as LEGO tends to have MOCs regardless, but a line-specific MOCing community has not traditionally been seen like it has with Bionicle. Of course, that was in part due to also having a unique building style at the time, mostly.)

"If you had claimed that LEGO fans cite the lack of canon in most LEGO lines as the reason they make less MOCs for them, that would have been different."

This forgets that a lack of interest as a hypothesis does not usually predict a lot of talk about why they're not paying attention to it.

You could explain it away some other way, but without specific evidence, it is an ad hoc fallacy. The evidence we have seems to strongly support that more canon generally equates to more inspiration. Especially when this pattern is repeatably and predictably fulfilled. Chalking that up to a coincidence is not reasonable in that light. If we only had one data point or close to it, so that no discernable pattern was found, you would be right that it would be a correlation fallacy. Not the case.

"So, you've got fan-fic writers not depicting something because it is described canonically in a less than complete way. If it is canonically-detailed to their satisfaction, then they feel comfortable writing about it. This mindset rather limits the pool of inspiration."

That may be your personal feeling, but others need not share it, and I would say it is in large part the other way around (though again there's some of both). Adding more canon details tends to expand the pool of inspiration (to use your term). Note that one thing inspiring something else implies there is a thing that does it. A gap is not necessarily as strong of a thing as an established detail.

To bring it to a personal level for example, personally the sorts of things that tend to be inspire my fanfic ideas are almost always specific positive things, not gaps. Even when a gap in knowledge is standing out to me to try to fill, what solution I come up with is itself usually inspired by positive inspiration.

Maybe that's just me, but yeah. Now, the thing doesn't have to be part of a canon. It could be a snippet of a TV episode I see on some completely unrelated subject and I imagine how that could be altered, usually a ton, and something else made of it, and if a gap comes up in Bionicle, I might apply it. But other times Bionicle canon fills that role. One of my major upcoming stories (only begun a little so far) is entirely based on such a discussion about some canon factoids that came up in a topic many years ago that stuck with me, that wouldn't have been possible if it was just one big gap.

Now that's anecdotal... but for whatever it's worth.

"Limiting your non-canonical work because of canon is patently absurd."

Actually, it can be quite fun. I do both... but both are fun and can be good mental exercise, among other things. It's only absurd if somebody thinks they have to do that.

"It is perfectly possible for a LEGO story to have a single canon without stifling creativity. However, if the canon is actually stifling creativity, then it ought to be changed in some way. It's as simple as that."

Thing is, those are both just assertions. They might sound good "on paper", but in practice I see that anything can do both, for different people and in different situations. Establishing a canon fact could stifle some creativity while encouraging others... and vice versa. (The Helryx example works in reverse. It stifles those that want a canon version to base their version on or to change away from, but doesn't stifle those that want to feel more encouraged to operate in a gap. And I think having some of both is good.)

"You stated that fan-fic writers were discouraged from writing about certain things"

I don't recall using such a wording, but if I did, not what I meant. Problem with that is passive voice -- who is doing the discouraging? And did they really want to be doing that? Some fanfic writers may feel discouraged. My point is this needs to be treated with some level of respect. But at the same time, they do have a way to get over that feeling without the canon being banned.

[Mjolnitor]

 

BG, I was saying that associating them being near him a lot (because they're on the same team and this has been treated as important before in Bionicle story, they have three important members, yadda) with being worth describing is not arbitrary.

WH40K, for example: Ultramarines are treated as important (like any other major SM chapter), they are in the same chapter as their chapter master Marneus Calgar, they have some other important members (Tigurius, Sicarius...), but suddenly not each one of rest of them is described so much, although some number of them is probably this close to one of aforrementioned important members (Calgar's honour guard, for example).

So, is describing each single member of some group, albeit important, not arbitrary?

Edited December 10, 2014 by Mjolnitor

[Quisoves Potoo]

But unless that site is in the habit of banning people for opposing canonization (!), surely they would take this discussion to that site...

My point is that canon-snobbery, which seems to be the primary irritent here, would still persist on BZPower.

 

"You wrote "If there was no canon at all, you'd think there would be more MOCs,  but lots of LEGO lines have had little to no story, and few of them have had anywhere near the interest in MOCing that Bionicle does."

To my mind, that assumes a correlation."

 

No, other way around. It is part of the logic arguing for a correlation (evidence for it, but not absolute proof mind you).

 

Basically, a correlation is the most reasonable, Ockham's Razor explanation of these things.(And it's an observation repeated across multiple story franchises, not just Bionicle, although to be fair some have raised some examples where the pattern doesn't seem to fit as well. Whether this is due to mitigating circumstances or this observation not being correct is not so simple, though.)

I disagree. Given nothing more than the data you supplied, The Ockham's Razor explanation of those things is that they are unrelated. It requires at least one less assumption than the explanation that they are correlated.

 

"No evidence was given save the lack of MOCs depicting those themes."

 

It's been mentioned for especially for fanfics, art, etc. MOCs aren't the only example. (They're possibly even the least example, as LEGO tends to have MOCs regardless, but a line-specific MOCing community has not traditionally been seen like it has with Bionicle. Of course, that was in part due to also having a unique building style at the time, mostly.)

You misunderstand me. My point was that you gave no linking data. You could have mentioned the lack of fancics, art, etc. But it would have changed nothing. You gave no premise for a correlation.

 

 

"If you had claimed that LEGO fans cite the lack of canon in most LEGO lines as the reason they make less MOCs for them, that would have been different."

 

This forgets that a lack of interest as a hypothesis does not usually predict a lot of talk about why they're not paying attention to it.

Huh? You keep going after the peripheral bits in my arguments. My point was that you gave no linking data. What sort of linking data is irrelevant, so long as it provides evidence for the argument that a greater amount of canon makes consumers more interested in a theme.

 

 

You could explain it away some other way, but without specific evidence, it is an ad hoc fallacy. The evidence we have seems to strongly support that more canon generally equates to more inspiration. Especially when this pattern is repeatably and predictably fulfilled. Chalking that up to a coincidence is not reasonable in that light. If we only had one data point or close to it, so that no discernable pattern was found, you would be right that it would be a correlation fallacy. Not the case.

Trite as it sounds, I'll believe it when I see it. You have yet to provide sufficient evidence.

 

 

"So, you've got fan-fic writers not depicting something because it is described canonically in a less than complete way. If it is canonically-detailed to their satisfaction, then they feel comfortable writing about it. This mindset rather limits the pool of inspiration."

 

That may be your personal feeling, but others need not share it, and I would say it is in large part the other way around (though again there's some of both). Adding more canon details tends to expand the pool of inspiration (to use your term). Note that one thing inspiring something else implies there is a thing that does it. A gap is not necessarily as strong of a thing as an established detail.

 

To bring it to a personal level for example, personally the sorts of things that tend to be inspire my fanfic ideas are almost always specific positive things, not gaps. Even when a gap in knowledge is standing out to me to try to fill, what solution I come up with is itself usually inspired by positive inspiration.

 

Maybe that's just me, but yeah. Now, the thing doesn't have to be part of a canon. It could be a snippet of a TV episode I see on some completely unrelated subject and I imagine how that could be altered, usually a ton, and something else made of it, and if a gap comes up in Bionicle, I might apply it. But other times Bionicle canon fills that role. One of my major upcoming stories (only begun a little so far) is entirely based on such a discussion about some canon factoids that came up in a topic many years ago that stuck with me, that wouldn't have been possible if it was just one big gap.

 

Now that's anecdotal... but for whatever it's worth.

 

You've switched the goal-posts. Adding canon details can expand the pool of inspiration. I never denied that. I'm not arguing that we ought to keep certain details vague so as to further inspiration. I was arguing that if BIONICLE fanfic writers tend to be afraid of writing about something in canon which has been left vague (as you claimed was the case,) for fear that their story might be contradicted by later canon, then the canon of BIONICLE is not furthering inspiration, but squelching it. In that case, it is not the content of the canon per se, but something about its arrangement, presentation, autcetera.

 

"Limiting your non-canonical work because of canon is patently absurd."

 

Actually, it can be quite fun. I do both... but both are fun and can be good mental exercise, among other things. It's only absurd if somebody thinks they have to do that.

Exactly. By limiting, I meant hindering. Trying to work your story into canon, because it relates in some essential way to a canon event or character, is molding, not limiting. Trying to do so merely as a mental exercise is still limiting to the story, but since the purpose is to exercise your mind, it's not pointless.

 

"It is perfectly possible for a LEGO story to have a single canon without stifling creativity. However, if the canon is actually stifling creativity, then it ought to be changed in some way. It's as simple as that."

 

Thing is, those are both just assertions. They might sound good "on paper", but in practice I see that anything can do both, for different people and in different situations. Establishing a canon fact could stifle some creativity while encouraging others... and vice versa. (The Helryx example works in reverse. It stifles those that want a canon version to base their version on or to change away from, but doesn't stifle those that want to feel more encouraged to operate in a gap. And I think having some of both is good.)

"Just assertions?" The premise on which we are both arguing is that creativity is a good thing, and that anything which generally stifles it (such was the implied condition for my statements) is therefore bad. Furthermore, you clearly had no objection to the idea that a single canon can be a good thing, so I saw no need to convince you of it.

 

I was not referring to particular things, such as the details of Lesovikk's hiatus or how Krana are made, but rather their arrangement (or presentation, or what you will,) and consequent reception. I'd be a fool to suggest that there is anything inherently wrong with a canon answer being given to the question of the creation of Krana. But it is the context that matters. If what you stated earlier is true, then something is causing BIONICLE fanfic writers to pay undue reverence to canon. It exists to build a coherent fictional universe, not to be treated like some abstract universal constant. My point is that if a fanfic writer wants to portray something a certain way (for example, Artahka as a villain,) he oughtn't to behave as if his soul is fettered to the canon and not do so.

 

 

 

"You stated that fan-fic writers were discouraged from writing about certain things"

 

I don't recall using such a wording, but if I did, not what I meant. Problem with that is passive voice -- who is doing the discouraging? And did they really want to be doing that? Some fanfic writers may feel discouraged. My point is this needs to be treated with some level of respect. But at the same time, they do have a way to get over that feeling without the canon being banned.

 

You wrote

I've seen this especially at work with fanfics, and the Mangai example works here too. Because we don't know their masks or tools, a lot of people would rather tell stories about some other team than deal with the "danger of gaps" if they want to seem canonically plausible or close to it (and this desire is common, and not wrong). But once something is established, although it is mildly unfortunate that it has the downside of making "work in the gaps" stories less canonically consistent, it's also true that it can make it feel like telling fan stories about them loosely attached to canonicity is now more enjoyable.

In other words, the fanfic writers, according to you, are feeling discouraged by the possibility of their works being non-canonical. What did you mean, if not that?

 

 

 

 My point is this needs to be treated with some level of respect. But at the same time, they do have a way to get over that feeling without the canon being banned.

What needs to be treated with respect? If you mean canon, then I disagree. We are talking about fictional works, written for the purpose of entertainment, that are non-canonical. Fanfic writers are no more obligated to follow canon than I am to paint a copy of the Mona Lisa with dark hair and white skin. If I want to paint a red-haired, dark-skinned Mona Lisa, why should the particulars of the original stop me?

[fishers64]

At this point I'm probably beating a dead horse, but I want to clear a couple of loose ends that I left when I had to leave.

 

Oh, please, not this argument again.

Fishers, this isn't an "argument", it's official canon as relayed through TLG channels and representatives. The line's sales stagnated and slowed to the point of barely-profitable because consumers thought the entry barrier was too high because of the overly-complex narrative. And you're probably right- the average consumer was not a BZPower member and probably didn't know all this extra canon. If the official channel itself was too complex, then are we not compounding the problem? If the original mythos, on its own, was too big of a barrier to new fans, how much bigger are fans like us who know every detail of every random side character? It's simply a bunch of gatekeepers who get to be the "realest fan" because they know more about it than everyone else. I mean, full disclosure, I enjoy having more knowledge than others too, it's a neat feeling, let's be honest. But I'm also pro-sharing everything I'm allowed to share because an informed fanbase is a happier fanbase (most of the time, lol). All of this extra canonization stuff just feels like adding more hurdles for new or less-engaged fans to jump over in an effort to be "as informed" as we are. I don't like it, and it's one of the biggest complaints off-site about this part of the board.

Alright, first off, by "argument" I meant the argument between you and bonesiii, not "argument" as "argument for my position". Something I can't help but notice - simply by reading you two's debates on BZP. It's a bad habit that I tend to have - I read everything, even debates that I'm not involved in, because it could come up in a debate with either party later. (But it has. )

 

As such, it was meant to be a joke. Hence the emote.

 

But I can't help but notice that it is a point of contention, as it were, between the two of you, which all (or nearly all) of these arguments tend to spring forth. So I'll ramble a bit and explain what I think. (trust me, its short)

 

First off, I agree that BZPower adds complexity to this story. However, I maintain that it does so not only through fan canonization, but also entertaining every single story medium that Bionicle ever produced, throwing it into a blender, and producing a complex knowledge of canon as a result. Every single story medium is considered as an answer to a question, every piece of information is open for debate. But even that is not what the average fan sees. 

 

For the five years I followed Bionicle before I joined BZP, all I knew about was the books, movies and web serials. I knew about the MNOG and some of the web vids, but I just assumed those were non-canon. I didn't even know that comics existed or were important to understanding Bionicle. And that's what the average fan saw (or they just saw the comics, movies, or whatever). Cut it down to ONE story medium, cut all the clutter of debates and interpretations, and is Bionicle complex?

 

Somewhat. 

 

But there's a reason that Tolkien is beloved by many while Hero Factory is not. Some complexity in a story is wanted by the audience of a story. Complexity works well for stories.

 

But we're not fully talking about a story, are we? We're talking about a toyline. It gives me the mental image of a parent walking down the toy aisle.

 

Kid: Mommy I want that one! *points to a new Bionicle set*

 

Parent: What is Bionicle?

 

Kid: Um...well it all started on 2001 with an island and the first Toa...

 

*parent's eyes glaze over*

 

Parent: And what does that have to do with him?

 

Kid: *launches into another speech*

 

Parent: Can't we get something else?

-------------------

Then bones gives me another mental image - of a parent walking down the toy aisle, seeing Bionicle, and their eyes glazing over.

 

Parent: Not Bionicle again! Can't we get something else that's different already?

-------------------

So my mind says "both of these things are possible". I don't have any evidence to say that one is more likely than the other - in fact all the evidence says that both were factors. (Especially since Gen 2 took a break - "bringing back the new factor" - and rebooted, leaving all the story complexity behind.)

 

But in this case (canonization vs. non-canonization) that reasoning doesn't hold any water, because we are talking about a story now. Gen 1 story isn't going to affect any set sales or glaze over any parents' eyes any more. Therefore using set-based reasoning to make a story decision is not really that helpful. And in this case, bringing it up is rather silly. 

 

(But of course the top set expert and the top story expert on yonder forum would argue about this lol. It only makes sense. Hence the joke. )

 

In any case, I see that you have acknowledged the role of personal taste in your thinking, so I'm not going to continue with that train. I've written too many posts in those veins as it is. 

 

fishers:

"3)Also keep in mind that the anti-canonization movement has 20 votes in its favor in a poll, and all of them can like a post. So any number less than 20 wouldn't really matter statistically."

I wouldn't go that far. It can speak to weight of importance in their minds versus just number of proponents. Which does matter. How much so... well, that's what we're discussing so yeah.

I think it would go without saying that the anti-canon people are more vocal and more interested in these debates. The pro-canonizers are for the most part sitting back and sipping lemonade (let the lemonade represent the mixed feelings at being opposed) and relying on the fact that Greg supports them and "they can do whatever they want." rather than standing up to debate. 

 

And Vocal Complainer Syndrome is alive and well. Perhaps "wouldn't matter statistically" is a bit extreme, since it says "the anti-canon people are following this debate, while the pro-canon people don't care as much."

Edited December 10, 2014 by fishers64

[bonesiii]

Lemme reply this time in reverse order by posts (of the ones that I saw when I started typing this... a few hours ago, heh... I'm sure there might be other posts in between but I'll have to catch up later if so...).

 

fishers:

So my mind says "both of these things are possible".

Right -- plus, kids themselves can be confused by the overcomplexity and not want to keep up with Bionicle for long, so buying power can be affected that way. My guess is DV didn't realize I understand these things. And that's okay. And another thing -- arguing which one is the greater contributor to me misses the point. Both are sizeable -- of this much I think we can be pretty sure, but can we even know which is the larger?

 

One might be a large minority, but still squarely in the minority category. Or they both might be close to equal. I'm guessing DV may have missed the evidentiary nature of the discussion and confused it for a "claim of definite fact", when I tell people who ask the natural answer to the question, that LEGO said they saw it as mainly the new factor. The thing is, nobody can know that unless you do a scientific poll of the fanbase as a whole. We were not told that LEGO funded such a poll, just that this was their belief. So there is really no need to make a big deal out of arguing with it. They could still be wrong about that. All it really shows is that it's probably a big factor.

 

DV has spoken with internal sources that suspect the story side of it was larger. And that's helpful, but I think he needs to realize, since the rest of us haven't spoken with them, we didn't hear their wording, etc. we aren't as good of witnesses of that as he is, so he needn't expect us to cite it as heavily to others. Doesn't mean we doubt that this too supports the story issues being a significant factor, it just means we naturally tend to limit our explanations to what evidence we personally had ways to come closer to verifying. That's just good procedure. But it also doesn't mean he shouldn't tell us what he knows better than we do. He should. It's just better if it comes direct from him, as we might misunderstand and be more likely to misrepresent it; he'll have a better handle on it than we do.

 

For the rest of us, we have to weigh the original, public statement by LEGO of their suspicion a little more heavily, not in the sense of evidence that this is "by far the largest factor" (though possibly evidence that of the two it's larger, as I do tend to take it because of other plausibility analysis, which itself is admittedly a complex subject that it could be easy to make a mistake on), but simply in the sense that this evidence happens to be closest to us in terms of our ability to be somewhat trustworthy witnesses that this evidence exists and what it said. This is okay since all we are / I am using it for is as evidence that we do have some idea of possible factors as opposed to no idea of any at all. (Populating a field of candidates for the top factor, in other words.)

 

Also doesn't mean we can't mention DV as a source passing on what he heard from internal sources. I just did, lol. It's just weighed differently.

 

Basically it's like how a witness is handled in court. The witness is a reliable source, but testimony of what the witness saw is far, far more reliable when it comes from the witness themselves. Somebody else who heard a witness's account must be treated far more cautiously. The rest of us are only in the second category (unless we, too, talk with internal sources and they tell us these things so we also hear their wording and have a firmer grasp on what their view is).

 

I "read" DV as not getting that this is how I am treating his 'testimony', and confusing it for something like ignoring it or the like. Plus, it is all only step one. Step two is trying to analyze how likely it is that each of the two factors (or more if others are added to the field of candidates) is what percentage, and you could add step three (and likely should, if we have enough data to even go there without being speculative) of "what it means for the future).

 

Q:

 

My point is that canon-snobbery, which seems to be the primary irritent here, would still persist on BZPower.

Can we use a nicer name for it? But that aside, yeah. If that's all you're saying, then okay. But not sure why that matters.

 

I disagree. Given nothing more than the data you supplied, The Ockham's Razor explanation of those things is that they are unrelated. It requires at least one less assumption than the explanation that they are correlated.

Except this view isn't based on just a little bit of data summarized in a post replying to a possibly somewhat off-topic post here ( ) and more importantly, assuming it's unrelated is an assumption, and it must be explained. With no evidence for the things necessary to explain how it could be unrelated, those are ad hoc. So it is not at all true that a repeated, predictable correlation being seen as likely causal has one less assumption. In fact, since it's treated as evidential, it isn't even assuming it; it's just seen as by far the most likely explanation given what we currently know.

 

But that's a complex process and I totally get why you'd confuse it that way. 'Tis a'ight. But just so you know.

 

BTW, it works in reverse too. If predictable, repeatedly observed correlation does not evidence causation (note that the correlation fallacy does not use rigorous testing standards like this; it is basically a derivation of the Hasty Generalization fallacy as so many are, using only fragmentary evidence without repetition and predictability) of established canon inspiring fan imagination, then nor can it evidence the stifling of some imagination that tried to work in the gaps in a canon-fit way. But that's obviously related as I think you would agree, which demonstrates that the other pattern matching (which is determined by the same principles, just maybe not as intuitive as the other so it's easier to miss it) should be seen as related.

 

(Then of course we can wonder which is the larger factor, similar to the discussion at the start of this post. See past posts for my reasoning on that, but this is admittedly a grayer area.)

 

I'll believe it when I see it. You have yet to provide sufficient evidence.

You may have missed the implication, but yes, this is something it's best if you don't take people's word for it, but you go out and observe. In any case, I have. You seem to think I was trying to convince you of something as fact in your mind. This isn't really the kind of thing where you can do that unless I were to write a book explaining all the evidence I've observed. I hope you realize it's not reasonable to expect me to feed you all of that here since you can observe this principle in action yourself. Be aware that this is common knowledge and has been widely agreed for many years on BZP (though it was much better known back when Bionicle was active, for obvious reasons; the subject hasn't come up in years).

 

You've switched the goal-posts. Adding canon details can expand the pool of inspiration. I never denied that.

And I didn't say you did.

 

I'm not arguing that we ought to keep certain details vague so as to further inspiration. I was arguing that if BIONICLE fanfic writers tend to be afraid of writing about something in canon which has been left vague

The ones worrying about canon-fit, yes (or when writing stories meant to be canon-fit; in my case I've done both now).

 

for fear that their story might be contradicted by later canon, then the canon of BIONICLE is not furthering inspiration, but squelching it.

I'm guessing this means you didn't grasp what I was saying, as this is just (as you said), restating the argument I was responding to. If you didn't get it how I worded it already I'm not really sure how else to say it, but I'll try...

 

Basically, this assumes that more "squelching" is going on than "inspiring." And it's there that the observations don't match. We see less fan work in lines with less canon, repeatably, predictably.

 

(With, again, some exceptions. Although admittedly, I actually forget offhand which things it was that somebody raised once as the exceptions. I'm just adding this caveat to be fair. These could be evidence the interpretation is wrong, but I think probably not, as we should predict some exceptions since with things as complex as this there have to be other facts. I'm also partly raising it because if we could understand those other factors, maybe we could break out of the pattern if we wanted to, and have a way to have less canon but more fan works, or more canon but less (don't think we'd want the latter but it would be more understood then too). Not a lot of discussion has delved into that, at least on here, probably because you have to go through several complex (but sound) logical chains even to get to this question.)

 

Exactly. By limiting, I meant hindering.

Yeah, I was thinking you probably meant that later, and should have edited that accordingly, sorry.

 

 

bonesiii, on 09 Dec 2014 - 9:37 PM, said:

"It is perfectly possible for a LEGO story to have a single canon without stifling creativity. However, if the canon is actually stifling creativity, then it ought to be changed in some way. It's as simple as that."

Thing is, those are both just assertions. They might sound good "on paper", but in practice I see that anything can do both, for different people and in different situations. Establishing a canon fact could stifle some creativity while encouraging others... and vice versa. (The Helryx example works in reverse. It stifles those that want a canon version to base their version on or to change away from, but doesn't stifle those that want to feel more encouraged to operate in a gap. And I think having some of both is good.)

"Just assertions?" The premise on which we are both arguing is that creativity is a good thing, and that anything which generally stifles it (such was the implied condition for my statements) is therefore bad.

My point was it's not as simple as stifling or not, since it'll work differently for different fans, due to different preferences.

That complicates things in two ways. First, the statement can be true in a sense if your goal is to always appeal to the majority on everything. It just has to be "translated" as "for the majority" being implied. But second, it can be "yes and no" if you do only look at a small group and show that "yes we have some positive evidence of some stifling", and assume that represents the majority (hasty generalization), when it may be a minority.

 

There's other complications too. You're making several leaps in logic to the "is bad" part. Other things affect what's good and bad, because stories exist to do other things besides just inspiring creativity. That's an important one, but others are important too. Plus, it can be bad to actually do what would be necessary to perfectly match everybody's tastes, as you'd have to poll them all for everything beforehand. Polling is good for some things, not for others. You can't poll for spoilers. (Actually you sort of can, if the results are secret, but people would still be less surprised as it'd be one of the choices they saw.)

 

If what you stated earlier is true, then something is causing BIONICLE fanfic writers to pay undue reverence to canon.

Yep -- which is probably that they're kids. However, as you also said, not all writing according to canon is "undue." Possibly even most of it isn't. It would be tricky to figure that one out. And that might be the strongest clue to the right and wrong answer here -- at some point you start second guessing everything, since we can't know everybody's mind. I think to an extent this complex uncertainty starts to dissolve all the "this is bad, this is good" simple statements away and the truth becomes more like "this is the author's vision and it's good for authors to share with us their visions." (Including if their vision is to have fan input... or not, and leave some things open, or not.) And the rest should probably be sorted out amongst fans, for the most part. Greg seems to have reached this basic conclusion (and gets flak for it, but I see that as understandable too; few besides authors have the motive to think this through that hard and start to see that.)

 

Sorry I got a little tangential there again too though. I'm aiming some of that at everybody reading along here, not just you.

 

It exists to build a coherent fictional universe, not to be treated like some abstract universal constant. My point is that if a fanfic writer wants to portray something a certain way (for example, Artahka as a villain,) he oughtn't to behave as if his soul is fettered to the canon and not do so.

I absolutely agree, and I have argued that for years. But what I'm trying to help people see (because this is something it took me a while to get and it does change things a lot) is that due to the nature of humans and childhood, it's basically inevitable/understandable that some (many?) kids will have issues with that. I see this as a hill that kids need to climb over in their development. Just as we wouldn't expect a very young child to carry on a conversation coherently for a long time, and wouldn't blame them for this failing because they haven't climbed the hill of learning language (and indeed we delight in their coming through the process), we shouldn't (entirely??) blame fans (at ages older than the example child above because this is a later hill) for confusing the purpose of a canon.

 

But notice a way this affects your simple "stifle/not stifle, bad/good" logic. This means that the stifling will almost always be 1) partial (with more inspiration probably happening, only stifling certain topics, and 2) temporary, to be surpassed at some point in normal development by learning to get past that hill and learn to deviate from canon freely. And! And the process can actually be fun and wholesome to have to face that challenge and grow past it!

 

Plus yet another complication is that kids aren't always that bothered by their inabilities to do the things beyond the hill they haven't yet crossed. So while it's stifling for them, they may barely notice as they're too busy enjoying the canon and their limited fanfics. By the time they learn to be annoyed by that they're probably getting close to the age when they can also realize "hey... I can just make up my own version!"

 

Realizations like this are part of why I rarely word things with a lot of certainty. (Plus that's just good logic, heh.)

 

 

In other words, the fanfic writers, according to you, are feeling discouraged

Yeah, I just wasn't sure from your wording if you meant "feeling" or literally being discouraged. Thanks for clarifying. (That's why I focused on the passive voice. As this wording is in the active it's clear who is making the mistake; the fanfic writers, not the canon producers.)

 

 

 

bonesiii, on 09 Dec 2014 - 9:37 PM, said:

 My point is this needs to be treated with some level of respect. But at the same time, they do have a way to get over that feeling without the canon being banned.

What needs to be treated with respect? If you mean canon, then I disagree. We are talking about fictional works, written for the purpose of entertainment, that are non-canonical. Fanfic writers are no more obligated to follow canon than I am to paint a copy of the Mona Lisa with dark hair and white skin. If I want to paint a red-haired, dark-skinned Mona Lisa, why should the particulars of the original stop me?

I was talking about fans who make the mistake we're talking about. That was what you had mentioned in the quote I replied with "this" to. Specifically, the mistake itself actually needs treated with respect, just as a young child's current inability to talk like an adult needs to be respected. Doesn't mean you want them to stay there. Just means you don't imply disrespect (once you learn this) to the kid in the way you tell them that they should learn to talk better. (Using that as a metaphor that time. Kids usually don't have to be taught that, but often they are told they shouldn't treat canon as law before they reach a developmental stage where they would figure this out naturally on their own. Telling them that in the wrong way can cause problems.)

 

 

Mjol:

 

 

So, is describing each single member of some group, albeit important, not arbitrary?

 

 

In this case, it isn't. It's close to borderline, but things close to borderline should still generally be done (borderline being defined as the standards for a particular work). The reason is that we're not just rolling the dice and saying "Lesovikk's team, okay that comes up as a yes. Lhikan's team... okay that comes up as a no." That would be arbitrary. We're (or I'm ) seeing evidence of why Lesovikk's team is a no, as it's more obscure than the Lhikan's team (basically; I gave some specifics earlier in one of these topics, forget if it was this one lol), but Lhikan's is a yes (but close enough to borderline, I could understand it not being done too).

[Pomegranate]

What if folks simply do not like the changes being made to the canon? Is it really worth shoving things they do not like in their faces and insisting they are now the law of the land, when all of the changes could easily be fanon interpretations that nobody is forced to accept? If the beauty of this "worldbuilding" is that it's for the fans almost entirely by the fans, why are not all fans considered? It seems very selfish and inconsiderate, especially when Greg's approval could just mean that something is possible and could have happened, validating it as worldbuilding in terms of setting limits, boundaries, and guidelines for possible tales, while not setting anything in stone. The push to make something canon is not a deliberate action by Greg but merely an enablement of the desires of the outspoken few who goad him into saying yes or no to changes or additions that were never his own.

I'm also very confused, Bones, by your insistence that kids writing fanfics and not understanding the purpose of canon are the main victims and source of discomfort, when there are plenty of grown adults who want to put a tremendous amount of work into fanfictions that rely on the contradiction or complete disregard of canon and get very adversarial over their interpretation of it. That hill you talked about is one that some never make their way over. On the other hand, once you've made it over that hill, not only should you be able to enjoy canon while making your own version, but shouldn't you also be equally willing to accept that making your own version is more than enough and doesn't need divine validation? You say you want to dissolve the right/wrong dichotomy while insisting that one side of that hill is not the right side, although it's not very easy to tell exactly what you're trying to say because of all the vaguery and drawn out thoughts that wind and meander and make it hard to follow your point and thus have an engaging and fair discussion. Your concern for the youth doesn't seem to extend to their ability to participate in this flowery debate. I don't mean to criticize your masterful grasp of the English language but it's just not that easy for everyone to decipher your responses; it should be the speaker's duty to make his point clear if he wants to be understood properly, and you seem to be correcting everyone left and right on misunderstanding what you say. Again, I don't mean to be rude, but confusing your audience and telling them what they mean to say does not elevate the validity or strength of your message. Think of the children. They wanna argue about canon too.

One last point is that you seem very attached to Tolkien's worldbuilding, but the thing about that is that he built his world through storytelling; although the Silmarillion is quite a feat, it's not just a list of facts and rules. You insist that how arbitrary and needless certain canonizations are is completely relative, but I believe that their irrelevance is basically fact since the new facts and names are neither presented to us in canon storytelling nor do they directly affect existing canon story. The canonicity of particular factors, going by your example of the Mangai and the Dragon, only serves to support what is still pure speculation. It's not worldbuilding, it's making character sheets. There is no story being told, and without a story canon is just an empty frame. Like has been said before, at least back in the day short stories and writing contests were how fanon became canon.

If it's meant to be for the good of the fandom, would it not be better that nobody is left bitter and uncomfortable over the constant nitpicky or controversial canonizations than a portion of the fandom celebrating their personal ideas being stamped with approval? And if it's not for the good of the fandom, then what's the point of it if not for personal pride?

I am neutral on the subject as it doesn't affect my life in any way, but I do think that it's arrogant and unfair to insist that rampant canonization is a good thing that everyone should appreciate or put up with.

[Iblis]

If Greg is accepting of peoples fanfics (they can exist in an AU, & that's okay)..?

 

Then why canonise minor details? It's restrictive;

Canon usually exists so people can come together and talk about something easily without needing to specify what they have read and watched etc.

So as such many people try and make sure their stories don't violate canon; because even though the story (or MOC, etc.) won't be canon, it's easier to confuse some background detail with another (eg the Masks of most of the Toa Mangai);

If you mix something up with something unspecified people tend to point it out in a nicer way "actually it was never specified", as opposed to "No X wears this!"...

 

Because Canon is sort of the ...'starting ground' (what people are 'expected' to know, mainly once the story has been finished or abandoned for a few years; ie Bionicle); why shift that if your not actually adding story (a tv episode, a book, a chapter, etc.), but just a dot point?

 

It gets in the way for people that have waited for the story to be finished for a whille before they make a particular story or MOC, & then can be rather rudely told that they are wrong.

 

There is a difference between something being non-canon, & violating canon.

 

Changing minor points only really serves to give rude people the chance to say your fanfic is wrong (because of the smallest point, which may not eb easy to re-work if the mask power was used extensively in a story for example), & what does it add for everyone else..?

 

Whether I read or write Bionicle fanfics or care about how accurate my MOCs are, this affects some people out there.

 

And if something offers more harm than good, I'm against it.

 

Besides it's a pain as it is trying to track down every quote by Greg...

[& whilst I like BS01, they have a horrible citation system.]

[Dorek]

especially when Greg's approval could just mean that something is possible and could have happened,

Just wanted to point out on this one... whenever there's ambiguity these days, I am on that like white on rice. I eat Greg's waffling for breakfast. So like it or not, his answers will ultimately be pretty definitive.

 

(no easy feat when you're not actually on the LMB :U)

 

[& whilst I like BS01, they have a horrible citation system.]

Hey now... we're working on it :<. Doesn't help that we lost a vast majority of quotes in the BZP downtime (although there are archived bits here and there, and Yaldabaoth is doing a bang-up job tracking down some of the older ones). Edited December 11, 2014 by Dorek

[bonesiii]

Pomegranate, I'm running shorter on time now, and skimming over your post, just about all of that was answered earlier in the topic, most of it repeatedly. I can understand your confusion, but if you think through how all the answers to those questions fit together it shouldn't be that difficult to figure it out.

In short, the answer that explains most of it is the one that goes to the first thing you said there -- what if folks don't like the changes? Well, that gets into the personal taste issues discussed earlier. I've talked about that issue several times. I don't have time to repeat it again or dig it up right now, sorry.

Just remember that a poll does come much closer to considering everybody than how normal canon is added.

I also question your characterization of me as being especially attached to Tolkien's worldbuilding. I was not the one who brought him up. And I've pointed out before how I personally, when I was younger, had more trouble getting into his works. It was something that grew on me. That's part (although an anecdotal part, but added to from things I've heard from others) of why I personally am not persuaded by arguments that want Bionicle, a kid's line, to make its standards necessarily more like Tolkien's. I've explained other reasons why earlier.

Yes, character sheets is a good name for it. That would be part of this type of worldbuilding, within reason.

And yes, of course it's best if nobody is left bitter. Not sure why you feel the need to ask that.

Iblis:

"Then why canonise minor details? It's restrictive"

This again has already been covered in detail and repeatedly. In short, although I want people to respect and understand the people who see it as restrictive, it also isn't intended to be, and need not be, etc. See previous discussion especially the one about other factors in my previous post. This question of why has been answered already by me and others, citing positive things it causes.

All pros and cons, folks.

"It gets in the way for people that have waited for the story to be finished for a whille before they make a particular story or MOC, & then can be rather rudely told that they are wrong"

Again, though, this is solved by not taking these rude people that seriously, and using it as a positive opportunity to help them mature by politely explaining to them that the canon author(s) don't intend their work to be restrictive. (And even if they did, for some weird reason, fans would still actually be free to imagine their own versions.)

This is not really a strong enough reason to take down canon or parts of canon, even peripheral/little-known ones, since that takes away larger pros, like rewarding those who do work to learn more about Bionicle, a huge part of the basic idea of it as Greg has said. For that to work, you have to have things that they will find when they seek more knowledge.

The encyclopedia illustrates this principle well. In this case it itself added to the profits on this (and of course, wouldn't have if enough didn't want it).

Basically, I see this rudeness problem as caused by the human nature tendency to turn positives into negatives. It's good to reward eager fans with things that please them (within reason; obviously I am arguing for a balance, but here I'm talking about why one side of the balance matters too). If we took away everything good that some will turn around into a negative somehow, there'd be nothing good left in life, honestly. Sometimes we do have to do that in extreme situations, but this is hardly one of them (in most instances?).


You kind of implied the solution in your "it's a pain to..." part. See, that's the wrong approach. If you have the tastes to not want to do that work and feel its reward in the way those with the other tastes do (again, a major intent of Bionicle Gen1), then simply don't try, or not as much. Live with not knowing it, until/unless somebody else brings it up. Same as it would be a pain for me to try in a short period of time to know everything from the similar sources for Star Wars designed to reward those who are curious about those details. The problem then is not those sources, but it would be my choice to feel like I had to know them all and that pain could ever be involved!

That misses the point of entertainment. When something works for your tastes, enjoy it. When something doesn't, you can dislike it and if you want, tell others you don't, but treat it more like "not my cup of tea" rather than "I wish it didn't exist", since you should be happy for those who have the tastes to like it that it exists. (Society variety theory etc. -- society is benefited from a variety of talents to solve a variety of challenges, and different personal tastes stem from different talents/personalities. Ergo there should be a variety of entertainment options, and an agreement among all not to take dislikes too seriously.)

[Iblis]

Some people look for a story which doesn't contradict canon; because they can't get a canon story (or set) they look for a fanfic &/or MOC, they don't necessarily care about something which doesn't feel like an add-on or continuation (sequel, prequel, etc.) the canon story.

 

Whilst it may seem arbitrary, I don't see what position you have to say that they should change their opinions; if 200~ ^{(I don't think I've seen a poll here recently that's had 200 votes...)} people get the creator to canonise something; that thing might be incredibly minor in the canon (hypothetically; "The Toa Mangai of Earth used a Kakama." period) could be very big part of a given fanfic that happened to give that Toa a differant Mask, which was used extensively.

Said author may have waited three years after the series had died before releasing their fanfic thinking it would be safe to do so.

Generally (in my experience), writers & readers are thrilled when a canon sequel shows up even if it is completely incompatible with a  loved fanfic; because, hey they got another story.

 

Canonising the Masks of a Toa isn't a story.

 

 

This is not really a strong enough reason to take down canon or parts of canon, even peripheral/little-known ones, since that takes away larger pros, like rewarding those who do work to learn more about Bionicle, a huge part of the basic idea of it as Greg has said. For that to work, you have to have things that they will find when they seek more knowledge.

 

You say it's not a strong reason... and your reasons for this are..? o.O

"that takes away larger pros, like rewarding those who do work to learn more about Bionicle, a huge part of the basic idea of it as Greg has said"

Dude. I don't see how that reward (a dot point answer on a boring Q&A in a forum), is a bone much greater than readers being able to find & read fanfics which don't violate canon. Because they aren't doing work, because they aren't trying to learn more (or create more) about the Bionicle Universe? Or because that hasn't had Gregs Seal of Canon...

 

Bionicle stopped having any stories released how long ago? Is there not a point were a creator can leave something alone? Like, discovering that four background characters happened to wear a few Masks (none of which are important to any narrative), ...gives them what?

It's a piece of data, & they might base (or read/look at) a fanfic or a MOC of that, but they could have done that just as well without knowing specifically what that was. ^{[Or rather, if one utterly has a lack of imagination, I would think a creator of a story might be interested in promoting some form of creativity...]}

 

Bionicle had a good decade to canonise tonnes of things all over the place. ^{[Has Greg showed an interest in actually tying up loose ends that where integral to an abandoned plot-line?]}

 

 

Basically, I see this rudeness problem as caused by the human nature tendency to turn positives into negatives. It's good to reward eager fans with things that please them (within reason; obviously I am arguing for a balance, but here I'm talking about why one side of the balance matters too). If we took away everything good that some will turn around into a negative somehow, there'd be nothing good left in life, honestly. Sometimes we do have to do that in extreme situations, but this is hardly one of them (in most instances?).

 

Maybe so, but I see far more (likely) negatives than any likely positives to come out of this. The only positive seems to be this way if someone goes looking for an answers, there will be one more answer for them. ...Which doesn't actually seem to serve any purpose; fans should be rewarded? Then maybe actually finish off a story if part of it's already been published, although that wasn't really within his control.

 

But still, I don't see how that 'reward' is worth more than the inevitable annoyance it gives readers of now my I need to hear someone rant about how this violates canon. Because it really isn't just a might happen; it will happen.

 

Not canonising this sort of stuff doesn't 'hurt' anyone, canonising it does.

Canonising things isn't intrinsically bad but dot-point canonisations such as the Toa Mangais Masks & Tools?

That's not a story; and it doesn't change the quality of any of the canon stories.

 

 

When something works for your tastes, enjoy it. When something doesn't, you can dislike it and if you want, tell others you don't, but treat it more like "not my cup of tea" rather than "I wish it didn't exist", since you should be happy for those who have the tastes to like it that it exists.

 

Yes, but this hasn't happened yet; this  would apply equally to people seeking things made canon if suddenly it was decreed that there would never be anymore G1 canonistions. But until that happens, I am going to try and prevent something happening that I believe causes more problems than good offered.

 

 

Fundamentally though: Why is someones desire for something to be made canon worth more than someone else's desire to not have their thing invalidated by canon?

Both have merits according to some, but I still don't see anything that looks like overall these canonisations would be better for people &/or the story.

 

Just leave the canon story be if they're not actually going to work on the plot. I don't care what colour Dumbledore's slippers canonically are until I'm getting spammed because my story or a story I'm trying to follow did X wrong. If someone can derive pleasure from canonically knowing what colour Dumbledores slippers are, good for them, but their pleasure is at others expense.

& if it actually is a Zero-Sum Game on the other side as well; if them not knowing canonically actually bugs them, & a fanfic won't do, shouldn't they be happy that others are enjoying their freedom, & not disrupt others pleasure so as to get their own? ^{([{Or rather if they can then acceptably go & try and change it, shouldn't we be able to change that back? They would be making others works suddenly violate canon? So shouldn't we be able to do the same & demand a retcon? I don't think so, but it seems to be a logical extropolation, after all their displeasure would be offset by others pleasure.}])}

 

Shouldn't they ask why they want something to be canonised? (Not  X instead of Y, but why should X, or Y, or Z be canonised), shouldn't they be able to accept a fanfic just as much as a fanfic should just deal with being made contradictory to canon? But if they can't, & canon is somehow not jsut a common meeting ground, but intrinsically better than a fanfiction, then it should be known that whatever is canonised invalidates more otherwise non-canon-violating stories, than what would have existed without something being canonised?

More things are thus made less good (or worse) by one thing being made better, at least in their eyes.

So having late addition canon is doing more harm than the harm of it not appearing.

 

If something is a story it's different, & there are a few other major things that I can see justifying all this, but the canonisation I've been talking about is directly relating to the Masks & Tools of (a half dozen or so of) the Toa Mangai.

[Boidoh]

Is there any reason why people don't like these canonizations besides this "people want to make canon fanfics" reason?

[Iblis]

Is there any reason why people don't like these canonizations besides this "people want to make canon fanfics" reason?

^{(It's also people want to "read fanfics")}

Yes: people coming back to a Fandom or who haven't followed it closely find that they need to learn all this new stuff; but no, it's not a new story, or no no, they need to go searching through a forum, looking for Q&As & every post by a certain person trying to piece together all these different responses and statements to work out what's new since they left. It's messy, ugly, & if you don't enjoy searching for such things ^{(or not when so many other people know them, it's not so much a puzzle as it is just a mess)}, you're stuck in this annoying limbo before you can properly join in discussion again.

 

So rewarding people that want canon for canons sake, or as a reward for them searching for information were there wasn't some [when the series ended], you punish anyone that hasn't been connected with where ever the creator chooses to say all these things.

 

It's a wonderful way to alienate part of the Fanbase unnecessarily.

[Boidoh]

I'm sure there were not many discussions about any Toa Mangai except for Lhikan, Tuyet, Nhidiki, and the wearer of the Kakama, in the past. That point is moot. It isn't required to know which mask the Toa of the Green wore to understand the entire story, or any discussion we're having here.

[Iblis]

I'm sure there were not many discussions about any Toa Mangai except for Lhikan, Tuyet, Nhidiki, and the wearer of the Kakama, in the past. That point is moot. It isn't required to know which mask the Toa of the Green wore to understand the entire story, or any discussion we're having here.

Are you talking to me here or someone else? & if me which point's are you addressing, as they don't seem entirely relevant to my last point..?

^{& again if this is about me/my_post, then I don't understand how my point's wouldn't be relevant to a discussion titled "What's up w/ the rampant canonization?", especially when I'm referencing a topic which is looking at four background characters equipment being canonised, amongst others; contemporary yes? but doesn't that make this more relevant? because it's on-going?}

[Boidoh]

 

Is there any reason why people don't like these canonizations besides this "people want to make canon fanfics" reason?

^{(It's also people want to "read fanfics")}

Yes: people coming back to a Fandom or who haven't followed it closely find that they need to learn all this new stuff; but no, it's not a new story, or no no, they need to go searching through a forum, looking for Q&As & every post by a certain person trying to piece together all these different responses and statements to work out what's new since they left. It's messy, ugly, & if you don't enjoy searching for such things ^{(or not when so many other people know them, it's not so much a puzzle as it is just a mess)}, you're stuck in this annoying limbo before you can properly join in discussion again.

 

So rewarding people that want canon for canons sake, or as a reward for them searching for information were there wasn't some [when the series ended], you punish anyone that hasn't been connected with where ever the creator chooses to say all these things.

 

It's a wonderful way to alienate part of the Fanbase unnecessarily.

 

 

You say that if people return to the fandom they won't know what we're talking about. I'm saying no one talks about that anyways.

[Iblis]

You say that if people return to the fandom they won't know what we're talking about. I'm saying no one talks about that anyways.

 

It seems like there are only a (barely) few hundred people on here... Regardless, this isn't the only Bionicle community; making something canon pretty much by definition changes it for all the communities ^{(whilst a given community could decide to outright reject a part of canon, that runs into issues as well)}, so I don't see how that is entirely relevant. Besides, any idea how much people Private Message?

 

I'm still not hearing much that suggests that canonising minor points is particularly good...

[bonesiii]

"Canonising the Masks of a Toa isn't a story."

Nobody said it was...

"You say it's not a strong reason... and your reasons for this are..?"

Again, we've been over this. Because it's so rare and so easily ignored/corrected that it doesn't outweigh the many and major upsides.

Read on, though (I skimmed ahead and noticed you brought up a better point that hasn't been discussed a lot).

"Dude"

No offense, Iblis, but coming from a taste to such a dismissive reaction to me pointing out one of the founding goals of Bionicle that caused so much of what it was how it was (wanting it to take work to understand) is not even close to a reasonable response... If anything it just makes me trust your judgment that much less. You're posting 14 years later how you don't accept that goal, but they used it to make Gen1 last, pretty successfully, for ten years!

"I don't see how that reward (a dot point answer on a boring Q&A in a forum)"

You're again confusing tastes here. You're using the tastes of one not into this (yours) to get to "boring", as if this argues against using such answers to reward the tastes of those who don't find it boring, but interesting and useful for inspiration.

"much greater than readers being able to find & read fanfics which don't violate canon."

Can we use less loaded language than "violate"? That implies that the mistake that it's intended as rules has more weight than it does. While I am the one saying it needs respected, to continue the analogy from before, the fact that young kids will have trouble or be unable to read books doesn't mean you take those away from those who can.

It would be better to say "which fit with canon" or the like.

As far as which is greater, the one is a key part of what Bionicle was intended for -- a reward for that work to encourage more of it. The other is an obscure practice rejected by Bionicle's authors in favor of fans being allowed to reimagine whatever they want, one that could have a problem with anything and everything that gets established anyways.

"Is there not a point were a creator can leave something alone?"

As I said, yes. But given the circumstances, I think it's too early. There really hasn't been much opportunity to do that "slow down and think it through" refining until now, as Greg was cut off from us for a while and too busy anyways.

"Like, discovering that four background characters happened to wear a few Masks (none of which are important to any narrative), ...gives them what?"

Both this and the previous quote were answered in past discussion. I repeated the first, as I'm sure you must just not have had time to read, but if I keep repeating all the same answers over and over, this post will be just as long and hard to read. I'd recommend taking the time to slow down and read through the previous discussion.

"Maybe so, but I see far more (likely) negatives than any likely positives to come out of this."

Sorry, Iblis, but I can only see this as (rather baffling) wishful thinking. Millions of kids have gotten fun out of Bionicle, and only a handful (relatively) of these sorts of incidents have happened, all of them easy to get over by just ignoring them. (Okay... the vast majority let's say...)

"The only positive seems to be this way if someone goes looking for an answers, there will be one more answer for them."

I wouldn't say only! But yes, that's what I said.

Keep in mind that if we applied consistently the 'rules' being proposed for why this should definitely be out, then those same rules should have put most of the rest of Bionicle canon out, and that means the work-to-understand fans (who it was aimed at) are going to be more displeased.

Can this be one case where the rules are exempted to have a balance for those who don't want to know?

Yes. But as there are better candidates for those things (Lesovikk's team, Jovan's team, etc.), I think it's a serious stretch to invoke that here.

"Which doesn't actually seem to serve any purpose"

Come now, surely you can see how entertainment teaching by example the principle of working to understand things can benefit kids? As one of BZP's old admins, Bink, I think it was, said, Bionicle fans seem to tend to be fairly smart. That's no coincidence; it was designed to appeal to those who enjoy exercising their mind. And by rewarding it, that can give benefits in just about every other walk of life.

It's like an even more fun version of a crossword puzzle. Just disguised more so kids are more likely to be into it and get the benefit rather than dismiss it as for old people. XD

 

Is there any reason why people don't like these canonizations besides this "people want to make canon fanfics" reason?

(It's also people want to "read fanfics")

Yes: people coming back to a Fandom or who haven't followed it closely find that they need to learn all this new stuff; but no, it's not a new story, or no no, they need to go searching through a forum, looking for Q&As & every post by a certain person trying to piece together all these different responses and statements to work out what's new since they left. It's messy, ugly, & if you don't enjoy searching for such things (or not when so many other people know them, it's not so much a puzzle as it is just a mess), you're stuck in this annoying limbo before you can properly join in discussion again."

I agree with this, but at least for S&T, that's one part of why I wanted to make a retelling to include a lot of this as it would naturally come up in a story.

It's also easily solved just by phrasing everything with uncertainty ("as far as I know," "I think it was..." etc.), until you hear from those who do follow this stuff. A good lesson to learn also in most any walk of life. And that way when others reply informing you of what you didn't know, it feels like learning something new instead of a correction.

And it's not likely to be a major problem at least in the Mangai case anyways. If somebody asked how the battle against the Kanohi Dragon went, if you didn't know the powers you wouldn't have much chance of having that conversation to begin with. But now you could just look them up on the Toa Mangai page real quick.

AND!

In a sense, these discussions are also sort of like stories. You could then have fun making a basic idea of a 'story' (or your analysis could read as similar to a story), or even write a fanfic based on how you imagine those powers would play out in battle. Basically, now you can have fun with it that wasn't likely before.

[Iblis]

[...] the many and major upsides.

Read on, though (I skimmed ahead and noticed you brought up a better point that hasn't been discussed a lot).

 

"Dude"

 

No offense, Iblis, but coming from a taste to such a dismissive reaction to me pointing out one of the founding goals of Bionicle that caused so much of what it was how it was (wanting it to take work to understand) is not even close to a reasonable response... If anything it just makes me trust your judgment that much less. You're posting 14 years later how you don't accept that goal, but they used it to make Gen1 last, pretty successfully, for ten years!

 

Again, what upsides? You listed about one, last time.

 

I don't accept that goal as a valid goal after the series has been gone since 2011. I take no issue to that being the philosophy whilst it was still running; now that it has ended (with loose ends, but still; it's ended). So I'm not 14 years late, as three years late...

 

If these polls were done last year, I could see where people were coming from. The story is over, minor canonisations are a bone that is almost insulting; talk of how Greg accepts peoples input (& the way Canonisations are done is a testament to that), but they don't actually add anything that distinctly improves the Canon story; (they might give direction for theories, but they aren't Canon at that point either.)

 

But frankly considering fanfics are made secondary when they can no longer fit the canon (which can change in ways that don't improve and don't radically add to the story, well after the series has ended!), canonising such small things doesn't give everyone a new story (In your last paragraph, "In a sense" were the operative words, it's broader than the way I was using story & most know that), too enjoy, it marginalises some pre-existing works, all so that if someone goes looking for answers for somethign they will find a canon answer, because:

 

If someone goes looking for an answer, there will be an answer for them.

 

There wasn't a lack of answers in the first place; but clearly this means that a fanfic, or a MOC someone made is by definition of not being official, not good enough for some people. Which emphasises that: Canon = Good, Not Canon = 'Not So Good'; which rather naturally implies a sort of hierarchy: canon [1] > unstated (not canon) [2] > 'can not fit with canon' [3];

Thus an act that validates someone 'needing' specifically a canon answer, that also makes various fanworks move from 2 to 3, is two moves which really don't look anything like embracing fan works (Hence almost insulting; because it's at odds with other things he's said, about fanworks).

Edited December 11, 2014 by Iblis

[bonesiii]

Just read all the posts in all these topics for other upsides. I've listed more than one, and it's not just about the number of them but the importance/size/weight.

"the series has been gone since 2011."

As said before, it sends a good message to Gen2 fans that LEGO still cares about refining Gen1 canon, so investing in Gen2 canon will probably be rewarded too.

And again, it's not reasonable to expect that LEGO came close enough to fulfilling all its goals for building that world while the story was still being produced (and things were much more hectic; now we've had time to slow down and think through what is missing). This last one doesn't apply to several canonization proposals but it does to the Mangai as this has been brought up repeatedly by fans. (For their powers, anyways.)

"If these polls were done last year"

Ah, but it makes sense that interest is being renewed now that people are hearing about the reboot.

And the polls are in part happening now because people were complaining about Greg canonizing some things to keep filling in those gaps in their standards (as I see it anyways, at least as his aim) without letting others have more input. Last year. The polls are happening now because now he's started listening to that.

Also, seems rather arbitrary (and convenient) to say last year is okay but this year isn't. Three years versus four... ?? Seems arbitrary.

"minor canonisations are... almost insulting"

Nobody should feel insulted for somebody adding some details to their story world and 'character sheets.' Uninterested, sure, if that's how your tastes are. But insulted? That makes no sense. On what basis?

"(they might give direction for theories, but they aren't Canon at that point either."

Knowing Tahu's mask power doesn't canonize theories of instances in which he used it besides those shown, but being able to imagine them is a huge part of the point. (It's not ONLY to understand why the power works that way in the featured uses itself.)

Or for a better example, knowing that Turaga Dume's mask could repair objects doesn't make theoretical instances of his using it canon, but not knowing those instances doesn't change that LEGO's standards at the time included revealing the power to inform fans what they had in mind, so they can make of it what they wish.

(BS01 does say that he used it to help reconstruct Metru Nui, but that's not a 2004 use; had the story stopped with 2004 this wouldn't count.)

Or, the Vahi's power was defined in 2001, but not seen in action until 2003. Etc. And even 2003's featuring didn't canonize theories of how Vakama might have used it once we knew he'd been a Toa; we didn't know that until later that next year. Etc. etc.

Your last three paragraphs are almost indecipherable. I gather from the last comment you're trying to explain your "insulting" argument, but if I'm reading this right, it's all based on the premise that we're rejecting anyways, that having a canon answer "invalidates" a fan alternative, and that Greg rejects. It also seems like it's circular reasoning; that you're actually trying to defend that premise as your conclusion. Just take out that erroneous premise, and the whole thing falls apart.

Note too that that premise comes from certain fans, not from LEGO, so by definition it can't be LEGO that's doing the alleged insulting. I guess it would be those fans insulting themselves or something if I'm following the logic right.

[Iblis]

Also, seems rather arbitrary (and convenient) to say last year is okay but this year isn't. Three years versus four... ?? Seems arbitrary.

 

When I first typed that I had 2013 instead of 2011, because I knew the website was still up then & couldn't remember whether it was 2011 that it actually finished up in or not, as such rather than having a post go into that year is wrong I thought I'd just go with 2013 it being 'abandoned' (from a story point of view), alas I missed that in my edit; so when I go & change that it will be if this was three years ago.

[ultimately any time period is arbitrary to some degree but one year after something ends seems reasnoble to me, at least when it was in a very noticeable decline before then.]

 

 

"minor canonisations are... almost insulting"

 

Nobody should feel insulted for somebody adding some details to their story world and 'character sheets.' Uninterested, sure, if that's how your tastes are. But insulted? That makes no sense. On what basis?

 

On the basis that those canonisations are at odds with his 'accepting fanworks stance' (as AUs anyway...)

As I articulated in my post.

 

"(they might give direction for theories, but they aren't Canon at that point either."

 

Knowing Tahu's mask power doesn't canonize theories of instances in which he used it besides those shown, but being able to imagine them is a huge part of the point. (It's not ONLY to understand why the power works that way in the featured uses itself.)

 

Or for a better example, knowing that Turaga Dume's mask could repair objects doesn't make theoretical instances of his using it canon, but not knowing those instances doesn't change that LEGO's standards at the time included revealing the power to inform fans what they had in mind, so they can make of it what they wish. 

 

(BS01 does say that he used it to help reconstruct Metru Nui, but that's not a 2004 use; had the story stopped with 2004 this wouldn't count.)

 

Or, the Vahi's power was defined in 2001, but not seen in action until 2003. Etc. And even 2003's featuring didn't canonize theories of how Vakama might have used it once we knew he'd been a Toa; we didn't know that until later that next year. Etc. etc.

 

I think you've missed my point; I'm not saying canonising a given character wearing a Mask canonises all theorised (non-canon, if they were canon it wouldn't be a theory) instances of that character using that Mask. Those theories aren't canon, but they aren't at odds with canon either (they might be for other reasons, but none listed in the example).

But before that characters Mask was canonised (it wasn't stated before etc.), then many theories about that character using Mask X, Y, or Z etc. would have also been neither canon or at odds with canon; but when any given Mask is canonised it makes all those other "theories" (or headcanons, or ideas [or fanfics]) go from being not-canon & not-at-odds-with-canon to at-odds-with canon.

 

 

Your last three paragraphs are almost indecipherable.

 

I'm sorry was hard to read, I shall try & break it down & hopefully that will make it clearer,

 

I gather from the last comment you're trying to explain your "insulting" argument,

 

Yes.

 

but if I'm reading this right, it's all based on the premise that we're rejecting anyways, that having a canon answer "invalidates" a fan alternative

 

That is almost it; I'm giving a reason for why a canon answer can 'invalidate' (or rather, make less 'important' meaningful)

^{It has reasoning behind it, so if you choose to reject that without inspecting the reasoning for it properly you have very little chance of convincing me I or others with this opinion that we are wrong. It won't mean anything beyond that obviously, but that form of reasoning might be worth inspecting further if that is the route that ends up being taken. Regardless, I apparently need to break down what I said.}

 

The "indecipherable" paragraphs are these, I believe;

 

But frankly considering fanfics are made secondary when they can no longer fit the canon (which can change in ways that don't improve and don't radically add to the story, well after the series has ended!), canonising such small things doesn't give everyone a new story (In your last paragraph, "In a sense" were the operative words, it's broader than the way I was using story & most know that), too enjoy, it marginalises some pre-existing works, all so that if someone goes looking for answers for somethign they will find a canon answer, because:

 

If someone goes looking for an answer, there will be an answer for them.

 

There wasn't a lack of answers in the first place; but clearly this means that a fanfic, or a MOC someone made is by definition of not being official, not good enough for some people. Which emphasises that: Canon = Good, Not Canon = 'Not So Good'; which rather naturally implies a sort of hierarchy: canon [1] > unstated (not canon) [2] > 'can not fit with canon' [3];

Thus an act that validates someone 'needing' specifically a canon answer, that also makes various fanworks move from 2 to 3, is two moves which really don't look anything like embracing fan works (Hence almost insulting; because it's at odds with other things he's said, about fanworks).

 

 

So let me put it this way:

 

There is the canon: the story, universe, characters, etc. all as shown through a variety of medias, as well 'direct' word from Greg, one of the writers.

 

Canon  is what more or less everyone is expected to know the general outlines of, & when things prop up that someone doesn't know, it is explained, or stated.

 

As such it is what brings most people into a series; in many sense the canon is the series.

 

As it serves as the known ground; so people base theories off of the canon, sometimes people stuff up & someone points out that couldn't have happened that way; theories aren't canon, but they aim to comply with canon; they don't contradict it, and are otherwise not at odds with it.

 

Some fanfiction is similar; the writer doesn't want to remake a series but they wish to add to it; they don't want to make a retcon; their goals are in this sense the same as many writers, the difference being they aren't official.

 

The only positive for canonising minor details (specifically the variety of certain Toa Mangais Masks & Tools) I've been able to discern from what you've said bonesiii is that "if someone goes looking for an answers, there will be one more answer for them.";

But if a fan does go looking for an answer, & there are answers out there - which don't contradict the canon, (so whether they are canon or not doesn't matter), then he doesn't need to canonise an answer; there are plenty of different fanfics, headcanons, & theories out there.

 

But if he goes to the fan you know what there are plenty of answers to this but none of them are canon, so I'm canonising this one; why that one? Because it was better? 

 

But when it's something that's entirely almost entirely subjective ^{(...does anyone want to really say that there is one[/four] objectively correct answer for what Masks the Toa of Ice should wear?)}

 

What is the point, why distinguish one theory from another if both canon & fanfiction are valid?

 

That he's rewarding people with canonisations of minor details which add no real substance to the story; indicates canon is somehow better, if it wasn't better or a different 'option', it wouldn't be a reward now would it?

 

& it isn't a different option, whatever Masks are canonised; there was a headcanon which had it, or rather whoever wanted that canonisation could have had it.

 

So if he's not adding an extra answer, he's offering a better answer - what makes it better? That can only be one thing: that it's canon.

He will be saying "canon = better than not canon" by his actions; by canonising something so small & trivial which already existed in a variety of forms.

Literally the only thing he will be adding is him calling it canon.

 

From that it naturally implies that canon is better than an unofficial add-on which is in turn better than something which is not consistent with canon.

So that's all one negative thing, or two if you want to count the 'natural implication' separately, but it has 'another' effect:

 

 All those other alternatives that could have been canonised (so the ones that weren't at odds with canon until that instance)?

They all now violate canon; so they definitely aren't acceptable now: because regardless of how 'non-canon but not-at-odds-with canon things go', all those things are now incompatible with canon.

They can exist in an Alternate Universe; which some like; but plenty of people see similar but not quite the same AUs as expendable.

Besides that though, they're not canon, so they're not as good as actual canon anyway type "logic" sets in;

 

Note too that that premise comes from certain fans, not from LEGO, so by definition it can't be LEGO that's doing the alleged insulting. I guess it would be those fans insulting themselves or something if I'm following the logic right. 

 

It's some fans asking for canon because headcanon/fanfic isn't good enough, & Greg going yes sure; without adding anything else.

His accepting of their with their perspective (which he disagrees with apparently) in plain sight, is in turn accepting what they are saying:

That canon is better than something left unclear. By default. in all situations.

& that perspective is derisive of fanfic/headcanons, & thus some fans

So it's fans insulting other fans & Greg approving this with his actions.

If him canonising something so minor didn't change it's perceived quality then people wouldn't be asking for it...

 

I think there is room for canonising certain things; but generally some hypothetical reveal about how Krana are made wouldn't have to be a story but it could make people go wow (emotion response) or something & it would potentially change how people saw something else in a substantial way; what Masks four Toa Mangai of Ice wore really isn't going to have this affect; maybe if you had something like one of them wore a Legendary Mask or something it might, & any & all potential issues there aside; that isn't the level that some canonisations have/might be on.

 

 

If something being canonised is just done on the grounds that 200~ people like it and you'll say yes because we didn't go outside of these parametres, the  those people wanted that canonised is because they didn't wan't something else they didn't like as much being canonised;

Fans give canonisation worth, (because to a degree we are expected to know it), & if they don't canonise something because it's good, it actually indicates that canonising makes it good.

 

Also for the fans that didn't want their headcanon to contradict canon, I still don't see how saying "well those fans don't need to see it that way" is very similar to me just saying that no one needs minor points canonised; because it isn't helping anyone.

 

Besides, isn't it easier to create a community that takes the canon plus one or more headcanons, and says this is what we follow around her, this is this communities canon. Where as once a point's being canonised, saying we take canon & reject this and that, really starts to fall apart; I haven't really seen any examples of the latter.

 

^{Because canonising one thing is stating that I'm not canonising these others; what's the reason for that?}

^{What was wrong with every single one of those other things?}

 

^{(Unless you count r/TESLore & the 'equivalent' Facebook page, they 'reject canon' entirely, or do they accept many of the things an ex-dev says as canon? Both really, tendencies vary.)}

[toa kopaka4372]

The controversy sparked by the recent wave of canonizations has done more to bring this community to life than anything in the past three years (with the possible exception of the BIONICLE gender debates a few months back). Regardless of any opinions regarding these canonizations, I can only see that as a good thing.

 

Keep it up folks. I'm enjoying following these debates.

Edited December 12, 2014 by toa kopaka4372

[bonesiii]

Ultimately any time period is arbitrary to some degree but one year after something ends seems reasnoble to me, at least when it was in a very noticeable decline before then.

I was going to add something about this but forgot -- one thing to keep in mind is that after Bionicle ended, Greg didn't suddenly have lots more free time, even without the other issues; he moved on to other projects.

 

Ten years later might be a good time to definitely call it quits (unless some major contradiction is outstanding that could be fixed by a retcon without messing anything up or the like, but that seems unlikely). But just one year can whiz by.

 

On the basis that those canonisations are at odds with his 'accepting fanworks stance' (as AUs anyway...)

I don't see how these two things are at odds. It means there can be canon, and fans are free to reimagine it. Those two things aren't mutually exclusive; the second implies the first in fact.

 

But before that characters Mask was canonised (it wasn't stated before etc.), then many theories about that character using Mask X, Y, or Z etc. would have also been neither canon or at odds with canon

Yeah, but everybody knows that. That's something that actually IS self-evident.

 

That is almost it; I'm giving a reason for why a canon answer can 'invalidate' (or rather, make less 'important' meaningful)

Well... let's just go with "something like that" and not worry about the wording further. Yes, it can do... whatever the right word for what I think you're saying is lol. And again, I think we all get that. It's just that at the outset you have to decide if you are okay with that when you start following something that has a canon, because it's naturally going to come up a lot, especially if it's not something by a long-dead author and new info is coming out.

 

That last bit is where I think people are getting... what's the word... upset... or yeah. Because it did seem for a while that it was all over. Of course, that wasn't really confirmed, either, so I guess that just shows the risk in making assumptions again, or having expectations.

 

"Some fanfiction is similar; the writer doesn't want to remake a series but they wish to add to it; they don't want to make a retcon; their goals are in this sense the same as many writers, the difference being they aren't official."

 

Right...

 

"The only positive for canonising minor details (specifically the variety of certain Toa Mangais Masks & Tools) I've been able to discern from what you've said bonesiii is that "if someone goes looking for an answers, there will be one more answer for them.";

 

But if a fan does go looking for an answer, & there are answers out there - which don't contradict the canon, (so whether they are canon or not doesn't matter), then he doesn't need to canonise an answer; there are plenty of different fanfics, headcanons, & theories out there."

 

With you so far. Note that although it works here since you clarified it as the only positive you're aware of, it's usually a bad idea to use "only" statements like that. I was going to say this to an earlier case of it but forgot that too. (It would have fit better to that wording lol.)

 

But I'm not at all saying that's the only positive. The last part of this quote doesn't work for those who want to have a good idea of the single "what this universe would be if it was real" (within a single dimension anyways ). Which is a pretty common desire.

 

Since it doesn't really hurt people's ability to imagine things differently, I think it's generally okay for the canon just to answer that, at least in things that could affect potential plot in major ways like powers (not so much tool shapes).

 

"But if he goes to the fan you know what there are plenty of answers to this but none of them are canon, so I'm canonising this one; why that one? Because it was better? "

 

But apply this to the real world. This person could have picked any type of car, but he happened to pick X car instead of Y car. Does that make X car better? No, but for those curious about the coherent single universe that is canon, it helps them see it more clearly to know he happened to pick X.

 

Of course, in some cases X might be better. If he has a job that requires X type of car and not Y, a universe with him picking Y is implausible. And there can be degrees of that but yes, a lot of different options can be roughly equally valid (and there should be some AUs where he makes a bad choice, heh).

 

"What is the point, why distinguish one theory from another if both canon & fanfiction are valid?"

 

You seem to have lost sight, though, in that chain of reasoning that the one benefit you mentioned that you got from what I said, disappeared somewhere in there. Now if there's no canon answer, there's no reward from LEGO for those seeking to work to understand the (single) story. Yes, there's a lot of fan interpretations (and again, LEGO does leave it to this in many cases), but nothing from these kids' beloved toy company itself.

 

Although with a few things even for the canon they do appeal to multiple equally or roughly equally plausible versions (esp. which moon struck Makuta).

 

"He will be saying "canon = better than not canon" by his actions"

 

In some cases yes, in others no. He didn't want the Mask of Rahi Control for the Bo-Toa, because he felt it was implausible that the mask wouldn't have made the battle with the Kanohi Dragon much shorter than stated. That one, he's judging as not as good. Most of the others though may be roughly equal, and saying one is canon doesn't have to mean that one is miles ahead of the others. It can just mean that something would have to be chosen by the Toa if it was a real universe, and he feels there's enough curiousity about this corner of that single universe, and/or that he wants it to be known enough.

 

"it's fans insulting other fans & Greg approving this with his actions"

 

I don't agree. By that logic, not answering is approving of fans who don't want it known who are insulting those who do. (You've seen cases of that here.) He can actually please those who don't want it by not having it be known, without approving of those few who resort to insults. Right? So can't he also please those who want it known without approving of those few who insult?

[UnderscoreChronix]

Can we just stop these polls? 

They're getting really out of hand. 

[fishers64]

Can we just stop these polls? 

They're getting really out of hand. 

No, the admins declined the rule that bones proposed. So he can't really stop them unless they violate another rule. 

[Mjolnitor]

Short answer to this is you're apparently forgetting that what makes one person want to ignore something is their subjective personal taste (assuming the thing passes the consistency tests so it isn't a legitimate problem, and that's what we check). Other people who like it don't want to ignore it and in their eyes the value goes up. Especially relevant when the person who values it is the author, and when polls show a majority of support (but even minorities should get nods sometimes, whether pro or anti canonization).

But isn't proposing some things in canon and not proposing other ones the subjective personal taste again?

[bonesiii]

Taste is involved, yes, especially taste of the author. But there's more to it as discussed before -- like being consistent about which areas of that proverbial worldbuilding map you fill in and which you don't.

 

Even if taste was all there was to it, that doesn't amount to an argument that any one taste should always win out over the others (except in some fiction if that's the author's taste, but LEGO is more group/majority focused than that). That includes those with a taste not wanting something established at all. (But it also means they should get some things for them too. A balance.)

[Toa R. Lih Nit]

Is there any reason why people don't like these canonizations besides this "people want to make canon fanfics" reason?

Yes, because sometime the people messed things up.

For example: The Mask Of Creation being a "Legendary Level" Mask when it just was a mask used by a being of legends. Is silly try to justificate now that Creation is a fundamental force of the Universe just like Time, even in-universe because the people in Bara Magna were "fine" without the ability to create things.

 

The Toa Mangai case is similar, Lhikan is suposed to be a mentor figure. He is heroic and incorruptible (2 parters were fallen Toa after all, even with the Cain/Abel-thing that Bionicle loves), and very wise (he summoned 4 Toa of Ice to fight a fire-spliter dragon, that was a very good strategy), the backstory needed for this was: Nidhiki (The Cain part), Tuyet, 4 Toa of Ice (without masks, Toa Tool or names) and nothing more... Even Tuyet part wasn't primordial until Dark Mirror...

 

Why do we try to push little nothings and not the end of the serials? I know that Greg is busy but we can win more with that...

 

(Sorry if my English is bad, I'm terrible with languages.)

[bonesiii]

Yes, because sometime the people messed things up.

This is not a good argument against fan input for reasons discussed already; we can actually help make messups LESS likely than canon given just by LEGO since it's more people checking things. Also, the two examples you try to give don't really work. But I read the question as asking about the ones that are NOT messed up (objectively -- but both your examples below seem subjective anyways... I bring this up because some things like Toa Cordak seem like objective errors). Point is, once objective inconsistencies and implausibilities are removed, and we see why it makes sense for a part of that worldbuilding map to be filled in by the same rules implied by what they revealed already, new details shouldn't be opposed just because some other details didn't fulfill those rules well enough.

 

Basically the argument is you either have to get total perfection or nothing. If you took it to its logical conclusion you would have no Bionicle at all. It seems to be a waaaaaay overvaluation of mistakes!

 

For example: The Mask Of Creation being a "Legendary Level" Mask when it just was a mask used by a being of legends. Is silly try to justificate now that Creation is a fundamental force of the Universe just like Time, even in-universe because the people in Bara Magna were "fine" without the ability to create things.

That's not how Legendary powers work. You seem to have fallen for a somewhat common misconception that without Legendary Masks, the thing that its power controls doesn't exist. No, it's that the Legendary Mask controls a major force. Prior to the Vahi existing, time worked just fine (and time outside the MU would still work fine even if it was smashed).

 

There are alternate possible arrangements of legendary powers, but the fact that it's somewhat arbitrary means that the one the Great Beings picked is plausible, and it fits their personalities well; they were obviously very creative. (It wasn't about Artakha being "legendary", by the way. Karzahni was too but got just a Great Mask.) It really just means the next level above Great, and in the MU they have restrictive rules like that there can only be three of them. In some of my fanfics there is no rule, so there can be a Legendary Mask of Fire, for example.

 

The idea that it controls a major force or aspect of the MU reality is not essential to having such a mask. But it was chosen mainly because of how important matter is. Time, matter, and life being three essentials to having a living being like a Matoran.

 

Also, I don't normally think of that as a result of fan canonization, though I guess you're right that it did involve some fan input and discussion. It's not a good example of what people normally mean when they talk about canonizations though. If memory serves, LEGO had already thought of the basic idea of Legendary Masks for the Vahi. The idea of it being a major force or aspect of existence seems to have come from that. But it's already looser with the Ignika (also thought of from LEGO alone as far as I know.) Life isn't quite a force either. (Well, neither is time in the sense of the force of gravity or the like, so yeah.)

 

The Toa Mangai case is similar, Lhikan is suposed to be a mentor figure.

I don't see how this is similar to the Mask of Creation example or what your point is. Lhikan's being a mentor has no logical connection to an argument that we can't find out the rest of his team; if anything it implies we should since he was such an important character (so is his team by extension).

 

Why do we try to push little nothings and not the end of the serials?

It isn't quite nothing. And Greg has already explained why the serials aren't continuing. This seems kind of like asking why we keep shopping for the food stores happen to sell instead of starving ourselves and demanding scientists construct Matoran energy absorbing systems for us instead. (Not that we actually need this 'food' to live or anything; that would be unhealthy, but we do WANT a little more, or some of us do, and Greg seems willing to keep providing some. )

 

 

Edit: You know, another point about this "nothing" thing that keeps being trumpeted. It seems many of you are missing that tons and tons of details revealed already in the worldbuilding are just as small or smaller. Yet they were big enough for LEGO to want to reveal. Thing is, when you reveal so many details, almost every detail is small -- just how percentages work. Which might be an argument for a simpler story entirely, but it can't be an argument that once LEGO decided to make a huge world with lots of "little" details that other details can't be added. You can make arguments against that, but this isn't really one of them if you think about it.

Edited December 26, 2014 by bonesiii

[Toa R. Lih Nit]

I'm a fan of Bionicle, not a fan of silly ideas. Isn't an absolute, it was my anwser to Boidoh, I don't like some ideas being canon because I belive that some of them made the story worse. The Mask of Creation was one example of that.

 

The Mask of Creation never was a Legendary Level Mask, that was someone's sugestion and the justification that you gave me (and even powers like "make things from air") was added latter for un-mess the matter. (Maybe I'm wrong about this and in some book that isn't in my country was wrote, in that case I'm sorry about that) Creation is just a little part of the relation between the mind and the matter, is just a little part of the culture, not a fundamental force of anything. I know how a Legendary Level Mask work and how are link to the MU, and thats why I gave the Bara Magna example, they didn't have the power of Creation, wan't essential. And Life wasn't essential for a universe too, but the Vahi and Ignika work better with the Legendary Level Mask lore, they are far beyond the power of a Great Mask but for diferent reasons. 

 

Yes, I make a mistake picking words in the Lhikan case, wasn't similar, just was unnecessary for the big picture and I'm sorry about that error. But bad picking of metaphors for you too because we had several years without Bionicle news and are all healthy.  

Like was said before, Bionicle Gen I is over and bystanders' Masks/Toa Tools  weren't needed for the tale. I don't really care about the sword or the spear of Toa Mangai Of Ice #3 (the "little" worldbuilder), and we won't have new serials (the "big" worldbuilder), my problem is with the "medium" worldbuilders like Toa Cordak and Mask Of Creation. 

Edited December 26, 2014 by Toa R. Lih Nit

[bonesiii]

I don't like some ideas

Fair enough. That wasn't clear from your wording. But thanks for clarifying.

 

because I belive that some of them made the story worse.

Well, are you sure that in all cases it's disliking because you think it's worse? Or could it be that you think it's worse because you have a personal taste that makes you dislike it? The latter is almost always the case unless we see a real contradiction or the like... With the Mangai at least, I'm not seeing one. Seems like that's definitely a taste thing.

 

About Legendaries... well, that would be a complicated discussion methinks and the Toa Mangai are much more on-topic. Legendaries are well established by now for Gen1 and that discussion won't really lead anywhere productive most likely, but the Mangai discussion might. So, might be best to just agree to disagree on that one. See below for a question, though.

 

I know how a Legendary Level Mask work and how are link to the MU, and thats why I gave the Bara Magna example, they didn't have the power of Creation, wan't essential.

Uh... if you understand what Bionicle's idea of Legendary powers is, you should know that Bara Magna is irrelevant to this, at least I think so... Not following you here. But maybe I wasn't clear enough... or maybe I'm misreading this. The "that's why" part of this quote doesn't fit at all if you understand Legendary powers the way LEGO intended them. The whole point of my answer was to explain why Bara Magna doesn't support an argument against Creation being a Legendary because of the Bionicle meaning of that. But I don't know how to explain it more clearly without understanding what you're saying here. So... could you clarify? I'm not getting it from this latest post.

 

And Life wasn't essential for a universe too

It's essential for life, which is what I said. Maybe you just need to re-read my previous post more carefully?

 

Yes, I make a mistake picking words in the Lhikan case, wasn't similar, just was unnecessary for the big picture and I'm sorry about that error. But bad picking of metaphors for you too because we had several years without Bionicle news and are all healthy.

Uh... I'm perfectly capable of bad word choice, but this may be more of a "lost in translation" thing, because I didn't say that we need new Bionicle info to be healthy; I said the opposite in the clarification in parentheses... I brought up the food analogy to illustrate a flaw in the reasoning I was replying to, not for that part of the analogy; hence the clarification.

 

But during that time, people who want these details weren't being pleased by their still being little mysteries, and defining them does help for that. And since pleasing wants is what entertainment is for, that makes sense. (And since tastes are subjective, pleasing some always means (or usually lol) displeasing others. Hence the importance of those who are displeased generally bearing with it.)

 

Like was said before, Bionicle Gen I is over and bystanders' Masks/Toa Tools  weren't needed for the tale.

Oh! We're back to that! Sorry, I didn't get that from your earlier statements. No, this was covered earlier and misses the point of the genre of Bionicle as a worldbuilding story that establishes, as I think I put it earlier, a "cloud of extra details" around each part of the tale. That aren't needed for the tale. You're confusing it with the type of story that only establishes what is in the story itself. See the Encyclopedia and tons of 2001 guidelike content, etc. (I had thought this was cleared up already. Maybe you didn't read through the earlier parts of the discussion, though?)

 

In case that's not clear, lemme put it in simpler terms again.

 

Basically, even from 2001, extra details were established beyond what was used in-story. And the rules that can be inferred from what details they did reveal, if applied consistently, really should mean that the Toa Mangai should be revealed at least in some important basics like their powers, since that team had three prominent members in their story roles (plus one important enough to have a major landmark named after her, and one of those big three had one of the most important roles of all, at least in his story year).

 

This is different from more obscure teams like Lesovikk's and Jovan's -- so I don't think those teams should necessarily get these details (though I wouldn't really oppose them... and Jovan's has gotten some of them). But the Mangai are a unique case, that objectively I think really should get at least the powers established. So, elements and mask powers.

[Toa R. Lih Nit]

Mmm, let me try this again, again.

 

[...]the way LEGO intended them.  [...]

 

I think this is the key about all, LEGO intended two Legendary Level Masks, BZP canonized another one and made up all your argument because without it, just fails.

Break the Vahi => Tear apart the flow of time.

Break the Ignika=> Kill'em all apocalypse

Break the MoC=> Bara Magna-like MU (Is a bad thing but the other two options are much, much worse)

And, yes, is a pointless topic now and a lost battle but that was my example for (in my point of view) a bad canonization.

Please don't think that I hate all the aports of BZP, I really like things like named the Lhikan's Team and made a red shirt Piraka Star into Nektann. I read all the topic before posting and just felt the need to post about because I think that is necessary to make a line between what try to make canon and what don't, we need a limit.

[Katuko]

I agree, with Toa R. Lih Nit here. Why the Mask of Creation was made a Legendary-tier mask is honestly beyond me. It's power is nothing too out of the ordinary - it's honestly not a major force in the universe like time - and its proposed effects if broken (its energies released upon the world) is vague and hard to reason out. It's certainly powerful, but if the Olmak and Mohtrek are not Legendary (and those things rip holes in time and space) then neither should this be.

 

Also, remember: The Ignika is not essential for life to work in the MU. We have seen as a major plot point which demonstrates this: Launching the Mask into space and having it destroyed there equals no harm done to the MU. The inhabitants wouldn't even have noticed that it was gone if Makuta hadn't told everyone. The only thing that would cause harm is its function as a doomsday weapon, or the massive release of energy that would occur if it's broken. This makes the mask a nuke to be worn on your face, but it does not make all life energy in the MU dependent upon it. At least that is what I think you mean when you say "essential for life".

Edited December 27, 2014 by Katuko