Tolwyn's silly cape in WC2

Originally posted by Nemesis
But there must be levels of canon. If there were no hierarchies of sources, then we each would indeed be free to “walk away believing what we want”. We would have no basis for distinguishing the quality of information in, say, a published versus an unpublished source, a game manual versus a press release, or an “official” versus an “unofficial” guide. In short, WC lore could not commonly exist.

Yes, the development of canon is downright messy, even helter-skelter. But show me any generally accepted proposition in the proverbial real world (such that the earth orbits the sun) and I’ll show you a “simple” belief that has gone through a baptism of hellish fire. There’s nothing new here. The kind of arguments we’re having in WC about the authority of various sources occur all the time in science, law, religion, art, and politics. Welcome to human civilization and its many different “quests” for knowledge and certainty.
Click to expand...

You used the phrase "WC lore" and that's exactly what I'm talking about. It's literature and art. It's an entire mythos. We should be so lucky that the WC universe converges as much as it does. We're not arguing Creationism versus Darwinism here. Some would like to force one version of events above another and I believe that to be a flawed action. In our world there is fact and fiction which is constantly being tested, but in the WC universe we are presented with a ficticious universe, and we are given the facts therein. The contents of the games and novels and even the movie and cartoon must be considered canon, even if they contradict, when they contradict, and especially when they contradict. You can't just sweep things under the carpet that you don't like.

There need be no "quests" for certainty, for there is absolute certainty. I am absolutely certain that in the context of the movie, Kilrathi are not covered in hair. I am absolutely certain that in the context of the games the Kilrathi have plenty of hair. In the context of the WC universe in general, I am absolutely certain that both of those statements are true. An explanation would be nice, but frankly it's not something I'm going to blow a fuse over. This isn't the first time details in an ongoing story get a little fuzzy, and it won't be the last. The problem arises from the fact that people are believing certain things, and throwing away other things, and they want others to do the same. I'll believe that about as much as I'll believe WC fan-fiction is canon, because that's what some of arguments amount to.

As a side note, I'm wondering whether or not we're breaking rule 3 here, for some of the arguments here are specifically "game vs. book." I know, it isn't quite as cut-and-dry as "Enterprise vs. Tiger's Claw" and everyone seems to be playing nice so far, although stubbornness often turns into flaming; I was just curious as to what the governing parties might think of this. Do "versus" thread bans pertain just to inter-universe discussions, or also to intra-universe ones?
 
Originally posted by Jetlag
(...) That is why I will submit that we should just take everything equally. This raises the question: What about the differences? Well, a novel and a game are two completely different ways of telling us a story. OF COURSE there will be inconsistencies. Didn't you ever hear two different versions of the same story? So maybe Blair landed on the planet, or maybe he just flew by and had a little comm chat, or maybe both. Am I the only person willing to accept that the games and novels don't have to fit perfectly, not even inclusively, because they are simply retellings of the happenings of the Wing Commander Universe.

So, maybe Kilrathi have no hair. Maybe the carrier is named the Tiger Claw. Maybe Tolwyn is black. Maybe Paladin isn't fat. Maybe going through a jump is a split second affair, or maybe it's long enough to write home to mom and dad. All these things could lead to interesting discussions, but posts that say "This is the only way it is because the <medium I like most insert here> says it is" isn't getting us anywhere. We could all share our observations and show our conclusions, and we could all walk away believing what we want.
Click to expand...
Ok, I agree with you that constant and repetitive arguing won't get us anywhere. Yet it demonstrates how we can take matters at heart when it involves something we're immersed into (WC namely). I guess that us wanting to have "consistency" in the storyline proves how perfectionist we want to be (by "we" I mean those who do want consistency), regarding details in the WC universe...
Furthermore, if we create too many "versions" of the story, we'll end up getting REALLY confused:

"Ok, see here you see the Tiger Claw jump into hyperspace..."
"Yo, wait a second, I thought it was Tiger's Claw..."
"Yeah, that's in the games, but in the movie it's Tiger Claw... ... and here it jumps out of hyperspace into the Sol System, pretty cool huh?
"No, I don't get this... in the novels I read, hyperspace is a very long process..."
"Yeah, but in the movie it just takes an instant..."
"Eeeeew!! Who are those guys??!!"
"Dude!! It's the Kilrathi!!"
"WHAT!! These are no Kilrathi man!! These are hairless siamese cats who have eaten too much vitamins!!"
"Yeah, they're different from what we used to see in the games, but that's okay, 'cause everything is canon"
"So let me get this straight... we have THREE different versions of Wing Commander???"
"Yeah well... life's complicated, isn't it?
:D

Furthermore, "Let's prove LOAF wrong" is petty and childish.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is!! You have a problem with that? LOL
But seriously Jetlag... me was J-O-K-I-N-G... Of course LOAF knows more than evrything the rest of us people know, summed up... so what? Can't we make fun of that, once in a while?

Now, go buy some cafepress junk, seriously.
Click to expand...
Ehm...I'm not fully familiar with your American expressions... by that you mean?
The contents of the games and novels and even the movie and cartoon must be considered canon, even if they contradict, when they contradict, and especially when they contradict. You can't just sweep things under the carpet that you don't like.
Click to expand...
I disagree. It's not about "liking" or "disliking", Jetlag... it's about continuity of a story on consistency of details... Ok, so maybe some guy didn't like the first Kilrathi, who had fur!! Well that's too bad, because that's how they were meant ORIGINALLY to be...
They have had fur all along, and now just because the movie made them furless for money/practical reasons, we're going to consider that canon? NO WAY!!

What was done at first? The games? The novels? The movie?
Answer: the games. It is therefore logical to consider the games as a frame of reference, to which all the rest is related... and if it conbtradicts the games, well too bad, it's not the original version of the story...

As a side note, I'm wondering whether or not we're breaking rule 3 here, for some of the arguments here are specifically "game vs. book." I know, it isn't quite as cut-and-dry as "Enterprise vs. Tiger's Claw" and everyone seems to be playing nice so far, although stubbornness often turns into flaming; I was just curious as to what the governing parties might think of this. Do "versus" thread bans pertain just to inter-universe discussions, or also to intra-universe ones?
Click to expand...
Well guess what Jetlag? You're breaking rule 1 here...
"Also, if you think another user is breaking the rules, do _not_ flame or harass him/her. Let the moderators do their job." :p
But seriously, me and LOAF were having a calm discussion about the Price of Freedom novel (was getting a bit heated up, sorry about that LOAF), we weren't pulling each other's hair, now were we?
 
Originally posted by mpanty
Ok, I agree with you that constant and repetitive arguing won't get us anywhere. Yet it demonstrates how we can take matters at heart when it involves something we're immersed into (WC namely). I guess that us wanting to have "consistency" in the storyline proves how perfectionist we want to be (by "we" I mean those who do want consistency), regarding details in the WC universe...
Furthermore, if we create too many "versions" of the story, we'll end up getting REALLY confused:
Click to expand...

Well, I believe its up to the content creators as to how many versions of the story they wish to create.


Yes, it is!! You have a problem with that? LOL
But seriously Jetlag... me was J-O-K-I-N-G... Of course LOAF knows more than evrything the rest of us people know, summed up... so what? Can't we make fun of that, once in a while?
Click to expand...

Oh, ok. My bad.



Now, go buy some cafepress junk, seriously.
Click to expand...
Ehm...I'm not fully familiar with your American expressions... by that you mean?
Click to expand...

http://www.cafepress.com/wcnews/

I disagree. It's not about "liking" or "disliking", Jetlag... it's about continuity of a story on consistency of details... Ok, so maybe some guy didn't like the first Kilrathi, who had fur!! Well that's too bad, because that's how they were meant ORIGINALLY to be...
They have had fur all along, and now just because the movie made them furless for money/practical reasons, we're going to consider that canon? NO WAY!!

What was done at first? The games? The novels? The movie?
Answer: the games. It is therefore logical to consider the games as a frame of reference, to which all the rest is related... and if it conbtradicts the games, well too bad, it's not the original version of the story...
Click to expand...

But it is not logic that leads you to that decision, it is your personal preference, which I will respect, because it is your choice to make. But I could reason that the latest works should be considered more correct, because they give us the latest refinements to the story. Now I'm not going to say that this is my belief, but it is a valid point to consider.


Well guess what Jetlag? You're breaking rule 1 here...
"Also, if you think another user is breaking the rules, do _not_ flame or harass him/her. Let the moderators do their job." :p
But seriously, me and LOAF were having a calm discussion about the Price of Freedom novel (was getting a bit heated up, sorry about that LOAF), we weren't pulling each other's hair, now were we?
Click to expand...

Heh. Now if I were to respond to that, hypothetically, I might say you're breaking the same rule, but I won't say that, because then the same applies to me. Anyway, I wasn't trying to point fingers at anyone, if it looked that way I sincerely apologize, I was just wondering about the subject matter. But as you pointed out, this is not the place to wonder about such things, so I won't go any further.
 
[WC is] literature and art. It's an entire mythos. . . .We're not arguing [science] here.
Click to expand...

Sure we are. Literature or science. A story or a theory. Contradictions are a universal bane and prevent the telling of a “good” tale as much as they do a “sound” scientific theory. More to the point, without “enforcement” of one contradictory view over another (by way of due process, cultural traditions, formal schooling, professional comradery, and so on), knowledge or certainty of any kind would be impossible.

But not to worry. Although every day any number of so-called facts or conceptions are “officially” suppressed relative to others, I daresay more have survived than have forever disappeared or been wholly forgotten simply because of anyone or any group’s mere say-so. (Tell me again, who was it now who won the Florida vote last November? And doesn’t the sun really orbit the earth? I mean come on!, the sun moves across the sky every day while the ground under my feet stays still.)

So argue on! Search for and find that “nice explanation” you admit you’d like to have. Knowledge feeds on skepticism too. (Just don’t expect to have an easy time of it.:))
 
Howdy, y'all...

Sorry I haven't jumped back in yet -- I was at Joe Garrity's house all weekend... on the plus side, some other intelligent people seem to have argued my point for me <G>

Still, a wrap-up of the Catscratch/Vagabond situation seems necessary...


NO!! He's worrying about them because he thinks they're on board!!! IN THE NOVEL, Catscratch and Vagabond ARE NOT flying on Blair's wing!!!! But we know that Vagabond has already defected and that Catscratch IS flying on Blair's wing!! Come on LOAF, this is just denying the truth!! I'm sure if we asked the authors about what they wanted Blair to think at that moment, we would find out he's thinking that his two friends are on board... ON BOARD THE LEXINGTON!! It is clearly mentioned "...and all his other friends on board that would die in the explosion"... he thinks they're on board!! Therefore: game: Vagabond and Catscratch are NOT onboard the Lexington, novel: Vagabond and Catscratch ARE onboard the Lexington. It's just that Forstchen and Ohlander don't care too much about making the novel coincide with the game, they have been rather sloppy on this one...
Click to expand...

Don't misquote -- "His gut twinged at the deaths that would be on his hands. Catscratch, Vagabond, and the others he'd met had done nothing to deserve what he was about to deliver. He suspected many in the Lexington's crew would rebel if they knew what they were serving." This is *in no way* specific regarding whether or not Vagabond and Catscratch are on the Lexington... since the game specifically tells us that they are *not* onboard the Lexington, we know exactly where they are.

Certainly the authors intentions can be questioned... I would argue first that, from experience dealing with the authors, that they do indeed care about continuty -- second, however, I would argue that the work stands alone... if you cannot accept differences made because people demanded them (re: Axius), can you really argue the authors intent?

That said, if you'd like to contact Bill Forstchen (he did the outline, not the actual novel) you can contact him via snail-mail at...

Montreat College
#812, P.O. Box 1267
Montreat, NC 28757

Further, in the novel, Seether does *not* fight Blair when he's attacking the Lexington -- Seether was sleeping... don't be so quick to jump onto the "It's-so-different!" bandwagon that you make things up to claim a point <G>

The Kilrathi have hair in the movie (albeit it not as much), and hair in the games... there's no contradiction here. It's difficult to find two versions of the Kilrathi who look *the same*...

The versus rule applies *only* to that sort of 'TIE FIGHTERS ARE BETTER THAN BEHEMOTHS!!! LOL!!!!' crap. It is *not* a regulation preventing comparative discussion -- particularly not when we're comparing WC to itself.

... and that CafePress stuff sucks. :)
 
That does make it sound like Catscratch and Vagabond were on the Lexington but regardless the books and everything fit together. No reason to accept otherwise.
 
Originally posted by Nemesis
[WC is] literature and art. It's an entire mythos. . . .We're not arguing [science] here.
Click to expand...

Sure we are. Literature or science. A story or a theory. Contradictions are a universal bane and prevent the telling of a “good” tale as much as they do a “sound” scientific theory. More to the point, without “enforcement” of one contradictory view over another (by way of due process, cultural traditions, formal schooling, professional comradery, and so on), knowledge or certainty of any kind would be impossible.

But not to worry. Although every day any number of so-called facts or conceptions are “officially” suppressed relative to others, I daresay more have survived than have forever disappeared or been wholly forgotten simply because of anyone or any group’s mere say-so. (Tell me again, who was it now who won the Florida vote last November? And doesn’t the sun really orbit the earth? I mean come on!, the sun moves across the sky every day while the ground under my feet stays still.)

So argue on! Search for and find that “nice explanation” you admit you’d like to have. Knowledge feeds on skepticism too. (Just don’t expect to have an easy time of it.:))
Click to expand...

Firstly I wasn't pinning literature against science, I was holding it up against RL historical discussions (which I'm not precluding from being a science, I just wasn't making that broad of a generalization). My point was you cannot prove something didn't or couldn't happen in the WC universe as people will do in RL. Arguing into eternity will not make the words in my book go away or the picture on my screen change, that's just the way it is. I think I'm about to repeat myself, so I'll just stop here. :p
 
Arguing into eternity will not make the words in my book go away or the picture on my screen change, that's just the way it is.
Click to expand...

Yes, once a good many people said something like that about the indisputably flat earth.

How many possible interpretations are there of, say, biblical text or constitutional text, though we'll find only one authoritative interpretation within the Catholic Church or the U.S. Supreme Court? Also, remember the Rodney King videotape, and how it was interpreted for that first jury, which convinced them to acquit those policemen?

Still, as they say, keep the faith!:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top