What is Canon?

This article was originally published by Scooter (aka "The Canon Man") on the ERP Forums on 14 December 2003. (Ref: Internet Archive) The views presented herein are those of the author and not of ERP as a whole. It is presented here as it was at the time. [Simmo: As of 2021 when this page was republished, it is fascinating to see people having the same arguments about Discovery, Picard, et al. The more things change...]

This word is derived from a Hebrew and Greek word denoting a reed or cane. Hence it means something straight, or something to keep straight; and hence also a rule, or something ruled or measured. The dictionary gives several definitions for the word canon. At first glance, the most relevant definition of canon, as it pertains to Star Trek would seem to be:

A rule or especially body of rules or principles generally established as valid and fundamental in a field or art or philosophy.

It's a good definition, but being a musician I prefer this definition:

A musical composition in which the voices begin one after another, at regular intervals, successively taking up the same subject. It either winds up with a coda (tailpiece), or, as each voice finishes, commences anew, thus forming a perpetual fugue or round.

Traditionally, the realm of Trek canon has been defined as everything you see on television and in the theater, excluding the Animated Series. But it's not that simple. Due to pre-production mistakes by various people, there are plenty of examples where canon would contradict canon. You can find books and web sites with listings of these screw-ups, a few are even admitted in the Star Trek Encyclopedia. Clearly a new definition of canon is needed, and thus the Canon Revolution begins. Please fasten your seatbelts.

To understand canon, you need to stop thinking of Star Trek as merely a television show. It is an entire universe in the imagination of millions. Using our knowledge of how our universe works, we can derive how the Star Trek universe works based on what has been revealed to us and a bit of good old Vulcan logic. But first, we need to establish some ground rules.

First of all, understand that the people that made Star Trek are humans just like everyone else, and as such are susceptible to making mistakes. As a result, our perspective of the Star Trek universe is slightly skewered from what it would be if it were real. To be able to understand and discern canon, you need to be able to recognize these mistakes and know what would be correct. It won't always be easy, but you'll have much more interesting discussions.

Pay close attention to the little details. Often they will corroborate other evidence, and in some cases may shed light on an otherwise dark situation. Whether or not some things were intended to be analyzed is beside the point. We need to use our eyes as well as our ears when it comes to canon. Make the most of the brief glimpses into the Star Trek universe that we have been made privy to.

So how do you find canon? It might seem like it's at the end of the rainbow, but it's closer than you think. Listen with your ears to what the characters are saying. They will tell you things that you can't see. But keep in mind that the writers who wrote those words make mistakes, and sometimes a character will say something wrong. Keep your eyes on everything from the master systems display to the ship models; you'd be surprised how much information they contain. Sometimes what you see and what you hear will contradict each other. We can refer to prior films and episodes to prove or disprove.

Now we leap into the taboo world of what has traditionally been considered semi-canon or non-canon. When things are unclear, people behind-the-scenes will sometimes elaborate on them. Once in a while they will even tell us things we wouldn't otherwise know from on-screen, or they will tell us that what we saw on-screen was a mistake and will give us the correct information. Those who don't understand canon easily dismiss such things, and to their own disadvantage. If it logically makes sense in the context of the Star Trek universe, it's canon.

Another fantastic source of information is the numerous books that have been published. I'm not talking about novels, those are a separate issue. I'm referring to things like the Star Trek Encyclopedia, or the TNG Technical Manual. It's the stuff too boring to show on television, and it's more valuable than gold-pressed latinum. Be careful though, because while in most cases the books will support what is seen and heard on-screen, there are other cases where they will conflict. When there is a confliction, we must consider ALL the evidence, and make a decision based on logic. In most cases, the screen will be correct, but not always. Every once in a while, the book will be correct, and to recognize those times is what it means to truly understand canon.

So what about the novels? I've read more than fifty TNG novels. Some of them I've really enjoyed, and some of them were quite stupid. For the time being, it would be best to just enjoy the novels for their literary value and not take them into consideration while discerning canon, with the possible exception of novels based on episodes. Novels based on episodes provide a deeper insight into the characters, and may also provide additional information. Some deleted scenes are just as much Star Trek as the scenes that make it to air. On the other hand, some of those scenes may have been deleted for a reason. If they make it into the book, chances are they're good.

Another branch of the Star Trek franchise is the games. We need to tread very lightly here, because the companies that are contracted to develop these games make a lot of sacrifices in the interest of gameplay. They have an even greater disregard for canon than the episode writers. In some cases, they genuinely try to make a good Star Trek game. In other cases, it's just an excuse to make another first-person shooter that will appeal to the Star Trek audience. For example, most of the alien species you encounter in Star Trek games appear nowhere else and are totally non-canon.

As I'm writing this, we're roughly half-way through the third season of Enterprise, which has recently had the words "Star Trek" prefixed onto its name. It looks like Star Trek, it sounds like Star Trek, it smells like Star Trek, but it tastes like socks. The events of Enterprise take place in an altered timeline, the result of numerous time travel mishaps in previous series. This was confirmed in the last episode by Daniels, "None of this should be happening." The writers are conveniently blaming their mistakes on the temporal cold war; hopefully the Starfleet of the future will reset the timeline to the Star Trek we know and love. Now, even though the timeline has been severely altered, there are still some elements which could be considered canon. The species they encounter, and the planets they visit, most likely exist in the normal Star Trek universe.

I could have provided numerous examples, but I'm already farther than I had expected to go, and I don't want to turn this into a debate. The intent of this article is to change the way the world thinks about canon, and help people understand what it really means to be canon.