The third definition of Canon as defined by www.dictionary.com: “the body of rules, principles, or standards accepted as axiomatic and universally binding in a field of study or art”
While sci fi fans can be a stickler for what we consider sacred, does having a timeline/history set in stone help that hurt or help the development of show and its universe. I believe following the rich history of a storyline only enhances a show and its potential.
Recently, I started watching Star Trek: The Animated Series and this question popped into my mind: How do you define what is canon? In the Star Trek verse, to my knowledge, there are six TV shows, eleven movies, countless books and an online game. I’ve read that Gene Roddenberry never considered Star Trek: TAS apart of the official canon. Although most of the original casts, writers and producers were involved in the creation of the show. The show’s creator didn’t consider it part of the history of the show. Why did he turn his back on a series that remind faithful to its progenitor? Not only did Star Trek: TAS flesh featured favorite characters like Harry Mudd, Tribbles and Kor and returns to familiar places like the vacation planet in “Shore Leave” and the “The Guardian of Forever.”
TAS lasted two seasons and has influenced later shows and deserves to be included in the official cannon and obsessed over like the other shows and movies.
Today, where we have seen countless shows live on in graphic novels after the original show had been cancelled. While researching Aeryn Sun for my piece on The Top Women in Sci Fi, I discovered that the Farscape story continued in a graphic novel. Some of my favorite shows like Firefly and Buffy still live on in the graphic forms. Not having read any of the stories featured in the graphic form, I wonder if my opinions of these shows would grow or change.