Are author statements valid for canon use if they appear in non-canon side stories/secondary canon material?

[Arc7Kuroi]

Let me explain what I mean by the title here and bear with me as I get a little verbose.

So, often times when evaluating vague moments in fiction (specifically manga) we turn to a secondary source of canonicity for clarification (anime). The common example is finding time frames for feats, Hagoromo and Hamura hurl the moon into orbit, how long does it take, consult the anime. I'm sure everyone can think of their own example of using the anime for clarification, this obviously extends beyond Naruto, that's just the anecdote that came to mind.

Now how would we treat author endorsed statements that come from side stories or original content that doesn't appear in the main continuity? Let me illustrate an example to help explain my question further. Say you have a verse in which the planet the story takes place on is stated to be far larger than Earth, but we are never given an explicit size. Then say there is an anime only OVA, episode, or movie that comes out and a character gives an explicit size ("the core lays 200 thousand km beneath the surface"). Lastly, let's say the author comes out in an interview or some other medium and explains that they worked closely on the production of this anime only OVA, episode, or movie, admitting that they personally designed and worked on the plot and setting of this original work. Would we be able to take that statement as applicable to the canon work? After all it is the author's setting that is in use, and the author admits in this hypothetical to have been working closely on the design, production, plot, and setting aspects. You can apply this example with any situation in which the author works on a secondary source of canon elaborates on a vague canon piece of information.

Would we consider that expansion of knowledge from the secondary source endorsed and greenlit by the author to be applicable to the primary source? Obviously, any contradictions that arise in the main canon take absolute precedence over the secondary canon, but assume in this hypothetical the expanding info is not contradicted. And I'm aware there's going to be some case-by-case variation from instance to instance.

In my eyes the situation sort of similar to using the anime to get time frames for feats. Something is too vague in the canon material so we consult a secondary source. In this case rather than consulting an adaptation of the primary source, we are dealing with a side story/anime only scene that the author is confirmed to have greenlit/worked on/designed themself. Thoughts?

 

[DemonGodMitchAubin]

I mean I would personally say yes

I don’t know why the non canon material and author would be lying and only specifically talking about non-canon stuff when these statements are made

 

[Deceived3596]

If the author is decently connected to the non-canon piece of material, was specifically a part of writing the plot and scenes, which inherently includes the statement and the statement itself isn't contradicted by the main canon material then i don't see the reason why not to use it except for assuming that since the statement comes from a non-canon OVA or movie we shouldn't assume it's canon to the manga.

I'll use the example of stated distances from an anime OVA vs an assumed distance stated from the manga to illustrate my disagreement with this line of logic.

Completely handwaving away actual stated distances for usually more unreliable methods for finding sizes of objects in manga like pixel scaling or using stated time-frames, claiming a bunch of assumptions like assuming the speed of one's movement, assuming how long one rested for each day etc isn't something that i believe is "less assumptive" or "more correct" because the methods within themselves are objectively more assumptive and most likely less correct comparative to an statement that gives a direct distance and isn't contradicted by anything in the main source material.

Just because it's from a "non-canon source" doesn't mean we shouldn't assume it's better to use comparatively to faulty mathematics, author's drawing capabilities and a plethora of assumptions. It's just an objectively better way to get sizes of objects.

So i 100% agree we should be able to use author statements from "non-canon" sources if said sources were.

1. Heavily worked upon by the manga creator in question, specifically its plot and scenes since this is where he'd have control over things like statements.
2. Isn't directly contradicted by anything in the main source material.

This would ofc be applicable to any other "non-canon" statement but i was just using the distances of objects as an example.

 

[KLOL506]

As long as it does not contradict the source material in any significant way and only serves to add more details or serve as clarification to said events, yes. This is explicitly stated in our Editing Rules page:

• Regarding direct information from the author/creator of a character: We do not use statements from them that are phrased in an uncertain, uncaring, and/or unspecific manner, such as "Could be", "Maybe", "Probably", "Possibly" etcetera. Brief or vague answers to fan-questions via social media are also generally disregarded, whereas more elaborate explanations in serious interviews are usually considered more reliable.
• When a statement from a character, guidebook, or even word of god contradicts what occurs in the series, they won't be used. For example, if an author says that a character from his work is incapable of shattering planets, even though it has destroyed galaxies on-screen, we will always go with the latter, rather than the former. The statement need to be consistent with what has been revealed within the fictional franchise itself. Otherwise, it will be considered invalid.
• Author statements will only be accepted when they clarify what has been shown or implied in the series itself, and will be rejected when they contradict what has been shown to the audience. Statements that technically do not contradict anything shown in the series will still be rejected if there is no evidence that they are accurate.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

Author statements will only be accepted when they clarify what has been shown or implied in the series itself, and will be rejected when they contradict what has been shown to the audience. Statements that technically do not contradict anything shown in the series will still be rejected if there is no evidence that they are accurate.

Would this apply if it came from a technically non-canon side story, but the author is confirmed to have been heavily involved in whatever aspect the statement is applicable to?

 

[KLOL506]

Would this apply if it came from a technically non-canon side story, but the author is confirmed to have been heavily involved in whatever aspect the statement is applicable to?

Depends on whether the non-canon side-story is implied to happen in the canon material as well, like Cell destroying the Solar System from Earth but its visualization being shown in a non-canon video game (Even though the game isn't really relevant but further supports 4-B Cell from Earth alongside other secondary canon materials and somesuch).

 

[Damage3245]

Personally I wouldn't take the non-canon OVA statement and apply that to the main canon. I'd consider that be valid for a separate "canon" and just use the statement for that part of the verse, but that's just my view on it.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

Depends on whether the non-canon side-story is implied to happen in the canon material as well, like Cell destroying the Solar System from Earth but its visualization being shown in a non-canon video game (Even though the game isn't really relevant but further supports 4-B Cell from Earth alongside other secondary canon materials and somesuch).

That's interesting example that would fall in line of yes. Canon material supports it, non-canon adaptation makes it more obvious.

Personally I wouldn't take the non-canon OVA statement and apply that to the main canon. I'd consider that be valid for a separate "canon" and just use the statement for that part of the verse, but that's just my view on it.

Yeah I can see the apprehension, especially with the vague territory being addressed here. I'm curious to see what more people think. Because I see this come up a lot in scaling where people use non-canon works as supplemental evidence, but there never appears to be a solid guideline for it.

 

[Celestial_Pegasus]

This is interesting, Isekai Quartet comes to mind, which is like a non canon series with various Isekai, but the authors are involved.

Reinhard's blessings are first introduced there in anime format, so was kinda of a pain what to do with it, but recently with the upcoming movie (is it even out yet idk), the author of Re Zero who is very involved with it has gone as far as to introduce a character which we don't know too well yet in the series but is vitally important to the overall world building, in a non canon anime series.......

While also revealing major plot details, was really scratching my head about what to do with this, if Hoshin, the character mentioned, for example dropped some lore bomb like Reid once destroyed a country with 1 sword swing, could that even be used.

 

[Deceived3596]

if Hoshin, the character mentioned, for example dropped some lore bomb like Reid once destroyed a country with 1 sword swing, could that even be used.

I'd honestly say yeah it should be usable tbh, don't really see the reason why we shouldn't/wouldn't be able to use it if the statement was green-lighted by the manga creator themselves and nothing in the main canon contradicts it.

 

[Excellence616]

An Author statements on a non-canon work can be valid as long as it doesn't contradict the author earlier canon statements or works and it must be consistent. And also it must be close to the original storyline

 

[KLOL506]

An Author statements on a non-canon work can be valid as long as it doesn't contradict the author earlier canon statements or works and it must be consistent. And also it must be close to the original storyline

Basically what I had already stated before. As long as it doesn't contradict the main canon and gives further context to it, it's acceptable.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

Basically what I had already stated before. As long as it doesn't contradict the main canon and gives further context to it, it's acceptable.

Go comment in my Bleach thread best friend