Return To Collinwood - In Continuity or Not?

And there you hit upon a great point, PennyDreadful, and it leads me to a contradiction because I'll readily admit that I have a tendency [spoiler]to ignore Vicki's senseless death in the Leviathan storyline. I just can't accept the lame way that they tossed her death in there and never dealt with it. I also have to admit, no surprise here, that I ignore entirely Barnabas saying he always loved Angelique, because I'd fear for my dvds and tv otherwise.[/spoiler]

So in a way, it's a bit hypocritical of me to say anything about canon, since there are parts of it that I ignore. But then, the actual series was hardly strict with continuity/canon. DS contradicted itself during its run. So where does that leave the issue of canon when it comes to DS?

I thought about that when I posted my last reply. Great point.

For me, yes, of course.  It's canon.  No question.

Exaclty. I hate that that plot point was thought up and executed (not to mention HOW it was executed), but it happened on the show, so it is most definitely canon. There's no way to get around it. 

I think that most of the people who say they refuse to accept it simply like to outwardly pretend that it never actually happened. Hell, sometimes *I* like to pretend it never happened, too. But deep down, of course, we all know it did happen and we have to accept it, no matter how much we dislike it. But as you say, in the DS universe no one ever really stays dead. So, rather than refuse to accept it, perhaps we should simply choose to think that had DS continued they would have eventually come up with some way to rectify it...

Well, a lot of horrible stuff happened on the show, and then was later reversed.  The DS writers seem to have been blissfully unaware of the principle of Temporal Paradox, so they literally got away with murder on that show! I'm quite sure that the "end" to the Vicki storyline would have been changed by subsequent events, had the show continued--the fact that it happened during the last year meant that did not happen in canon.

I did like Dale Clark's suggestion of how this particular story might have been resolved, in the first of a very long series of novels he wrote some years ago.

G.

If it didn't happen during the run of the original series, it didn't happen, period.

i haven't yet seen the storyline development under discussion here about the fate of vicki.
but since i am currently watching the leviathan arc it's an upcoming inevitability.i know what number episode it is and have always planned simply not to watch it because i know i'll find it upsetting and had planned to join those who simply refuse to accept this as fact.

but as has been pointed out here since it actually did occur on the show it is canon.

however as mysterious said no one ever really stays dead in the d.s. universe.if the series had continued,if alexandra had wanted to return,there is certainly nothing to say that a storyline where,for example,barnabas orders angelique to undo the events surrounding vicki's death and she's brought back couldn't have been written.that all this happened towards the end of the show's run of course meant none of that could ever come to fruition but it's not outside the boundries that the show had set up for itself.

Sam Hall presented his original article (in text that I don't think made it to the version on the videotape) as possibilities for the fates of the characters.  I do love the idea of Barnabas and Julia marrying, especially in Singapore...

I love the idea of Barnabas and Julia marrying in Singapore too. I also like the idea of Maggie and Joe getting back together again and getting married. I didn't like the idea of Chris killling Sabrina and then killing himself when Amy desperately needed him to take care of her.    

I don't really get the whole debate about canon, to be honest.  As far as I'm concerned, be it novel, comic, book, CD or whatever, they're all stories with their own merits.  For what it's worth, a sequel with the original actors, produced by Dan Curtis Productions is as about as official as you're likely to get.  But, does it really matter if it's "canon"?

All that canon really means is "I like this story less than this story" -- ultimately, it just doesn't matter.  If someone likes something enough, they'll make it fit, regardless of how contradictory or illogical it might be. Note how many fans dismiss the Leviathan and Vicki developments off the bat.

I know the original DS episodes from back to front, and much as I enjoy them, there's a finite amount of mileage to be had from them.  I'll happily embrace any new stories or ideas, becasue I'd prefer to look forward rather than back.  With audios and novels there's a potential for Dark Shadows to feel alive and vibrant, rather than trapped in the past tense.  I think it's a great pity if fans really do dismiss new productions out of principle for such a flimsy reason.

stuart,

i don't think any of us who's opinion differs from yours deserve to be "pitied" and our reasons for thinking that what happened on the original series is canon are "flimsy".

it's nice that you enjoy new offerings under the d.s. banner.i'm sure many of them are quite good.
but,and i can only speak for myself,the sense of being in a "past tense" is part of the charm of the show.it is a time capsule of sorts.

i won't go so far as to compare d.s. to great cinematic works but no matter how many novels,sequels,comics,etc. one could come up with for "gone with the wind" or "the wizard of oz" there are just fans who will only accept what actually happened during the two or three hours of the original films as what was real about them.

I don't really get the whole debate about canon, to be honest.  As far as I'm concerned, be it novel, comic, book, CD or whatever, they're all stories with their own merits.  For what it's worth, a sequel with the original actors, produced by Dan Curtis Productions is as about as official as you're likely to get.  But, does it really matter if it's "canon"?

All that canon really means is "I like this story less than this story" -- ultimately, it just doesn't matter.

This reminds me of Star Wars... Many people will never accept the prequel trilogy or come to love it the way they do the original. Some will ignore it completely (I know many people that will be happy to). Others embrace both trilogies as one saga... It's different for everyone, which I think can apply to what you're saying above. I read a couple of the novels centered around Episode 3 and thought they were a lot better than the actual movie. Canon? No. But in the end, if you look at it that way, you're right...it doesn't really matter.

stuart,

i don't think any of us who's opinion differs from yours deserve to be "pitied" and our reasons for thinking that what happened on the original series is canon are "flimsy".

There's a difference between considering something "a pity" and telling someone that they are to be "pitied".  And I'll happily reiterate that it's a pity - disapproving of something out of principle rather than for its actual merits does seem needlessly negative.  I guess it's the whole attitude of trying to find reasons *not* to like something. 

I don't really get the whole debate about canon, to be honest.  As far as I'm concerned, be it novel, comic, book, CD or whatever, they're all stories with their own merits.  For what it's worth, a sequel with the original actors, produced by Dan Curtis Productions is as about as official as you're likely to get.  But, does it really matter if it's "canon"?

All that canon really means is "I like this story less than this story" -- ultimately, it just doesn't matter.  If someone likes something enough, they'll make it fit, regardless of how contradictory or illogical it might be. Note how many fans dismiss the Leviathan and Vicki developments off the bat.

I know the original DS episodes from back to front, and much as I enjoy them, there's a finite amount of mileage to be had from them.  I'll happily embrace any new stories or ideas, becasue I'd prefer to look forward rather than back.  With audios and novels there's a potential for Dark Shadows to feel alive and vibrant, rather than trapped in the past tense.  I think it's a great pity if fans really do dismiss new productions out of principle for such a flimsy reason.

Beautifully put, Stuart.  With any franchise, there's always the creator, creators, or corporation who owns the title and decides what is canon and what isn't.  In the case of Dark Shadows, anything produced by DCP should be considered canon unless otherwise stated.  However, in truth it really doesn't matter because it doesn't take anything away from the quality of the CD, comic, novel, etc.  That decision is up to each individual person.

  I think it's a great pity if fans really do dismiss new productions out of principle for such a flimsy reason.

 I certainly wouldn't "dismiss" a new production if I felt it was in truly in the spirit of DS.  I enjoyed Lara Parker's novel and parts of the audio drama.  I have also enjoyed some fanfic such as Charles DTroll's continuation (which, in many ways, captured the DS 'feel' moreso than RTC or Sam Hall's article did IMO).  Are any of those things "in continuity"?  No, IMHO.  Can I fully enjoy them despite that?  Sure.  Of course.  I love a good DS story.  I think the confusion here lies in "official continuity" versus "personal continuity."  As Barnabas'Bride mentioned, this type of debate goes on in other fandoms as well. 

   Sure, we can each construct our own personal continuity in whichever way we like. For example, I have my own plot/character theories to fill in holes in the DS plot.  I also pick and choose from stories I've read, or heard, to construct a personal continuity beyond what we saw in the show.  Does that mean anything?  No - except maybe that I'm kind of a guber, but hey, it's one of the things I like doing.  'Official' continuity is the show itself.  I don't believe that recognizing this "traps" one in the past tense, but rather, is an acknowledgment of the source material as canonical & authoritative.

   All this is really neither here nor there I suppose.  It's all fiction after all.  Except, of course, some of the fiction is 'official'.  Hee hee hee.   
 

i won't go so far as to compare d.s. to great cinematic works but no matter how many novels,sequels,comics,etc. one could come up with for "gone with the wind" or "the wizard of oz" there are just fans who will only accept what actually happened during the two or three hours of the original films as what was real about them.

Actually "The Wizard of Oz" film is just an alternate version of what "really" happened in the Oz universe created by L. Frank Baum in the novel "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz" and numerous sequels.

I still love the movie, though, and I also thoroughly enjoyed Gregory Maguire's "Wicked".

As for DS, it is amazing how many separate "official" (that is, created by DC Productions) realities there are... you have the universe of the original tv show, the universe of HODS, and the universe of NODS, not to mention the separate realities of the remakes.  I wonder if any other series in television, film, or literature has quite as many independent takes on a basic theme involving many of the same characters and locales?

Just for the record:

I don't "disapprove" of writing fanfic, putting on new skits, etc.  Hell, when I had more time, I used to churn out the fic with the best of them (albeit my production speed leaves MUCH to be desired).  I just think there needs to be a differentiation between fic/pastiche/whatever and the original, aired shows.  The latter are canon.  These are established terms widely used in media fandoms, and I think they are used because they are helpful in charting the complicated terrain of shows that have attracted as much activity on the fic front as Dark Shadows (or Star Trek/Wars).

I have to admit I'll never be able to get very excited about the concept of a remake of the series.  Too bad the WB version vanished without a trace.  It did sound like something different enough from the original to be judged on its own merits.  I'm afraid I find that very difficult to do with the edition DC produced in 1990.

G.

All that canon really means is "I like this story less than this story" -- ultimately, it just doesn't matter.

Actually, the American Heritage Dictionary defines "canon" as "(b). a basis for judgement; a standard or criterion."

That's how we're using the term: it (the original series) is the common ground we all share that allows us to compare any and all aspects.

And if it doesn't matter who likes what story, why do we all find it so entertaining to come here and discuss it?