Is Aftermath Canon?

W

Willow-Tree

Your Childhood Trauma
Joined
Dec 14, 2008
Messages
1,361
Location
US of A
I just finished Angel: After the Fall (And Spike: ATF) yesterday, and before I move on to Kelley Armstrong's arc, I was wondering if it's even canon?

Any help?
 
The last time I checked, it wasn't. The writing's not impressive either. Though I have only read issues #18 and #19 of Aftermath, so I don't know if that changed/changes. A way to check if something's canon or not is this: If it's got Joss's name on it, it is (safe for the BtVS movie) and if it doesn't it's not unless stated otherwise (again, by Whedon).
Maybe someone else can elaborate on that/has more updated information than me because I lost interest in the story pretty early because of Kelley Armstrong's take on the characters.
 
B
Buffyverse Fan
Aftermath gets even worse.
They aren't considered canon because Joss doesn't write them, plot them, call them canon, or anything else like that. There is hardly any fanfiction available for After the Fall though, so if you want the characters to live on Aftermath is pretty much your only choice.

However, issue 23 (the Gunn issue) is largely considered canon, despite being part of Aftermath, because Brian Lynch wrote it and he's really high up on the Writer-God Scale after being the sole writer of the new Angel canon for so long.

Second however: There is supposedly an ongoing Spike series coming up that will be written by Brian Lynch and considered canon. It's really hard to find information about it though and I don't think he's said whether any other characters from the actual show will be in it.
 
Revolver said:
My point is it doesn't matter what is "considered canon." It's fiction. You can interpret it however you want to.
Click to expand...

I think you might be using a different definition for canon (?) than us because canon isn't about interpretation, it's about fact. If we could choose fact we would never be able to discuss anything properly. And, yes, fact matters with fiction too. How else could we have this forum with all these lovely debates? No one would be able to support their arguments if they could pick and choose canon.

Can't you just picture it? "Nope, sorry. Season 6 isn't canon. Spuffy never happened." 😉
 
Flannen
Flannen
I can picture it! And it looks beautiful :p
W
Willow-Tree
Damn you! SPUFFY IS THE ULTIMATE FACE OF ~LOVE~!
B
Buffyverse Fan
[No message]
None of the comics are part of the show though, nor will they ultimately be what people remember about Buffy twenty years from now when new viewers discover it. As far as most people are and will be concerned, the story ended either with "Chosen" or "Not Fade Away." Really there isn't any such thing as facts in terms of a fake universe where demons and vampires roam the Earth. I know what canon means. I just think it's a silly concept. Even in history, half of the facts you read are utter b.s. This board is full of the biggest Buffy fans on Earth and even here a lot of us don't read the comics. It's an entirely different medium, and in my opinion does a poor job of continuing the story of Buffy because they completely lack the feel of the series. I'm not saying that makes them bad, but rather bad for me. They're pretty easily ignored if you feel the way I do, but who am I to deprive others of their enjoyment? And really, what's the point of reading any of them if you can't let yourself believe it happened because Joss didn't personally write them? Point is, take them or leaving. It IS entirely up to you, not Joss or anybody else.
 
U
ubi4soft
but the retcon with Buffy and the Immortal..it's canon
B
BillyidolwannaB
Pretty much how i view the comics too.
You're absolutely entitled to not like them or read them! I'm not saying that. Whether or not canon is a silly concept isn't what the original question was. It's about whether the term applies to certain things- and by its own definition it has to apply to the comics. Quality and what people will remember have absolutely nothing to do with the qualifications.

Quick question, if you don't mind answering, because I've always wondered this and now is my opportunity to ask someone: Movies aren't the same medium as television so why do people accept Serenity as canon for Firefly, but use the "different medium" excuse for comics?
 
Mumrik
Mumrik
[No message]
Amanda108 said:
Quick question, if you don't mind answering, because I've always wondered this and now is my opportunity to ask someone: Movies aren't the same medium as television so why do people accept Serenity as canon for Firefly, but use the "different medium" excuse for comics?
Click to expand...

Probably because TV series and movies are a closely related medium, much more closely than television and comics. That all of the actors reprised their roles in "Serenity" probably helped, too. Also, comics, in my opinion and experience, are a lot more obscure than that.
Plus, there's still some of the geek/basement dweller with no social life stigma involved. You get more weird looks when you say you like comics than when you say that you like certain, - for lack of a better term - equally geeky TV shows.
At least, that's how I experienced it.
 
A
Amanda108
[No message]
Amanda108 said:
You're absolutely entitled to not like them or read them! I'm not saying that. Whether or not canon is a silly concept isn't what the original question was. It's about whether the term applies to certain things- and by its own definition it has to apply to the comics. Quality and what people will remember have absolutely nothing to do with the qualifications.

Quick question, if you don't mind answering, because I've always wondered this and now is my opportunity to ask someone: Movies aren't the same medium as television so why do people accept Serenity as canon for Firefly, but use the "different medium" excuse for comics?
Click to expand...

I'm not Revolver, but I have an answer for that:

When most people think of a character, they think of the actor or actress that portrays said character. Even though the comic characters are drawn to resemble the actors/actresses, it's still kind of hard to accept that it's still Buffy or Angel. I hope that's a good enoguh answer! 😛
 
A
Amanda108
[No message]
Thanks to both of you for the answers 🙂 I still think that if movies are considered canon for TV that comics should be too, but what you said helps me understand why some people might see it differently.
 
Revolver said:
None of the comics are part of the show though, nor will they ultimately be what people remember about Buffy twenty years from now when new viewers discover it. As far as most people are and will be concerned, the story ended either with "Chosen" or "Not Fade Away." Really there isn't any such thing as facts in terms of a fake universe where demons and vampires roam the Earth. I know what canon means. I just think it's a silly concept. Even in history, half of the facts you read are utter b.s. This board is full of the biggest Buffy fans on Earth and even here a lot of us don't read the comics. It's an entirely different medium, and in my opinion does a poor job of continuing the story of Buffy because they completely lack the feel of the series. I'm not saying that makes them bad, but rather bad for me. They're pretty easily ignored if you feel the way I do, but who am I to deprive others of their enjoyment? And really, what's the point of reading any of them if you can't let yourself believe it happened because Joss didn't personally write them? Point is, take them or leaving. It IS entirely up to you, not Joss or anybody else.
Click to expand...

If canon is a silly concept, then don't try and change the definition of canon to "whatever you want to believe." Reject it. Say "I don't care if it's Canon or not, I choose to enjoy it even if it's not Canon." However, making this choice does not change the definition of the word canon and allow you to make stuff canon.
 
A
Amanda108
[No message]
Anyone heard of 'fanon'? It's a good term to know. It's when people have their own take on canon, regardless of what the general opinion of canon is. Like for example ignoring something that happened on the show.

To me Aftermath isn't canon, because Joss hasn't said so. Which means that he, as the highest authority within the verse, can contradict Aftermath as he chooses. In case he says it's canon, he would probably have to consider it in the future, more than he probably does now.

Mumrik said:
The last time I checked, it wasn't. The writing's not impressive either. Though I have only read issues #18 and #19 of Aftermath, so I don't know if that changed/changes. A way to check if something's canon or not is this: If it's got Joss's name on it, it is (safe for the BtVS movie) and if it doesn't it's not unless stated otherwise (again, by Whedon).
Click to expand...

Joss names is on another comic, Long Night's Journey, or whatever it's called, but taht doesn't make it canon. I think he co-wrote it, but he hasn't said it's canon, so it's most likely not, regardless that his name is on it.

Willow-Tree said:
Actually, there is a pretty strict rule as to what to consider canon, and what not to.
Click to expand...

Which rule?
 
M
Megalita
It's been awhile since I've heard "fanon," but agreed!
Skytteflickan88 said:
Joss names is on another comic, Long Night's Journey, or whatever it's called, but taht doesn't make it canon. I think he co-wrote it, but he hasn't said it's canon, so it's most likely not, regardless that his name is on it.
Click to expand...

I've never heard of that one but Joss doesn't have to say it's canon because with his name on it, it's safe to assume it is until he states otherwise, like with the '92 Buffy movie.
 
S
Skytteflickan88
I'm going to re-read it and see if in contradict anything in canon and get back to you.
AA, did you mean Atf isn't canon because of George?

It was a while since I read Aftermath, but he isn't mentioned at all, is he?
 
Given that Aftermath contradicts most of the major arcs of the series, I'm going with "NO."

Both TPTB & Angel himself are characterized radically differently. Armstrong contradicted Whedon, Fury & Bell, I'll go with the show-runners over her. She says Angel's saved enough souls to consider himself atoned for Angelus' murders, in S5 Angel said that his good deeds will never make up for the lives he's taken, and Fury, Whedon & Bell say the whole point of his character is that he's on a seemingly never-ending journey of redemption.
 
S
Skytteflickan88
How was that said? Aftermath was nice, but not good enough form me to read several times so I'm fussy on things.
Skytteflickan88 agrees: How was that said? Aftermath was nice, but not good enough form me to read several times so I'm fussy on things.
Click to expand...

I dug up an old post I made:
Joss Whedon, David Fury & Angel himself all got overruled on what Angel is all about! By whom you ask? The "great" Kelley Armstrong!

Kelley Armstrong says:
On Angel- "I think he has redeemed himself, between the work he did in the TV series and After the Fall," and has Angel say I've redeemed my past.

David Fury (Angel S5 Show Runner) says:
"The point of Angel was always that the fight never ends. He'll always fight. It's an eternity of fighting. You can't ever win but the fight is worth fighting."

Joss Whedon (Angel Creator & Owner) says:
"Angel is really about already having grown up, dealing with what you've done, and redemption. Redemption is something you fight for every day."

Angel says:
"Well, I guess I kinda - worked it out. If there is no great glorious end to all this, if - nothing we do matters, - then all that matters is what we do. 'cause that's all there is. What we do, now, today. - I fought for so long. For redemption, for a reward - finally just to beat the other guy, but... I never got it. All I wanna do is help. I wanna help because - I don't think people should suffer, as they do. Because, if there is no bigger meaning, then the smallest act of kindness - is the greatest thing in the world."

So Joss, Fury & Angel say that Angel's path to redemption is a battle that he'll always continue to fight because it's not something he can simply win. Armstrong apparently overruled them all, she says not only can Angel's redemption be won, but HE DID IT! Mission Accomplished! Angel = redeemed!

She also overruled Joss on what is Buffyverse canon! Yay for Kelley Armstrong!

Joss says ancillary work (like Kelley Armstrong's) is great, but it's just like fanfic. Buffyverse canon is what he writes. And he pays "not very much" attention to the ancillary works since they're not canon.

Armstrong says:
Aftermath "will continue that storyline and subsequent storylines will follow from it. So, yes, it's considered canon." "it 'counts' - it continues the main storyline of the series"

An especially bold statement since she admits that Joss has ZERO involvement with her work except for simply allowing it to exist.

Boy do I feel bad for Joss, overruled on the series he created and currently owns... tisk tisk...
Click to expand...

Skytteflickan88, it's been a while for me as well, but I'm pretty sure Armstrong has Angel saying that in the very beginning of Aftermath
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom