So, the writers hired by Bethesda who write all the text are not the authors?

If that is your claim, then I'll just have to cite irreconcilable differences and proceed with our divorce. In my view, every writer, who has wrote at least one line in a TES game or novel, is a co-author to the TES universe.

good thing I wasn't implying it was.

I was responding to Wayman's pot that there are multiple canons in Star Wars.




when you are hired by a company you become PART of it. The writers are part of Bethesda as a tentacle is to an octopus. the tentacle isn't a individual creature it is a part of a larger one.

As long as they are doing work for Bethesda they ARE part of Bethesda.

Stories don't really belong to anyone. Absolute privation, I would argue, violates the very purpose of story-telling. Narrative is not a product, it's a [censored] service. Stories are language given the power of transformation, not just description. They ennoble mankind, and really, truly, belong to everybody.

Bethesda only owns TES in the sense that they deserve to be paid for the labor that they put into this service. Which is entirely besides the point that the series wouldn't be nearly as interesting, this lore forum be nearly as active, without MK's continued contribution. Love him on hate him, he's really the reason why you and me and Lady N and all the other due-paying members of the Imperial Pedantic Society are posting messages right now. Perhaps it's not canon, but only in the not-approved-by-Church-censors manner.

Thus, I think we can reach a compromise by calling the MK liturgy Apocrypha.

By all means, to quote a man whose prime motivation for his work was selling action figures. It really helps your case.

You mean like how Bethesda's primary motivation for creating games is to make money?

So, as I said, you view authors as cogs.

The point being, there's the full scope of the Star Wars universe, where the licensed novels and other extended universe items are comparable to the books in TES, and are of varying authenticity in regards to what is true canon; then there is the only real official canon, which is told through the narrative of the games, similar to how the true Star Wars story is the one shown in the movies.
The in-game books in The Elder Scrolls are optional extensions to the narrative canon, and how accurate they are to the official story is up to the reader.

Although it is true that we don't even know what is "official" in the game's narrative outside of the events of the Main Quest (assuming you complete it successfully).

I see you made a typo.

Unless you actually think that it's inconceivable that anybody at Bethesda might actually like their job?

Whatever. You keep bringing it up as an example, though, of "canon laws."

The real point of my post was to get you to show evidence of Bethesda not caring what MK says.

Being in it to make money and liking what you are doing are not mutually exclusive things

The goal of all business is to make money first.

I would love to work at Bethesda. The video tour that they released makes it look like it'd be awesome to work there.

Anyways, Bethesda gives us the Main Quest, then some books of varyingly questionable content, then lets us engage in http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/WMG/TheElderScrolls to establish our own scope of the canon. Personally, I hold MK's works at the same level as any book in TES, or Mankar Camoran's philosophies: read it, learn from it, but never take it as a 100% literal transcription of the true canon.

When they, or anyone else for that matter, are part of a giant corporation like Bethesda they are.

If they had made the game themselves I would view them differently.

To focus merely on "Canon" always seemed to me like trying to grasp a grey-shaded world through black and white glasses. "There's canon, and there's non-canon. Fullstop." The way Elder Scrolls lore and stories are built seems to deliberatly avoid putting things in such black and white terms - the grey shades seem to be wanted by Bethesda. (As Pentirei also pointed out.) Why then insist on said glasses? It's not easy to find out what's "True" and "Untrue" in the real world. Does it have to be easy in a fictional one?


Hand of Sotha

It isn't easy even when Canon has been specifically stated. Look at the Fallout forums people still go back and forth on "what is canon" after it was specifically stated, because there's lot of gaps in the Fallout canon.

The Fallout bible fixes all giant parts of those gaps and was written by a guy who made a good chunk of the lore for Fallout, but they know that the Fallout Bible isn't canon because it hasn't been approved by Bethesda.



I would love for MK's works to be canon for the same reasons I would love the Fallout bible to be canon. It solves everything.

Probably depends on what specific things about a game world are discussed. The question whether Hammerfell borders on Morrowind or not can be answered by looking at "Canon". But a lot of the Lore discussed here is far more mythology than geography, and "True" and "Untrue" don't seem to be the best aids to really grasp what mythology's about ... Science is about facts, stories on the other hand tend not to be. I wouldn't be surprised therefore if many Lore fans react even allergically to the term "Canon" - I know I do.

edit: Maybe "fact" and "not fact" would be better terms here than "true" and "untrue".




I see what you mean, but do we really want everything to be solved for us? I mean, the fascination in a riddle does not lie in being told the solution, is it? Or being given a quick and complete summary of a story, in the case of a book?

That's exactly one of the things so many people around here love MK's posts; having been one of the creative minds behind a lot of lore, he can offer us insights that help us in unravelling it by ourselves. He doesn't forget all he knows at the moment he stops being paid by Bethesda, after all!


Hand of Sotha

Bethesda is the author of TES in the way that the Medici are the artist for some of Leonardo da Vinci's works. The authors might not own their work anymore but they are still the authors.

Arrogant you keep using that word. I don't think you really know what it means

Well, we'll have to agree to completely disagree on this one. They are out and published its to late for a take back is my stance obviously you disagree. IMO Of course their visions overtake any fans thoughts but once something is published/filmed there are no takebacks while maintaining credibilty and integrity.

I'm actually convinced most of Star Wars vision was the writers and aids ( Including some top flight SF writers like Leigh Brackett) who really got it. He was just a guy with a very vague idea at best of "his vision" and was unable to really understand the subtlies once the real detail archetects were gone.

I agree. I love how most lore sources are pssibly very bias or even just made up in game sources. It makes the world seem more mysterious and real. I hope thet always keep things that way.

Forgive my jumping in 5 pages deep. I'm usually more of an observer (been lurking since before Oblivion under one forum handle or another), as I'm still trying to get a handle on TES lore after starting with Morrowind. My question to CandleJack would be: would it make you happier if when someone linked to a writing of MK, they mentioned that it is not confirmed canon by Bethesda, but helps make sense out of currently unanswered questions? I'm trying to find out why this discussion has gone on so long when it seems like splitting hairs. Some (A lot? I don't know) of the stuff MK has written is canon. Undoubtedly some of the stuff will turn out to be canon when we see what story Skyrim tells us. Some likely won't be. I don't think we necessarily need to stamp a [Canon] or [Not Canon] label on everything we discuss in this forum - that would be silly.

Take The Seven Fights of Aldudagga, for example. It seems to be that it is written from the perspective of a Nord handing down a traditional story. The cultural understanding of the piece may only partially reflect "actual" events. It has a perspective on it, and that gives it a certain "spin" if you will. Just as a traveling Imperial in Skyrim may hear the tale and choose whether to believe it as 100% fact or not, so I too look at MK's writings. I enjoy the fantastical style of them, as I am sure most of us here do. Maybe they are not canon in the sense that Bethesda has not stamped [Canon] on everything he has written, but they sure make a lot of stuff make sense (or intentional non-sense as the case may be).

I hope I'm adding to the discussion instead of muddying the waters.

Appreciate your being helpful; the part of the problem is that CandleJack does not want people to even link to MK.

Here's my post that started the whole chain of contention:
http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1250528-akatoshalduin-the-world-eater/page__p__19044897#entry19044897

Right beneath it, CandleJack posted:



Basically, he doesn't want people to even link to MK at all.

I find your assumptions funny, you understand nothing of what I want.

You explicitly said, in your first post in this topic:



I explicitly said:



What's the assumption I made? What did I misunderstand?

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

lets see

-This is a discussion about lore
-This discussion is happening in a lore forum
-We are discussing what is canon
-I said "People need to stop linking to Michael Kirkbride"
-I also said "This spreading of misinformation that ES fans seem to love to perpetuate needs to end"

Given the above statements it should be clear that MK shouldn't be linked to when discussing lore. but since you obviously ignored my 5th listed object you didn't realize that.


Did I ever say no one should link to MK EVER for any reason? NOPE.

Why not? Much of what he has written can help one's understanding of the "lore" as it stands. I also think a distinction needs to be made between canon and lore. The two are not necessarily the same thing. In my mind, lore includes both canon and non-canon writings, postings, etc. that bear on the lore of the TES universe. That's similar to saying we shouldn't make reference to writings of the Framers of the US Consitution when discussing and trying to figure out what specific provisions may mean when confusion arises.* Any of MK's writings that are not currently confirmed in a game are still potential canon (because some of his writings have made it into canon in the past). Some may enter canon through Skyrim. Maybe none of it will. If some of his writings are not specifically referenced, but lead to the same facts that exist in the game, do those writings still remain non-canon? If so, can they at least inform?




*=(I am aware that there is a school of thought that believes just this, but I respectfully disagree with them)

Discussions about lore aren't necessarily discussions about canon - at least that's the way I understand it. (And as I tried to point out earlier.) You cannot reduce mythology to a matter of correct and incorrect, or of "right" and "wrong"! Those, however, are the only distinctions made by Canon ...

Why then this insistence upon the importance of Canon?


Hand of Sotha


edit: Didn't see Othniel327's post before posting myself. Just imagine a "As Othniel already pointed out:" or something at the beginning of my post. :hehe: