How Distracting Are Deviations from Canon?
| Meta | |
|---|---|
| Title: | How Distracting Are Deviations from Canon? |
| Creator: | the pouncer |
| Date(s): | July 10, 2006 |
| Medium: | |
| Fandom: | Stargate Atlantis |
| Topic: | |
| External Links: | How Distracting Are Deviations from Canon?; WebCite; another archive link |
| Click here for related articles on Fanlore. | |
How Distracting Are Deviations from Canon? is a post by the pouncer at the Stargate Atlantis fiction discussion community, The Cutting Board.
This essay has a focus of The Pegasus Society.
There were 76 comments.
Some Topics
- deviation from canon
- a fan's investment in a show may correlate to how much they care about canon details
- availability of canon resources that fans take for granted today
The Essay
I’ve been thinking about making this post for a while, because I read a lot of Atlantis stories, and frequently I’m thrown out of a story (that isn’t an obvious alternate universe) because of deviations from canon that seem random or nonsensical. In my less charitable moments, I chalk those deviations up as errors, as mistakes that could have been caught by a good beta or by researching the show a bit more. Other times, I’m able to shrug and continue. But it always lessens my enjoyment of the story in question and if the deviations are too egregious, I stop reading and go on to the next one.
There have been stories that I thought were otherwise marvelous, but the canon deviations were too overt for me to embrace them fully. I’m not talking about characterization, because that’s often in the eye of the beholder. As a reader, I try to immerse myself in an author’s words, but if a story contradicts canon for no good reason that I can see, my critical faculties blare an alarm: wait, what was that? Why? Why would XYZ happen given that the show said ABC? Instead of going with the flow of the story, I’m busy trying to problem-solve. I can’t relax and enjoy the writing, because I haven’t been given a basis for the changes. Suspension of disbelief only takes me so far.
Of course, I like canon. I like the show; I think it has room for stories that are humorous and funny and romantic and adventurous and serious and angst-filled – an entire spectrum of emotion and potential without venturing into alternate universes, although those can be cool too.
For the purposes of this post, I want to discuss Sabine’s (iamsab) The Pegasus Society (McKay/Sheppard, NC-17). She does what writers are told never to do and switches point of view freely between John Sheppard, Rodney McKay, and Atlantis and it works. The story takes place after the events of The Brotherhood, and this is where I start to have problems with canon deviations.
There seem to be three types of deviations:
(1) Things that directly contradict what was shown on screen, during an episode.
Bates is a Lieutenant in the story, while he was clearly a Sergeant throughout the first season.
(2) Things that are logically inconsistent with what was shown on screen, yet don’t contradict anything specific.
There is coffee in the story, while Rodney says Atlantis is “almost out of coffee” in Underground. Maybe he had a secret stash, but it stretches my suspension of disbelief that no explanation at all is given for the continued existence of coffee in Atlantis some weeks later.
(3) Things that contradict reality, given that Atlantis is supposed to take place in the “real world”.
Rodney eats donuts. We were never told that there weren’t donuts in the latter half of the season, but I know enough about cooking that it seems farfetched that scarce resources would be devoted to mixing flour, sugar, and yeast and deep frying in oil to produce nutritionally-bereft sweets. Especially given the episodes devoted to locating food for trade and the emphasis on Atlantis’ isolation and need for supplies to ensure basic survival.
The latter point is more fluid, because the way things happen on the show doesn’t always align with the real world, so it’s definitely subjective. If the show is patently unrealistic about something, should a story hold itself to a higher standard or go with the show canon? Try to find some sort of middle ground?
The truly weird thing is that small changes would have made The Pegasus Society into an ideal story for me. Have Rodney eat some sort of Athosian sweetcake, drink tea and complain about running out of coffee. Remember that Bates was a Sergeant and didn’t get a surprise promotion to the officer corps. The writing in the story is fresh and enjoyable, and it doesn’t retread ground already walked in Atlantis fanfiction, but the things I list above pull me out of the flow just enough that I’m not fully satisfied.
In other stories (that I haven’t bothered to track down for this post), I get confused when it’s first season but Major Lorne is present and best buddies with Ford. Or when Ford and Ronon are palling around Atlantis. Or when Weir and Sheppard and McKay and Beckett took the Daedelus back to Earth at the end of the siege, since it was established in The Intruder’s dialogue that they opened the stargate and walked through to Stargate Command. Or (and this is definitely a personal tick) something having to do with recent military history on Earth is wrong, like the US being in Afghanistan during Desert Storm.
serialkarma and I were discussing this topic a while back and she said that whenever she notices one thing that deviates from canon, she no longer feels she can trust the author, and spends the rest of the story wondering what else is going to be off. And that kind of sums it up for me. Deviations from canon bother me. I notice them, they jolt me out of a story, and then I can’t immerse myself in reading for a fully satisfying experience.
How do you feel about deviations from canon? Do you notice them? Do they bother you or not? Are there things that you see all the time? Things that don’t fit into the three categories above?
Excerpts from Comments
[mari4212]: I sometimes don't notice deviations, if they're subtle or it's been a while since I've seen the episode which contradicts. However, I agree, when I notice them they do really jar me out of the story.
I think the main thing that upsets me is the sloppiness it shows, because it makes me think that the author of the story didn't care enough to get their facts right. And then, as you say, it does make me start to doubt the rest of the story, especially characterization-wise.
[terrie01]:
Deviations from things that HAD to have been known to the author annoy me. Enless there's an obvious reason for it, it just strikes me as sloppy. If it's one of those "I started this prior the that coming up on the show," it doesn't bother me. So, for instance, if the story was written between seasons, I'll let the Daedelus example go. Since I don't go around rewriting stories because of the show, I'm not going to make others do it.
[wickedwords]: It's very odd, but while contracting canon bothers me, contradicting reality...doesn't. I already have the stargate universe set as an AU in my mind, so as long as the rules of that universe aren't violated, I tend not to notice. Example: The navy helicopters don't bother me as I write that off as one of the rules of the stargate universe, that air force guys can fly those planes as well. Which means that something like Afghanistan doesn't bother me, as obviously, the stargate universe's military history is different from ours, so it's possible that that could have happened. Nothing excludes it, and canon makes it clear that it's different, so I just go with how the author sets it up. It doesn't violate stargate canon, so that works for me.
I do appreciate it when authors work to reconcile reality and stargate universe stuff, as I don't expect them to do that. It's extra credit to me, and they get props for working it.
Extending those thoughts, something like 'eating donuts' doesn't bother as I just mentally assign it to the 'they have a flour-like substance, and an oil-like substance, and a sugar-like thing, and they make something that are like donuts' without the author having to tell me all the details behind it; I am happy to take the short cut.
(And I am growing tired of all the something-like stuff that shows up in fanfic. Mentally, the expedition would just call it 'butter' if that's what they used it for, even if it came from a 3-legged sloth-like thing. They'd stop using the long versions within a few months, and then when the daedelus arrived, everything would taste weird and wrong. It's like baking powder in the US is different from baking powder in the UK, but both are called baking powder and they do approximately the same sort of thing. It's still called baking powder no matter where it comes from, and donuts would be approximately the same thing. Only blue and tasting ever-so-slightly of fish.)
So I guess I'm saying that only direct violations of canon bother me, and it has to be something easy, like Lorne and Ford together.
And I'll forgive almost anything for good pacing and clever banter.
[the pouncer]: It always interests me to hear how people read stories - what you describe as shortcuts are routes that I just can't find when I'm reading.
The military history stuff probably bothers me because it's my career field and an area of abiding interest, but I can handwave scientific details in stories just fine *g*
I think I'd rather have the acknowledgement, however scant, that things like the food aren't quite the same. You're right that butter and milk would probably be called just that, but when it's some strange vegetable? I'd think that they'd go with the native name instead of assigning "faux-broccoli" or the like. Tava beans!
[introductory]: I tend to forgive most deviations of the inconsistent kind -- sometimes there's a reason for such deviation to be explained later, or it's just not that incongrous as to bother me. Sure, I'll blink and go, "Huh?", but unless it's completely off I'll let it go, especially if it's just a minor detail in an otherwise well-written story.
I'm more of a stickler for canon in SG-1 rather than SGA, since I haven't seen all the episodes yet, but general off-characterization bothers me. I recall, however, a relatively uninteresting SG-1 story in which Daniel owned a house (instead of an apartment) and Jack was strangely over-affectionate, and after the requisite blink I closed out the window and started on the next fic.
[the pouncer]:
Isn't it odd which fandoms we demand the most from? I know that I've read in other fandoms where the deviations I described above wouldn't have bothered me at all. It's a sign of my love for Atlantis that I want perfection *g*
[mswalter]: I tend to be a canon-freak, both in my own writing (obviously not in SGA, but other fandoms) and in my reading. I love love love it when good writers are sticklers for canon. And while I can forgive some deviance from canon, especially in a really well written story, I am so much happier when it doesn't happen.
I think I remember the Daedelus story (where the author wrote that the characters had taken the Daedelus back instead of walking through the stargate), and I stopped reading. That's the kind of canon mistake I just can't move past. Same with combining first- and second-season characters for no good reason. I mean, that's just a matter of paying attention, it's not even *research*.
Things like the donut and coffee examples you mentioned? If I notice them they'll bug me, but they probably won't take me out of the story completely. And the sergeant/lieutenant mix-up? I agree with what serialkarma said: It won't kill the story for me, but it makes me distrust the author just that little bit. It's called fact-checking, and in a lot of ways, I consider it an authorial responsibility to get the basics right.
I'm glad you wrote about this, because I've often wondered if I'm just particularly hard-core about my devotion to canon. I don't notice it quite as much in SGA as other fandoms, probably because I'm not *quite* as obessive about SGA, but when I write, I fact-check like crazy, both in regards to canon and real life (in the last OC story I wrote, I actually looked up the floor plan for a local hospital to find out what floor ICU is on -- but, um, that's probably overly obsessive). And while I don't quite demand the same level of accuracy from other writers that I expect of myself, I do appreciate it, and I do notice the mistakes.
[carolyn claire]: I know the science in the SG uni is, well, silly, a lot of the time (the 'instant aging' thing bothers me SO much, as does the retrovirus mutation thing), but that doesn't mean I don't want writers to at least try to make the science (or anything else) in their story plausible. It's annoying on the show, so it's okay to make your story annoying in the same way? Erm. I really appreciate an author who works at reconciling what we're given with what's somewhat more real and who doesn't add to my annoyance over the implausible aspects by adding some of her own. That said, sometimes a story is otherwise so good that I'll bound gleefully over the unlikely or incorrect bits. *g*
I do find myself on the 'huh, that really didn't bother me' side of the discussion a lot (when it's a story I've really enjoyed, usually), but I know what you mean about wanting that perfect story that's brilliant in every way, with no niggling (and, sometimes, easily catchable, woe) flaws. I think stories get harder to write 'accurately' the more like an episode one tries to make them. I mean, once our OTP gets out of bed, the potential for factual error just increases. (Well, and even before, I suppose--sometimes people just don't bend that way. *g*)
The stories that really blow me away are those that are jam-packed full of plot and people and setting and action and still seem to get it all right, in that nothing seems to be wrong, you know? I'm thinking of some of Auburn's stories, here, and I know there are others. That level of attention to detail awes me.
[kalikahuntress]:
I find deviation from canon annoying when it affects characterization. The science thing I could care less about because I have yet to see any sci-fi show take science seriously so I don't get too upset about it, even though I am a genetics major. Also, contradicting things that have been said or have happened on the show are really irritating to me as well.
[mmmchelle]: I haven't read the story you used as an example, but I would have stopped as soon as I hit Lt. Bates. It's the kind of mistake that would cause me to wonder if the author has seen the show, or is just drawing on the fanfic she's read.
The donuts would also have thrown me out of the story for the reasons you mentioned, although I might have been willing to accept careful coffee rationing.
Getting history wrong makes me mutter under me breath and also tends to make me question the writer's awareness and knowledge of the world. Including Afghanistan in Desert Storm would annoy me to no end, and I would probably stop reading. History matters and I tend to look askance at people who don't know basic facts about their own country's history. If I knew the author wasn't from the US I might be able to overlook it. I have the same reaction whenever someone has Jack serving in Vietnam in an SG-1 story. It throws me completely from the story.
Of course that extends well beyond fanfiction to real life where I have little patience with people who have scant knowledge of recent history.
[thegrrrl2002]: I had to think for a while before answering this, because like most things in life, my answer is 'well, it depends'. For the most part, deviations from canon don't bother me very much. The canon issues with "Pegasus Society", while noticable, weren't a huge issue for me. (Maybe because I don't really like the "sentient Atlantis" genre in the first place, so that took precedence.) But in general, if a fic is entertaining, and hits the right characterization notes for me, I can overlook a lot. As long as its not too overt - the kind of thing where I wonder if the person has ever seen the show.
But if the characterization feels off (and I know that's a very subjective thing), I'm bothered a lot more. I'm much more likely to stop reading a fic if I'm pulled out of the moment by "John would never do that".
[hardlyfatal]:
Not to be hugely contentious, but the assumption that McKay and Sheppard's relationship is/becomes something romantic/sexual is a significant deviation from canon in itself. If you're going to be nitpicking re: whether Bates is a lieutenant or a sergeant or if they'd waste resources making doughnuts, I think discussing the application of bi- or homosexuality to two characters who have both demonstrated interest in the female gender in canon could be a pertinent addition to this discussion.
[sweetvalleyslut]: Well, we've never heard Rodney or John specifically say, "I'm 100% straight, and I don't like to have sex with men." (Not that that would stop any of from writing slash, probably.) We *do* know, specifically, that they are running out of coffee and basic food sources, from statements made in canon.
I'm not saying that I think McKay/Sheppard (or any other SGA pairing other than Laura/Carson and John/Random Bimbo, for that matter) is canon, but it's a totally different issue.
[liviapenn]: I would agree with sweetvalleyslut and pouncer that, until we actually get a canon episode where, like, John is dosed with truth serum and says he's 100% straight, then that's not canon in the same way that "Bates is not a lieutenant" is canon. You can look at John (or Rodney) in canon and interpret his behavior as the behavior of a guy who's 100% straight, or you can interpret it as the behavior of a guy who's gay (and resigned to being totally closeted) or gay (and having as much clandestine gay sex as possible) or happily bisexual and totally into both cute girls and guys, or totally repressed and confused-- human beings are so complicated, just about any interpretation works.
On the other hand, "Bates is not a Lieutenant" is based on factual knowledge of how the Air Force works; there's no way to "interpret" that to mean anything different. So I don't think you can say that, for instance, slashing John is the same as changing Bates' rank.
But what I *do* think is interesting is that often people will alter canon in their stories to *support* their slashy (or shippy) interpretation, and nobody ever seems to point these things out as un-canonical-- maybe because that would be seen as attacking the pairing, as opposed to just picking at the details?
[millefiori]:
When going into a slash story, the reader expects a romantic/sexual relationship between McKay and Sheppard (or whomever the story is about) and is prepared to suspend disbelief. If I were reading an AU/AR-labeled story that said Bates is a lieutenant, I would chalk it up to Bates choosing a different career path in this alternate universe/reality and move on. However, in a story set in SGA canon--which is the default unless labeled otherwise--a story with a clear canonical error, such as Bates being a lieutenant, is going to be a problem for some readers, because there will be a jarring moment when the reader's brain says, 'Wait, I thought X! How did Y happen?'
[percysowner]:
I'm really out of place here, because I'm just renting season one SGA from Netflix, and I missed several season 2 episodes, so cannon mistakes totally bypass me. That aside all I really want is an entertaining story, that has people as characters I can relate to. Now, repeated bad spelling and grammar are another story. They can take me out of a story completely, but that is a discussion for anther day.
[kodiakbear]:
Definitely. Finding well written fic usually makes me so happy I can tolerate a lot! The up side is SGA is so prolific that there's good stories almost every day. It's one of those 'YMMV' issues (your mileage may vary). There are some stories I just don't get and they might be hugely popular but mostly I'm an easy to please reader. :)
[veracity]: *slowly walks into metadom again* Last time, I didn't have so much fun when I went atalking.
I honestly don't mind a deviation, such as food or coffee, because it doesn't really impact the story. For me, during those times, I usually assume the person is giving the readers a reference point to get the image of it. It's a lot easier to say "doughnut" than "a small, circular fried food with a hole in the middle that was nearly the exact same thing as a doughnut on Earth." Like I said, "doughnut" means I can move on to the more important aspects of the story, like plot.
And to be perfectly blunt, the science and military mentions fly completely over my head. I can't pass college algebra and I've tried three times (maybe more, I stopped counting after awhile), so I usually just smile and nod along like I understand what the heck they mean. Physics was passed in high school by being a senior in junior level clases and whining. Whatever it took to graduate. Before I Sleep's theory of infinite universes within each other (I'm guessing that's what they meant; see: math and science stupid student.) was only slightly clarified when they demonstrated it with Elder Weir. And as for military terms, so lost on those. I just enjoy the story, canonically speaking, so in fics it doesn't bother me.
If they can set up where the characters interact, like Ford and Ronon in a plausible plotline, I'll read it. And like the Daedelus (and I really need to stop making that "e" into a second "u") trip to Earth, well, I thought that until I rewound and watched that part again. Then the lightbulb went off of "Oh, right. They did the wormhole way, much quicker. Makes sense." I can't fault someone for thinking that since I did it. Little things, and to me there's so much information about the series that something to that extent falls under little, don't annoy me. Not even rank half the time. Unless, of course Sheppard is suddenly Lord King of Military Command, and then it's like "uhm, even I know he's not that high up the totem pole, thanks."
The biggest thing that makes me back button is characterization, and as everyone has a different view, that's extremely subjective. Doesn't mean that I can see Rodney suddenly becoming James Bond and getting all the girls though. That has a tendency to make me backtrack more than anything. The good thing is that those usually happen from beginning and before I get in too deep, a back button is quickly clicked. Though I've read some recently that just make me cringe and hide because I don't understand their perceptions of the characters at all.
Mind, these rules never apply to AUs, like crack ones, since that was the first thing I read in the fandom to begin with. So my perceptions might be a bit off, especially since I hadn't seen more than maybe 2 hours total of SG-1 before SGA. That might help too, who knows.
[zvi likes tv]:
I tend to get annoyed by major deviations from canon and 'simple facts your high school should have taught you' problems (these are things that tv writers often get wrong, like on Smallville, when Lana Lang is a sophomore in high school and also the manager of a coffee shop not owned by her family. Child labor laws, anybody?). That being said, I would not have noticed the issue with Bates, and I would chalk up Rodney eating donuts to Rodney's relationship with food, which seems to favor quantity over quality. If it's round and sweet and doughy, it seems to me he'd be quite content to call it a doughnut instead of mumbling through whatever they call it on P3X 432, you know? But I tend not to sweat the details of canon unless it's something that I think would impact the characterization of a major character.
[minnow1212]: A giant “it depends.”
Characters who were written off in season 1 showing up in season 2 bugs. But a lot of other things I won’t even notice unless I’ve been watching the source material lately. Some things I notice only because I’ve read them on someone else’s pet peeve list. (I.e., someone on my flist posted a little while ago about how McKay’s piano teacher is identified as a guy in Redemption, and I made a note to myself of, "Don’t forget that!" and now I’ll notice when the teacher is referenced as female. Or the spelling of Kavanagh.)
For the things I do notice, it doesn’t usually stop me from reading the story. At least, ones of the sort you mention above wouldn’t bug me. (I probably wouldn’t even notice the donuts thing, not least because I’ve read the "faux-donuts" conversation in enough other stories that I can fill it in myself.)
I know as a writer I worry about making that sort of mistake--because I’ll fact check the things I *know* I don’t know, but sometimes it doesn’t occur to me to check because something’s In My Head as a Fact I’m Of Which I’m Convinced. Like, I would double check Stackhouse’s rank before I used him in a story, because I’m not 100% sure of it. But it wouldn’t occur to me to confirm that Ford’s a lieutenant. So I don’t necessarily read that sort of mistake as lack of care/willingness to check/sloppiness, but as the experience where something enters your brain as undisputed fact, just, it’s wrong.
[dossier]: Oh, me again. I went and read The Pegasus Society just to make sure I ws working within the same reference frame.
1. Lt Bates. It didn't even see the words, actually. I'm sure it's there, but I was so totaly distracted by the Math Porn, that it completely escaped my notice.
2. Donuts & Toast. I read them, rolled my eyes and moved along. Ditto for Coffee. I think I was more focused on the Alteran database, and the level at which the AI focused on the Dysfunctional Duo.
I think that I was able to disregard the glaring errors because Sab's very interesting writing style. I did notice the constantly switching POV, and I was thrown a bit here and there by it. What I did notice was the amount of time & resources McKay's allocated to a MENSA test, with the Wraith only a few weeks away. However, I can be easily distracted by Porn, so I just rolled with it. Also, it was an interesting take on McKay & Sheppard, their interaction on the gymnastics mental and physical. I'd still rate it as a damn cool story, despite the issues!
[stungunbilly]: I've noticed that it depends heavily on a few major factors: 1. What kind of story it is. In a story pitting a character against a challenge that involves logical deduction and the use of detail (surviving alien wilderness, figuring out a logic puzzle, etc.), any deviation from internal logic or canon BLARES at me like a foghorn. In a romance? Not so much, except for poor psychology (if only SG:A-brand psychology, which is weird enough). 2. My mood. 3. How much SG:A fiction I've been reading, and what it consisted of/its quality.
If I just read something that highlighted certain aspects of canon, then I'll notice a random deviation in the next story I read.