The Canon Rule

[Tom Wall]

Jen Reese:
I've always interpreted the canon rule to mean you actually quote 
from the book or an interview with JKR, and base an argument around 
that (but then, I take things very literally <g>). 

Dicentra Spectabilis:
Being "canon based" means that the theory or argument is based on
known facts as established in canon (books, interviews) rather than 
on the movies, fanfic, or other material.  

It is not necessary to provide the exact quote to be canon based.  It
is also not necessary that the theory or argument be particularly
plausible (though "plausible" is a subjective term), just that it
start with canon and go from there. /END QUOTE

Tom, in his first post to Feedback:
Hey all! I've been following along here since Day One, but haven't 
yet been able to post my concerns due to time constraints and, uh, 
the fact that everyone else is very on top of the ball in their 
observations and suggestions. It's quite easy to feel rather 
redundant once one actually gets through everything that everyone 
else has to say.

IMHO, that is a Very Good Thing. ;-)

However, I figured that I'd briefly chime in here on this canon 
discussion. 

When I first joined HPfGU in January 2003, I read through the HBfile 
and was struck by the extensive explanations concerning canon: what 
it is, when to use it, how to use it, and so forth. From my *first* 
impression, canon was a Big Deal, and it was important to cite it 
correctly and copiously. 

Therefore, in order to not look like a buffoon in front of so many 
prolific members, I made a concerted effort to buff up my own 
knowledge of the books; I also took to carrying them around with me 
so that I'd be able to cite the canon properly.

When the HBfile was revised a little while ago, I noticed that - in 
contrast to the old file - the new document gave canon almost no 
attention. I mean, 'canon' was mentioned as a word, and it was used 
in explanations of the prefixes we use on the boards, but a full-out 
description of canon and its various attendant uses wasn't to be 
found anywhere in the new HBfile.

I wrote a letter to the Administrators at the time, but don't recall 
hearing anything back on the topic. And the HBfile hasn't since been 
revised to add more information about canon.

It stands to reason that the decrease in canon citations by new 
members, and the larger lack of attention to canon itself (not by 
all list members, to be sure, but by many) as of late might be the 
result of this teensy alteration to the HBfile. 

Since this document consists of - basically - the first major bit of 
information any newbie will process, I think that it would be 
beneficial for everyone if canon got more press in there. 

Would it be at all possible for the Admin Team to re-add that canon-
section from the old file? You know, not necessarily the whole 
thing, but something more than what is there now?

Anyways, thanks for some seriously illuminating reading, everyone: 
there are lots of great ideas zooming around here, and I hope to be 
able to participate more over the next few weeks!

-Tom