Movie as canon

[David <dfrankiswork@netscape.net>]

Heidi asked:

> Since this is the movie list, though, let me make this post fully 
on
> topic by asking a question - those of you who came to the HP 
series and
> the fandom through the books - do you consider the films to be
> canonical, and if so, why?

I think this question is deeper than some of the answers have 
allowed.

If you take it literally, then of course only the books are JKR's 
canon: the films are part of Columbus's (and Cuaron's) canon.  Or 
you can define canon slightly differently and say they are Kloves's 
canon.  Or you can *define* canon to include the movies.  But, to be 
honest, I don't think that's the point.

I think there is an issue: in what sense can the Potterverse be 
considered to have a coherent existence, other than strictly in 
JKR's canon?

I remember there was a very interesting post about eighteen months 
ago to the main list raising essentially this question in regard to 
fanfic, and drawing comparison with oral traditions pre-printing 
such as the Arthurian romances or the Iliad.  (And, Heidi, pointing 
out the cultural relativism of the notion of copyright).  There were 
virtually no replies IIRC. I will see if I can dig it out.

I don't know the answer to the question, but I don't think it will 
go away, particularly once Book 7 has been published.  The desire to 
maintain and extend the illusion will spawn variant universes and by 
some mysterious process some will be considered more 'canonical' 
than others in the fandom.

More later on OT on the notion of reality in the Potterverse

David