From: Dana Shilling dshilling@worldnet.att.net
Steve's typology:
Mine, actually
Noncanonical - a flat contradiction of the canon.
Some stories are intended as AUs (e.g., Blake as Coriolanus) which is a different approach then "oh, stuff canon."
I would say that all AUs are Noncanonical (though I think Anticanonical is a better term than Non) by definition, since by their nature they contradict canon in some way.
There are also things that might be termed permanent vs. disposable items--i.e., I've written a lot of stories that take a consistent view of certain issues, and only one story in which Gan is a werewolf. I don't REALLY believe that Gan is a werewolf, but...
I suppose the canonicity of that would have to depend on how you regard werewolves.
Further item to add to the typology: Altercanonical - the integration of canonical, subcanonical and extracanonical elements into a consistent and coherent structure that embrace the entire series, usually for a series of fictional pieces rather than an individual story. One story in such an altercanon might then refer to subcanonical or extracanonical elements introduced in another element of the altercanon. The altercanon might therefore penetrate or emerge from the canon at any point, hugging the canon like scaffolding around a building.
Subcanon - Blake loved Inga (an interpretation of the kiss)
However, he could have loved her as a family member, or as a precious reminder of the past that was taken away from him
And either would be a particular subcanonical interpretation.
Extracanon - Blake was the father of Inga's illegitimate child who was
taken
away from her at birth by the Morality Police, inspiring Blake to join
the
Freedom Party and vow to overthrow the Federation (invented backstory
that
canon neither supports nor refutes).
Nice one! Are you going to write it?
Nope.
Noncanon - 'Inga' was really Tarrant in disguise.
Crikey! Hair straightening technology must make great strides! Oh, and don't forget Inga-clones and Inga-androids programmed to kill Blake.
They would be extracanonical, not anticanonical.
Neil