3 ms·
My point is the author's is also a headcanon. What they do have the right to - which fans don't - is to write fiction which can legally generate revenue referen
by vslantiprocrast 2y ago
My point is the author's is also a headcanon. What they do have the right to - which fans don't - is to write fiction which can legally generate revenue referencing their previous works. And within those pieces of fiction they will generally refer to their headcanon, but it's no more special than the fans'
edit: using an alt bc I use antiprocrast on may username and wanted to answer. hey, it's a saturday!
- traject_ 2y ago> And within those pieces of fiction they will generally refer to their headcanon, but it's no more special than the fans'. If it's the same author writing these pieces of fiction, then speaking by definition, the author's opinion is more special by being the creator of those works and therefore can create fiction that reinforces their headcanon (which is why it's called canon). So I think calling the author's opinion less special is wrong for the author's tie to the work will always be more special than the consumer by virtue of being the creator.