metaphasia (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
metaphasia) wrote2013-03-04 09:39 pm
metaphasia) wrote2013-03-04 09:39 pm
Entry tags:
On the Space between Explicit and Implicit
Anyone who has played tabletop or board games has most likely been involved in a debate over the rules of the game they are playing. The tabletop gaming community often characterizes debates over rules into the camps of RAW versus RAI; Rules as Written and Rules as Intended. This debate does not simply exist in the realm of gaming however; the heart of this debate can be found in many areas; in legal terms, it is the difference between the letter of the law and the spirit of the law. The difference in both cases is whether a document captures all the necessary important points of the matter or whether it was written incorrectly or incomplete.
This same debate also manifests in other areas, such as fandom. And in fandom, this forms the difference between what I call explicit and implicit canon. I haven't heard these terms used before, and a quick google search reveals they're not in common usage at least, so I am unsure if these concepts already exist under different names, but I think they are pretty self-explanatory in the context that I use them for.
Implicit canon represents the same mental attitude as the Rules as Intended and the spirit of the law; that the matter seen in the canon is a representative sampling, and not the whole of the canon. On the other hand, explicit canon represents only the material seen in the original work and nothing else.
The difference between these two camps can sometimes be absurd, as the debate over the bathrooms on the Enterprise shows, but the I think it provides an important point of contention in a different type of argument, namely that of character interpretations. Many times, because an author can only feature a limited number of scenes in a work, they can inadvertently leave out scenes that support some aspects of a character's personality, and trust that the aspects that they leave out of the explicit canon will still be believed by the readers as part of the implicit canon of the work.
One of the authors that I think is extremely guilty of this sort of omission of details is JK Rowling. I think the most telling example of this in Harry Potter is Ron Weasley. It is rather obvious that JK Rowling intended for Ron to be a likable, brave character who is somewhat immature, but ultimately a loyal friend to Harry. However, because of the fact that the focus of the limited number of scenes in the book and the natural focus on conflict instead of on normal times, means that Ron's character flaws become more pronounced than his positive traits. We see Ron's jealousy and immaturity manifest repeatedly throughout the books, and are meant to assume that he is becoming more mature as time progresses. However, because it represents an opportunity to display interpersonal conflict between the heroes, he continues to display these traits throughout the entire series until the very end.
Because of this fact, there is a very large difference between the versions of Ron that exist in implicit canon and explicit canon. I think that this difference is what leads to such an intense difference between the ships of Ron/Hermione and Harry/Hermione in Harry Potter; some individuals base their opinions on what ship they prefer on the version of the characters that are explicitly presented in the novels, and some based on the version that is implied based on what JK Rowling intended the characters to be.
And though I think this dichotomy is most pronounced in the Harry Potter fandom, this same difference exists in every fandom. The difference between what is explicitly stated and implicitly meant will always exist in every canon, because there is always more to be told than can fit in any story. And this difference is a good thing, because it is what allows differing interpretations of a text. It is what allows fandom to thrive, because it is in the nuances and corners of canons that fan works come from, because if there was ever a canon that had no difference between the implicit and explicit canon, it would be complete and there would be nothing for fandom to fill in.
This same debate also manifests in other areas, such as fandom. And in fandom, this forms the difference between what I call explicit and implicit canon. I haven't heard these terms used before, and a quick google search reveals they're not in common usage at least, so I am unsure if these concepts already exist under different names, but I think they are pretty self-explanatory in the context that I use them for.
Implicit canon represents the same mental attitude as the Rules as Intended and the spirit of the law; that the matter seen in the canon is a representative sampling, and not the whole of the canon. On the other hand, explicit canon represents only the material seen in the original work and nothing else.
The difference between these two camps can sometimes be absurd, as the debate over the bathrooms on the Enterprise shows, but the I think it provides an important point of contention in a different type of argument, namely that of character interpretations. Many times, because an author can only feature a limited number of scenes in a work, they can inadvertently leave out scenes that support some aspects of a character's personality, and trust that the aspects that they leave out of the explicit canon will still be believed by the readers as part of the implicit canon of the work.
One of the authors that I think is extremely guilty of this sort of omission of details is JK Rowling. I think the most telling example of this in Harry Potter is Ron Weasley. It is rather obvious that JK Rowling intended for Ron to be a likable, brave character who is somewhat immature, but ultimately a loyal friend to Harry. However, because of the fact that the focus of the limited number of scenes in the book and the natural focus on conflict instead of on normal times, means that Ron's character flaws become more pronounced than his positive traits. We see Ron's jealousy and immaturity manifest repeatedly throughout the books, and are meant to assume that he is becoming more mature as time progresses. However, because it represents an opportunity to display interpersonal conflict between the heroes, he continues to display these traits throughout the entire series until the very end.
Because of this fact, there is a very large difference between the versions of Ron that exist in implicit canon and explicit canon. I think that this difference is what leads to such an intense difference between the ships of Ron/Hermione and Harry/Hermione in Harry Potter; some individuals base their opinions on what ship they prefer on the version of the characters that are explicitly presented in the novels, and some based on the version that is implied based on what JK Rowling intended the characters to be.
And though I think this dichotomy is most pronounced in the Harry Potter fandom, this same difference exists in every fandom. The difference between what is explicitly stated and implicitly meant will always exist in every canon, because there is always more to be told than can fit in any story. And this difference is a good thing, because it is what allows differing interpretations of a text. It is what allows fandom to thrive, because it is in the nuances and corners of canons that fan works come from, because if there was ever a canon that had no difference between the implicit and explicit canon, it would be complete and there would be nothing for fandom to fill in.