77,281
edits
Changes
m
→Why the term "Canon" or "Canonicity" is problematic
''There’s a misconception that writing in somebody else’s world is somehow cheating. Certainly world creation is given a lot of weight in genre fiction circles (too much in my opinion). The fact is, it doesn’t matter how much material there exists for a setting, the world must be created anew by the author every time they write a story or novel. It is the writer’s ability to evoke the world through their words that is important, and that doesn’t get any harder or easier whether you created the world yourself or are borrowing someone else’s.''"<br>
Source: [https://mechanicalhamster.wordpress.com/2010/01/21/jumping-the-fence/ Mechanical Hamster: Jumping the Fence (published 21 January 2010)] ''(last accessed 15 April 2020)''
|align = center
|width = 75em
}}
[[Philip Sibbering]], artist for [[Black Library]], has also elaborated on the issue on his [https://philipsibbering.com homepage]:
{{QuoteBox
|quote = "''Games Workshop ‘canon’ is often quoted in many a forum argument, and while many game universes do have a strict canonical source that can be quoted as ‘fact’, 40K seems to have a very liberal view of what ‘canon’ is and how the background books, novels and ‘colour text’ should be viewed.''<br>
''[...]''<br>
As I understand it, is that there is no strictly ‘canon’ background and it’s all down to interpretation. In addition the Black Library uses an extended or expanded version of the 40K background and the Wargame uses are restricted background. [...]''<br>
Source: [https://philipsibbering.com/warhammer/gw-canon/ Philip Sibbering: GW Canon] ''(last accessed 15 April 2020)''
|align = center
|width = 75em
