By Joe Douglas
NOTE: This article is something of a follow on from the Phantom For All article as well as a response to discussion on that article that can be found at the Phantom Phorums.
One of the biggest debates in the Phantom community is what exactly makes up Phantom canon.
Canon, generally, is considered to be material that comes from an original source or author, so in the case of The Phantom Lee Falk’s stories are canon. However, this is not a golden rule and, as with Falk’s stories, sometimes these canonical stories contradict themselves.
In the case of contradiction there are two main approaches that readers can take. The first of these is the “principle of first mention.” Basically this means that whatever fact was printed first is canonical. For an example lets use Joonkar /Joomka as an example. Falk originally called the character Joonkar so the later re-naming to Joomka is not considered canonical under this approach.
The second approach, however, does the opposite. In this instance if something is changed or retconed then the change becomes canon. So, once Falk changed the name from Joonkar to Joomka the name was, in essence, retconed and Joomka became canonical.
But then one has to consider the stories that occur after the original author stops writing. Things can become tricky here. Lee Falk may have been the original creator of The Phantom, but the character is owned by King Features Syndicate. In effect, Lee handed over all control of the character to KFS once he signed that deal and therefore the ability to affect canon as well. As KFS now own the Phantom it could be argued that any story they give the OK to can be considered canon. So, in essence, everything Egmont, Moonstone, DC, Marvel etc have done is canon.
But doesn’t this affect the rule of “principle of first mention?” Well, yes, if that is the way one decides to look at canon. But only for certain things. If Egmont changed the name of a character that name change would NOT be canon. However, Lubanga becoming president is still canonical. Why? Because Lee never stated anywhere the Luaga would remain President indefinably. Yes, Lee wrote Luaga as the president during his stories but he never indicated that this could never be changed. There for Luaga losing the presidency is not a breach of canon.
Of course if we use the second method of looking at canon than everything Egmont (and Moonstone et al) has done is canon. As explained this can hold true because KFS own the character. Also, because Egmont is, in essence, carrying on the work of Falk and is therefore a continuation it is not a breach of canon.
If you want to go further you can take into account “expanded universe” stories. In The Phantom these would be stories such as Phantom 2040 and Defenders of the Earth. Generally these would not be considered canon but there are exceptions. When the hit British TV series Doctor Who ended in the early 90s the series continued on through various novels and audio dramas. Stories of both the current (7th, and then the 8th after 1996) Doctors as well as past Doctors were recounted. Generally stories appearing in such mediums (mediums removed form that which the character originally appeared in – in this case TV) are considered expanded universe stories but with Doctor Who they are considered canon by most fans and also, to a certain extent, the creators of the current series of Doctor Who as well as the BBC itself.
So 2040 and DotE could be considered canon if the individual wished. Also, because they don’t contradict any established continuity there is just as good a case for them being canon as against. This can also be extended to the Marvel and DC mini series.
Because comic characters enjoy something of a floating continuity (or time line) things can be said to happened “between” stories. For example, the DC series sees the Phantom propose to Diana so these stories could be said to take place “between” those that Falk wrote between the proposal and the wedding. This could also be argued for the current strip, Egmont and Moonstone tales; they all belong to the same time line, the same continuity, but they happened between and around each other.
As you can see canon is a very subjective thing. The only true way that a definitive canon can be given is if a representative of whatever franchise in question comes forth and declares what is and what is not canon. For example in the 1970s and 80s Franz Joseph published a number of Star Trek reference books that were declared canonical by Gene Roddenberry (creator of Star Trek). Therefore, everything in the books was official canon and all that was left out was not. As this has not happened with The Phantom nothing can truly be said to be “in” or “out” of canon.
However, an official canon can still be undone. In 1988 as part of the release of Star Trek: The Next Generation Roddenberry and Paramount Pictures changed their policies on canonicity and therefore Joseph’s books became non-canonical.
Canon is a very hard thing to put ones finger on definitively. Unless an official representative of KFS states that such and such is official Phantom canon and all else is “extended universe” it is, like most things in the Phantom’s world, left up the the individual reader to decide what is and what is not Phantom canon. Thusly, people who feel that only stories written by Lee Falk are canon are not wrong and, in turn, those who feel every single Phantom story ever published makes up the totality of Phantom canon are also correct. And every opinion or variation between those also has a good argument for being considered canon.
It’s probably safe to say that as an overall body that the Phantom phan community will never agree upon one, true canon as different people read and regard fictional stories in different ways. Perhaps the best thing to do is also the simplest – read what you enjoy, everything else is just fluff.
Referances:
Canon (fiction) @ Wikipedia
Phantom Phorum posts
Special thanks to pcsarka for the Joonkar/ Joomka example.
Discuss this article on the forums.