Bungie Universe
This topic has moved here: Subject: Summa Canonica
  • Subject: Summa Canonica
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • of 4
Subject: Summa Canonica

Goddamn. Look, I'm not one to say tl;dr and walk away, but really? Is there really no simpler way you could say this, or do you just get a kick out of writing huge posts using complicated prose just to make people feel dumb?

  • 01.29.2011 1:08 PM PDT

I am a monument to all your sins

Im sorry dude, but I cant read all that, you need a short summery or something at the end

  • 01.29.2011 1:32 PM PDT
Subject: Summa Canonica - The Ideal Halo Canon Policy

It's fine the way it is. An intelligible topic for an intelligible discussion. The OP put a lot of time and effort into it, he shouldn't have to reduce it to a layman's version.

People who dislike it or entirely fail to grasp it should not be vexing those who don't. Big boards, many topics, the time would be better spent in threads more adequate to them.


That said... Kudos to you, OP, totally awesome. Honestly, without any bias towards 343, I fear for the health of our Canon and what might be done to it in the near future... Although it might not be necessarily bad, a Halo 4 might screw things up. Royally.

[Edited on 01.29.2011 2:00 PM PST]

  • 01.29.2011 2:00 PM PDT

"Once Bungie takes over the world, The Marty Army will take over Bungie and then we'll really have some fun."
-Marty O'Donnell

"Condemnant quod non intellegunt."

Make Bungie.net More Enjoyable: Read & Follow

Posted by: GanonSmash
Goddamn. Look, I'm not one to say tl;dr and walk away, but really? Is there really no simpler way you could say this, or do you just get a kick out of writing huge posts using complicated prose just to make people feel dumb?

A concise and short nature was my goal; I understand the great length, but I could not compromise necessary information. Every word is designed to be as simple and efficient as possible, there is no other purpose (I redirect that accusation to the second addendum "Defense of Style").

To you and Darthbill, I suggest you read Part VI "Conclusion" for a summation. Basically, I'm tired watching Halo be seen as going downhill because there's supposed junk being produced by 343 Industries. I agree about the junk - that's a different discussion - but what I really want to hit home is that the Halo Canon cannot be negatively affected by any said "junk" from 343 or whomever, because then it is just acanonical. For a simpler explanation of this, read my parable in the reply to the first Relativist objection in the Apology to Part II "A Definition" in "Pars Secunda".

See, I just gave you essentially 110k+ chars in about 1k. But when I state this as simply around here, people still disagree and call me all sorts of names. I addressed all their rebuttals so they can't do that anymore.

EDIT: Thank you, Soundash. I agree.

[Edited on 01.29.2011 2:04 PM PST]

  • 01.29.2011 2:00 PM PDT

I didn't have any trouble with length, but I will say the techno-babble doctorate thesis level language 'caused me to only skim it all. I know I would definitely go back and read it all if it was written more understandably in average language.

  • 01.29.2011 4:37 PM PDT

Posted by: SEAL Sniper 9
Somebody has a lot of time on their hands...


This. And that's coming from a bloke who has written a 340 page fan fiction in the past.

:P

I'll skim read it at some point if I've got the time, but the topic isn't interesting enough to justify such length and intricacy.

[Edited on 01.29.2011 6:11 PM PST]

  • 01.29.2011 6:09 PM PDT
Subject: Summa Canonica

You look unto me now through the profile screen found at http://www.bungie.net/Account/Profile.aspx. Here we are, mutually faceless, both ones in the Seventh.

It's going to take me a long time to read through all this.

Better start now...

  • 01.29.2011 6:24 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

One day... I am gonna grow wings... A chemical reaction... Hysterical and useless... hystecial and let down and hanging around... crushed like a bug in the ground.

Eyes bleed...

Yes but I agree with you 100%

  • 01.30.2011 1:09 AM PDT
Subject: Summa Canonica - The Ideal Halo Canon Policy

"Once Bungie takes over the world, The Marty Army will take over Bungie and then we'll really have some fun."
-Marty O'Donnell

"Condemnant quod non intellegunt."

Make Bungie.net More Enjoyable: Read & Follow

Posted by: OrderedComa
I didn't have any trouble with length, but I will say the techno-babble doctorate thesis level language 'caused me to only skim it all. I know I would definitely go back and read it all if it was written more understandably in average language.

Again, I revert to my "Defense of Style" in the second addendum. If I included a word that is unnecessarily wordy, without conveying any deeper meaning in shorter space than an explanation, then I apologize for this imperfection. But I did include a conclusion to sum up everything and drive home my main point - and that is short and understandable.

  • 01.30.2011 11:40 AM PDT

O_o

...
Thread saved

  • 01.30.2011 12:02 PM PDT
Subject: Summa Canonica

"Once Bungie takes over the world, The Marty Army will take over Bungie and then we'll really have some fun."
-Marty O'Donnell

"Condemnant quod non intellegunt."

Make Bungie.net More Enjoyable: Read & Follow

Posted by: Darthbill99
Im sorry dude, but I cant read all that, you need a short summery or something at the end

To help you and others with similar complaints, I have transcribed this into an HTML page for easier reading than these small, messy Bnet posts. Just please, understand my key message: no matter what 343 does with Halo, that can't negatively affect the Halo that Bungie has shown or diminish our enjoyment of that canon. Thus, people saying "I'm done with Halo; it is starting to get milked to death like Star Wars and I'm just escaping before it gets any worse" and similar comments are just dumb and unfortunate.

  • 01.31.2011 11:55 AM PDT

Signatures are for squares.

Ok, I'll be completely honest. I only read the first post. I didn't read the rest, not because it was too long, but because based on that post alone I assume you wanted to merely outcast everything 343's done because, "Bungie didn't do it." I may be wrong, but rather than waste 20 minutes reading a bunch more posts on a topic that I personally disagree with, I'll just say.

As of late, Bungie's works have been absolutely horrible when compared to what 343's recently done.

Bungie:
Halo 3 ODST - Added absolutely nothing "new" to the Halo canon. It was a fun expansion, but unnecessary and does nothing for the universe overall. (Other than screwing with Canon. Yes, they expect us to believe every single Elite in the city was killed within 5 minutes, and that Brutes were somehow deployed to kill these elites in the 30 seconds Buck spent in his pod...)

Halo Reach - Bungie simply took Halo canon behind the shed, pointed a gun at it's head, and pull the trigger. I'm not going to go in detail with all the canons errors here. I have a 40 page thread dedicated to that already.


Now, what has 343i done recently?

Halo Evolutions: Arguably the best Halo novel. Tons of stories. TONS of things explained to us for the time. Interesting stories, and new opportunities opened up to us. (Such as SIII headhunters)

Halo Cryptum: An amazing book. Details the Forerunner history in an amazing way people have been asking for, for years. The book handles everything perfectly, and although some canon regarding the terminals was broken, the book handles these breaks as it says things we've been told before aren't the entire truth.

I would much rather take 343's canon over what Bungie's done recently. They practically ruined the entire Halo canon with Reach. 343's left with the mess to clean up on their own.

That's just my opinion on this matter. My apologies if this isn't what the thread was about.

  • 01.31.2011 1:19 PM PDT

I am Field Master Avu Med 'Telcam, Servant of the Abiding Truth, and I have many brothers.

A god who creates tools is still a god. It is not for us to impose qualifications upon the divine or presume to guess its intentions.

My thoughts.

  • 01.31.2011 1:57 PM PDT

"Once Bungie takes over the world, The Marty Army will take over Bungie and then we'll really have some fun."
-Marty O'Donnell

"Condemnant quod non intellegunt."

Make Bungie.net More Enjoyable: Read & Follow

Posted by: privet caboose
Ok, I'll be completely honest. I only read the first post. I didn't read the rest, not because it was too long, but because based on that post alone I assume you wanted to merely outcast everything 343's done because, "Bungie didn't do it." I may be wrong, but rather than waste 20 minutes reading a bunch more posts on a topic that I personally disagree with, I'll just say.

I understand the lengthiness, but I very much suggest that you privet, especially, read the rest. If I want this to be read by only five people, you are one of them. The policy itself does not, as a matter of definition, "outcast" 343's work. My process is so logical and methodical (which is a necessity due to the large conflict of opinion) it pays no regard to whether the canonical artifact was composed by Bungie or 343, excluding the Halo Trilogy, which does hold a special position. Now, I'm sure you think much better of 343 than I do, and given your history on this forum I have surmised that we are disposed to disagree over those specifics; however, to accept the policy itself is of utmost importance because it provides logically-sound structure to your arguments supporting an artifact of Halo Canon, 343 or Bungie authored. I just want us to be able to analyze parts of Canon and determine where they fit; this provide common standards and processes so I can prove you wrong in your specific argument for 343 whatever, and vice versa. I am just as happy to be persuaded as I am to persuade in the specific matters of canonical analysis. And I'm confused over how you say that you "disagree" with the topic; the topic is about this canon policy that I want to become a standard around here to end pointless arguments about canonicity relative to each person. What you seem to disagree with are the comments about my personal suspicions of 343, which is a fine discussion to have.


As of late, Bungie's works have been absolutely horrible

Granted, the quality has dropped below that of the Halo Trilogy. Without question. "...Halo Trilogy, assumes the most accurate and true canonical body published for the effect of this story and Idealism compared to that of supporting canon in their two most recent interactive graphical publications..." That does not nullify this policy. Your criticism of ODST is a bit exaggerated, however I would be foolish to dismiss the apparent inconsistencies between Reach and the established canon, which I must admit are great. This policy discusses what is to be done about that.


Now, what has 343i done recently?

Halo Evolutions: Arguably the best Halo novel. Tons of stories. TONS of things explained to us for the time. Interesting stories, and new opportunities opened up to us. (Such as SIII headhunters)

Halo Cryptum: An amazing book. Details the Forerunner history in an amazing way people have been asking for, for years. The book handles everything perfectly, and although some canon regarding the terminals was broken, the book handles these breaks as it says things we've been told before aren't the entire truth.

Those two canonical artifacts are the two best published by 343, and likely the only two which I find acceptable. I judge that Halo Legends outweighs these largely good things... but that is a different argument. This policy does not exclude automatically things that come from 343 any more than it does Bungie, with the exception of the Halo Trilogy. It even acknowledges the fact that there very well may be true canon found in things like Legends.

I would much rather take 343's canon over what Bungie's done recently. They practically ruined the entire Halo canon with Reach. 343's left with the mess to clean up on their own.

That's just my opinion on this matter. My apologies if this isn't what the thread was about.

One of my key points is that you don't pick and choose ("take") a canon. There is one True Halo Canon that we must find. If I talk more about this... I'll just be rewriting what I've already written. Please read this; the entire reason I wrote it was because I am continually pained by statements like this: "They practically ruined the entire Halo canon with Reach." No matter what Reach was, regardless of all retcons/inconsistencies, this statement of yours cannot be true and is the exact mentality I hope to deter, most of all, with this. Please give it a read and show me how I'm wrong, so can either accept your view or correct yours.

  • 01.31.2011 1:59 PM PDT
Subject: Summa Canonica - The Ideal Halo Canon Policy


Posted by: paulmarv
One of my key points is that you don't pick and choose ("take") a canon. There is one True Halo Canon that we must find. If I talk more about this... I'll just be rewriting what I've already written. Please read this; the entire reason I wrote it was because I am continually pained by statements like this: "They practically ruined the entire Halo canon with Reach." No matter what Reach was, regardless of all retcons/inconsistencies, this statement of yours cannot be true and is the exact mentality I hope to deter, most of all, with this. Please give it a read and show me how I'm wrong, so can either accept your view or correct yours.

The reason you came to that conclusion, and that you wrote the article in the first place, is that you're using a definition of "canon" that means, roughly, the ideal and eternal background structure that ought to drive the series.
When most people refer to the "Halo Canon", they're referring to a body of work, not this ideal thing.

When most people say "Halo Reach damaged canon", they're saying that Reach created inconsistancies in that body of work, which is, if you were to flesh out the entire intuitive model of those attacking Reach for "damaging canon", roughly an equivalent statement to you saying that it's not in agreement with the ideal canon.

So as far as I can tell, your article doesn't introduce anything new or provide a new means of approaching the issue, rather it merely lays out a specific basis for viewing it that differs from the one people are currently using.


Though I admit I only read the first few pages and then the last few; I don't mean to be rude, but there's no other way of saying it: if you were going for concise language, you didn't do it very well. It's possibly to simultaneously be unambiguous and simple, it just involves carefully avoiding the hidden metapfhors present in common speech.

[Edited on 01.31.2011 2:20 PM PST]

  • 01.31.2011 2:16 PM PDT

"Once Bungie takes over the world, The Marty Army will take over Bungie and then we'll really have some fun."
-Marty O'Donnell

"Condemnant quod non intellegunt."

Make Bungie.net More Enjoyable: Read & Follow

Posted by: Tupolev
The reason you came to that conclusion, and that you wrote the article in the first place, is that you're using a definition of "canon" that means, roughly, the ideal and eternal background structure that ought to drive the series.
When most people refer to the "Halo Canon", they're referring to a body of work, not this ideal thing.

You could imagine idealisms for any thing; that's not my point. The True Halo Canon (which is my specific term that I used to not be confused with the general dictionary meanings of the word "canon") is a visible, existent, and real thing as seen in words such as the Halo Trilogy. It is very hard for me to have this discussion if you haven't read my entire OP... your specific points seem to be addressed in "v. Question of Identity" in "1. A Catechism" of "III. A DEFINITION" in Pars Secunda. It is evident you skipped this section.

When most people say "Halo Reach damaged canon", they're saying that Reach created inconsistancies in that body of work, which is, if you were to flesh out the entire intuitive model of those attacking Reach for "damaging canon", roughly an equivalent statement to you saying that it's not in agreement with the ideal canon.
Granted, this is a logically sound statement. I'm not arguing for or against the accuracy of Halo Reach; privet has a good thread on that going. For the purposes of this discussion, as an example, let it be known that I fully acknowledge the inconsistencies Reach has with the other revealed canon. Given the Specific Reflexivity of Halo Canon (part one of the scope of the same part that I mentioned above), there must be imperfect canonical manifestation. (Read "iii. Reasonable Manifestation" - that is also most relevant to your statements)

So as far as I can tell, your article doesn't introduce anything new or provide a new means of approaching the issue, rather it merely lays out a specific basis for viewing it that differs from the one people are currently using.
This is a rudimentary understanding of my OP that is understandable for only having read the first and last parts. "V. PROCEDURES FOR AN EXCLUSIONARY ANALYSIS" provided some sound, good, and orderly guidelines for the individual analysis of a potentially canonical artifact. I also discussed underlying theory of canonical interpretation (and more specifically, the hermeneutics of "Implicitness" which is another section you are apparently ignorant of due to your abridged reading) However, the "view" alone, as you call it, has significant impacts on what people accept as canon and what they do not. They need to understand that the Halo Canon is not the literal and exact content of the canonical publications. I thoroughly disproved this in the Reply to the First Objections to Reasonable Manifestation, part 3 of part 1 of part 3 in Pars Secunda.


Though I admit I only read the first few pages and then the last few; I don't mean to be rude, but there's no other way of saying it: if you were going for concise language, you didn't do it very well. It's possibly to simultaneously be unambiguous and simple, it just involves carefully avoiding the hidden metapfhors present in common speech.
You seem to be an intelligent person; I have full faith is someone of far less sophisticated linguistic ability to understand what I have said. I mentioned the uselessness of communicating in a language unintelligible to others in various places throughout my OP, but in application to my canon policy. I hold the same belief for this communication process. If I used any language or word that could have been more efficient (I talk alot about this in "ii. Idealism and Implicitness" and in the specific defense for this - which I anticipated - in the second addendum) but was not as concise as possible, then I failed and made an error. I apologize, in this case. But I have full confidence that you will be able to cope with my disability and understand my words.

  • 01.31.2011 3:16 PM PDT

Usually I don't mind long reads when I've got time, but this is a 12 post long read, at least 110,000 characters. Is there any way you could sum it up, maybe not in a short way, just in at least one post so I'd actually have the will to read this?

  • 01.31.2011 7:25 PM PDT

The Forerunner, the Great Journey, and Heaven Theory

[Announcement Trailer] Halo: Forerunner

Posted by: Agustus
I lol'd at the absurd miscommunication that occurs whenever dibbs post something. Perhaps his brain is so highly evolved that he can no longer clearly communicate with lesser life forms, even among his own species.

-Working through it, will edit eventually -

The terminology used is a bit over the top (forgive the analogy but it's akin to a college student using the thesaurus tool on every other word of his essay) and gives the impression of pretentiousness (I don't mean to criticize but it's my honest reaction to it after reading the first two posts). Although, if your strategy was to ward off those not intelligent enough to contribute to the topic at hand then I must congratulate you on accomplishing that goal (as evidenced by the posts ITT) and may have to use that strategy myself in future posts.

  • 01.31.2011 10:41 PM PDT

Don't worry, you're still your mom's favorite Bnet member.

I'm usually not one to say this, but for the love of God...
TOO LONG DIDNT READ

  • 01.31.2011 10:44 PM PDT

Don't worry, you're still your mom's favorite Bnet member.

Posted by: Wolverfrog
This. And that's coming from a bloke who has written a 340 page fan fiction in the past.
Which was extremely enjoyable, by the way.

  • 01.31.2011 10:45 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Heroic Member
  • gamertag: Serpx
  • user homepage:


Posted by: GanonSmash
Goddamn. Look, I'm not one to say tl;dr and walk away, but really? Is there really no simpler way you could say this, or do you just get a kick out of writing huge posts using complicated prose just to make people feel dumb?


Haha, definitely not just you. I know the defense was made from the author against this post, and that all the words were "necessary", but I know this could've been typed a lot better. I mean, for one, why the latin? How is that "necessary" ? "SVMMA CANONICA", "To be oversimplified into unjustly bereft and inadequate terms, terms that, in the interest expediency and brevity" ... really? If this is targeted towards a mass-audience, it has to speak in the language of the masses, not to the kind of scholars who would be willing to read through all this.

I write a lot of science papers, and I know when to use "Occipital Lobe", vs. "Back of the brain." You must know your audience. Now, I won't be a critic and just walk away, I can see that the ideals/arguments have been well thoughtout, and definitely a good job on that.

[Edited on 02.01.2011 7:31 AM PST]

  • 02.01.2011 7:27 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

“To say more would spoil be it’s overall its a game that needs to be played.” - Aristotle

Posted by: serpx
That's because, I'd wager, paul didn't want "the masses" to read it. Large documents like this, particularly if they're written in a complicated manner, are usually made so to prevent the proles from screaming at something they don't understand.

I didn't read it either, however, and I don't have the time nor the care for the franchise any longer to make me desire to read it later. My mind's already been made up, and I don't need a bloody nation's constitution to tell me that there are problems with the canon. That's why I gave it up, partially.

  • 02.01.2011 7:30 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Heroic Member
  • gamertag: Serpx
  • user homepage:


Posted by: Lord Snakie
Posted by: serpx
That's because, I'd wager, paul didn't want "the masses" to read it. Large documents like this, particularly if they're written in a complicated manner, are usually made so to prevent the proles from screaming at something they don't understand.

I didn't read it either, however, and I don't have the time nor the care for the franchise any longer to make me desire to read it later. My mind's already been made up, and I don't need a bloody nation's constitution to tell me that there are problems with the canon. That's why I gave it up, partially.


If his target audience is a particular market of scholars, then sure, but why negate people like me from reading it who may agree on this ideals, but are unwilling to read because of such a high-technical writing style? Are his goals to get masses to back his arguments/thoughts, or just a few people?

If this was written for Bungie/343, they'll also have to be willing to read it.

[Edited on 02.01.2011 7:36 AM PST]

  • 02.01.2011 7:34 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

“To say more would spoil be it’s overall its a game that needs to be played.” - Aristotle

Perhaps I was harsher than I needed to be in my last post. That could very well not be the reason that paul wrote this like he did; he could've simply wanted to seem professional. One way or another, however, I think it's agreed that, on the topic of brevity, for whatever reason he chose to write it this way, it was... unsuccessful.

I apologize for my unnecessary roughness, it was wholly unnecessary and uncalled for to boot. My points stand as I made them, but I could have made them sound let scathing. Should have.

[Edited on 02.01.2011 7:54 AM PST]

  • 02.01.2011 7:53 AM PDT

I think he was a little overzealous in his use of the English language; it almost appears as if he wanted to flamboyantly show off, which I doubt was his intention.

I don't mind reading long threads, and I can understand the language used in this, but I don't feel that the subject matter is even close to interesting enough to justify either the length or wording.

I can't imagine how painstakingly dull it must have been to write. Of course, I'm not nearly as into the Halo universe as I once was. I'll read Cryptum and finish a fan fiction because I'm not the sort of person who abandons projects solely due to a lessening interest, but I don't grab on to every morsel of information about the universe I find.

I've discovered better science fiction universes to captivate my imagination.

  • 02.01.2011 8:22 AM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • of 4