Bantam Series: Canon?

Lao_Che

Active member
Stoo said:
1) Well, you've been encouraged to use the Search feature many times before but, for some reason, you don't. Is it because you keep forgetting that there is such a feature due to your poor memory?:confused:

3) Indy almost died of typhus looking for Akator, not the skull.
-In Indy 4 he says he saw a crystal skull "once in the British Museum". This contradicts the novels (and an unproduced Young Indy episode).
-The summer of 1916 is part of a flashback which has Indy in the southwest U.S. (according to Rob MacGregor). In the TV show, he's in Europe.

Seeing a crystal skull once in the British Museum ain't a contradiction. Although neglecting to mention all the ones he knows about may contradict his 90s self. ;) He doesn't mention Deirdre Campbell in KotCS either but it still happened (despite denying he ever had a wife in one of McCoy's book).

The summer of '16 is when he's going on his vision quest with Aguila/Changing Man, yeah? The Ultimate Guide retconned that 1919. AND IT FITS! :eek:

Raiders112390 said:
Outside of the college timeline, are there any other contradictions either within the series of Bantam novels themselves, or between the novels and the 4 movies, or between the novels and the YIJC?

All the stories fit quite well together until some reference book comes along and starts messing with the dates but LFL managed to drop every story (novels - including the French/German ones - comics, games, gamebooks) neatly into a space where nothing else is happening, the problem's in the details.

Most of Indy expanded universe just contradicts itself rather than the films and TV series. Although technical limitations kindly avoided having Abner Ravenwood wandering around with Indy in 1935 in the Emperor's Tomb game. Although Temple of the Forbidden Eye has him sending letters to Indy when they're not speaking. (In my personal canon it's Belloq using Abner's name not knowing Indy/Abner have fallen out and Indy's playing along to use Belloq's mind.)

Not really a contradiction but Peril of Delphi says Indy has a preference for horse riding and skiing(?!) over baseball and football when he's shown to be a big baseball fan in the TV series.
 

Raiders90

Well-known member
Lao_Che said:
Seeing a crystal skull once in the British Museum ain't a contradiction. Although neglecting to mention all the ones he knows about may contradict his 90s self. ;) He doesn't mention Deirdre Campbell in KotCS either but it still happened (despite denying he ever had a wife in one of McCoy's book).

The summer of '16 is when he's going on his vision quest with Aguila/Changing Man, yeah? The Ultimate Guide retconned that 1919. AND IT FITS! :eek:



All the stories fit quite well together until some reference book comes along and starts messing with the dates but LFL managed to drop every story (novels - including the French/German ones - comics, games, gamebooks) neatly into a space where nothing else is happening, the problem's in the details.

Most of Indy expanded universe just contradicts itself rather than the films and TV series. Although technical limitations kindly avoided having Abner Ravenwood wandering around with Indy in 1935 in the Emperor's Tomb game. Although Temple of the Forbidden Eye has him sending letters to Indy when they're not speaking. (In my personal canon it's Belloq using Abner's name not knowing Indy/Abner have fallen out and Indy's playing along to use Belloq's mind.)

Not really a contradiction but Peril of Delphi says Indy has a preference for horse riding and skiing(?!) over baseball and football when he's shown to be a big baseball fan in the TV series.

Well in the Summer of 1916 wasn't he in New Mexico and Mexico, before going to Europe? Perhaps his vision quest happened during that period right before Europe.

And yeah, not mentioning his numerous adventures with the different crystal skulls isn't really a contradiction because he's not going to spill his life story to some kid he just met and say he had a skull which had the power to kill those the bearer loves--Mutt would think he's nuts. It's similar how to even after seeing the events of TOD, he's still a skeptic to the supernatural in ROTLA, and is even still slightly skeptical in LC after discovering the Ark of the Covenant. I think Indy, throughout most of his life, was very skeptical toward the supernatural--similar to Scully in the X-Files, he probably always tried to rationalize it with a more logical, scientific answer to the things he witnessed, or in some cases might've felt "it was just a coincidence." It's not until LC I'd say that he becomes a true believer in the supernatural.

And it's quite clear the Crystal Skull he found in the '30s is different than the Akator Skull--And seeing as Mutt mentioned Akator specifically, there was no reason to really mention the other skulls as they had no importance to the discussion--two different kinds of skulls. Though he does mention that there are a number of crystal skulls in the world.

As far as not mentioning Deidre in KOTCS, there was no reason to, and in Secret of the Sphinx, he might've lied and said he was never married because maybe the memories of it were too painful to recall. I mean he doesn't mention being engaged to Molly, either, in the novels or films, probably for the same reason--two women he dearly loved died (indirectly) because of him. That wouldn't be an easy thing to bear for anyone, and they're probably two things he prefers to forget. Look at the way he reacted when he thought Marion was killed--he takes to drinking and has no fear of being killed--He's very emotional with regard to the women he loves, I'd say, even though by the '30s he has a very tough, seemingly uncaring exterior.

As far as the EU contradicting itself, are you referring to the EU as a whole or just the Bantam novels? I've never read any of the comics and have only played the Infernal Machine.

Whats the LFL by the way?
 
Last edited:

Lao_Che

Active member
Raiders112390 said:
Well in the Summer of 1916 wasn't he in New Mexico and Mexico, before going to Europe? Perhaps his vision quest happened during that period right before Europe.

Peril at Delphi said:
His thoughts drifted back to when he was fourteen and had met an old Navajo named Changing Man while on a desert hike with his father. The Indian had taken a liking to young Indy, and said he would see him again. It hardly seemed likely, because a few months later Indy had moved to Chicago. The summer after he graduated from high school he returned to the Southwest to work on his uncle's ranch, but by then his encounter with the old Indian was only a distant memory.

Raiders112390 said:
As far as not mentioning Deidre in KOTCS, there was no reason to, and in Secret of the Sphinx, he might've lied and said he was never married because maybe the memories of it were too painful to recall. I mean he doesn't mention being engaged to Molly, either, in the novels or films, probably for the same reason--two women he dearly loved died (indirectly) because of him. That wouldn't be an easy thing to bear for anyone, and they're probably two things he prefers to forget.

That's how I like to see it. Vicky > Molly > Deirdre is also the way I want to see why Indy ran away from Marion twice despite dates being moved to make it appear like he's with Deirdre and Marion at the same time in 1925. I can't like the character if it's the latter.

But most problems are fairly flexible, it's just there probably won't ever be an official answer unless there's something like a Complete Indiana Jones Encyclopedia released. Indy's met Wu Han three times (1914, 1933, 1935) but I like to think that they didn't know they'd met in 1914 (Temple of Doom Sourcebook) and realised after 1933 (Dinosaur Eggs) so whenever they meet up they pretend they don't know each other as a private joke like in 1935 (Emperor's Tomb).

Raiders112390 said:
As far as the EU contradicting itself, are you referring to the EU as a whole or just the Bantam novels? I've never read any of the comics and have only played the Infernal Machine.

Whats the LFL by the way?

Lucasfilm Ltd, and the EU as a whole. MacGregor contradicts himself with the birth of Jack Shannon's son. Unless Shannon has time traveling sperm, his wife is pregnant with a baby named after Noah before she even meets Shannon OR Noah. ;)
 

Raiders90

Well-known member
Lao_Che said:
That's how I like to see it. Vicky > Molly > Deirdre is also the way I want to see why Indy ran away from Marion twice despite dates being moved to make it appear like he's with Deirdre and Marion at the same time in 1925. I can't like the character if it's the latter.

But most problems are fairly flexible, it's just there probably won't ever be an official answer unless there's something like a Complete Indiana Jones Encyclopedia released. Indy's met Wu Han three times (1914, 1933, 1935) but I like to think that they didn't know they'd met in 1914 (Temple of Doom Sourcebook) and realised after 1933 (Dinosaur Eggs) so whenever they meet up they pretend they don't know each other as a private joke like in 1935 (Emperor's Tomb).



Lucasfilm Ltd, and the EU as a whole. MacGregor contradicts himself with the birth of Jack Shannon's son. Unless Shannon has time traveling sperm, his wife is pregnant with a baby named after Noah before she even meets Shannon OR Noah. ;)

True..and then you have the films contradicting themselves--
For example Indy talking about his mother as if she was still alive in Raiders; LC shows us she's deceased by 1912. Indy's attitude toward the supernatural in Raiders even though we see what he saw just a year earlier in TOD; etc. Marcus kind of acting like the events of Raiders didn't happen in LC.
There's a lot of little contradictions in the Indyverse that just need to be explained away.
And as far as the novels I think if new editions came out all that would be needed are date edits to make it fit. It's said in Seven Veils that the events with Deidire happened in March & April 1926 and thus Marion could've happened anytime in the next 8 months of 1926. I mean Marion clearly says ten years ago in 1936 and since it's made clear when exactly in 1926 the events of Seven Veils are happening, we know there's over half a year left for the Marion affair to occur.
And him running away from Marion in mid or late 1926 would make sense as he saw that his adventuring cost him the life of his beloved wife, and in 1937 he again probably remembered what his adventuring cost him back in 1926 and he probably felt he wasn't ready to settle down anyway. So actually the existence of Deidre in his life makes him leaving Marion twice make even more sense and I'd say is a big moment in his life, which would explain why he doesn't become truly emotionally close to any woman until 1957.
 
Last edited:

Raiders90

Well-known member
Bump.

This issue needs to be clarified in some way. Personally, I wish Lucas would just let the novels be canon. As it is in his vision it seems Indy did nothing between 1920 and 1935 outside of seducing Marion. Which makes ToD his first adventure.
I find the novels more realistic.
 

Stoo

Well-known member
Raiders112390 said:
As it is in his vision it seems Indy did nothing between 1920 and 1935 outside of seducing Marion. Which makes ToD his first adventure.
Plenty of things in the films tell us that 1935 is not his 1st adventure. In "Raiders", Marcus says, "It's like nothing you've ever gone after before." and Indy is called "an obtainer of rare antiquities". One year would seem too short to have that sort of reputation. From "Doom":

1) Indy's weathered clothes
2) Indy's skill & resourcefulness with a whip
3) Indy's knowledge, experience & wariness of booby-traps, finding secret passages, etc.
4) Indy 'found Nurhachi' before the film begins
5) Wu Han says he has followed Indy on 'many adventure'
6) Chatter Lal has heard Dr. Jones' name from studying at Oxford and directly refers to pre-1935 events in Honduras and Madagascar

Even though the "Chronicles" ends in 1920, Lucas had a 'vision' of 2 episodes set in 1921 which were planned to have adventurous themes with Indy on expedition in both stories. (The "Brazil" episode would've contradicted the "Seven Veils" novel.) Excluding the unproduced shows, there's still the hunt for the Eye of the Peacock, the Jackal's head (and the Cross of Coronado).

Without the novels, Lucas' vision was more more like 1921-19?? but, years ago, I remember reading where he talked about the untold gap between the TV series and the movies. He said something like (paraphrasing), "I'll leave it to someone else to tell those stories." (Wish I could find the quote!)

Not quite sure what you mean about 'first adventure'. Do you mean 1st mystical one?:confused:
 

Montana Smith

Active member
Stoo said:
Plenty of things in the films tell us that 1935 is not his 1st adventure. In "Raiders", Marcus says, "It's like nothing you've ever gone after before." and Indy is called "an obtainer of rare antiquities". One year would seem too short to have that sort of reputation. From "Doom":

1) Indy's weathered clothes
2) Indy's skill & resourcefulness with a whip
3) Indy's knowledge, experience & wariness of booby-traps, finding secret passages, etc.
4) Indy 'found Nurhachi' before the film begins
5) Wu Han says he has followed Indy on 'many adventure'
6) Chatter Lal has heard Dr. Jones' name from studying at Oxford and directly refers to pre-1935 events in Honduras and Madagascar

Even though the "Chronicles" ends in 1920, Lucas had a 'vision' of 2 episodes set in 1921 which were planned to have adventurous themes with Indy on expedition in both stories. (The "Brazil" episode would've contradicted the "Seven Veils" novel.) Excluding the unproduced shows, there's still the hunt for the Eye of the Peacock, the Jackal's head (and the Cross of Coronado).

Without the novels, Lucas' vision was more more like 1921-19?? but, years ago, I remember reading where he talked about the untold gap between the TV series and the movies. He said something like (paraphrasing), "I'll leave it to someone else to tell those stories." (Wish I could find the quote!)

Not quite sure what you mean about 'first adventure'. Do you mean 1st mystical one?:confused:

Nicely put, Stoo.

Raiders began in medias res (in the middle of things). We see the experienced adventurer, who knows to expect the unexpected.

TOD takes us back further in his life, and we're still in the middle of things. Nurhachi's urn seems only like the tip of the iceberg. His experience and expectation really shows when he's hanging on the rope bridge fighting off Mola Ram. It doesn't appear that this is the first time he's dabbled in occult practices, as he speaks the invocation of Shiva with the conviction of a man who expects something to happen.

I haven't read any of the non-filmed novels, but I would have no trouble in putting as many of them into Indy's canonical chronology as would feasibly fit. It is more likely that he had those adventures, than not had them, if you see what I mean!
 

StoneTriple

New member
Raiders112390 said:
Personally, I wish Lucas would just let the novels be canon.

NONE OF THIS IS REAL. There isn't real make-believe vs false make-believe. The novels can be whatever you want them to be. The novels are Indiana Jones stories, Lucas' thoughts on them are inconsequential.

I generally find the novels much more enjoyable than the films. Particularly the MacGregor novels. When I'm reading them (I happen to be reading one now), I'm reading an Indiana Jones story. I don't give a single moment of thought to where they are on some sort of official Lucas website\time-line\guide book\canon\etc - nor do I care what Lucas has decided they can or can't be.

Lucas doesn't make mental decisions for me.
 

Col. Detritch

New member
Originally Posted by StoneTriple
NONE OF THIS IS REAL. There isn't real make-believe vs false make-believe. The novels can be whatever you want them to be. The novels are Indiana Jones stories, Lucas' thoughts on them are inconsequential.

I generally find the novels much more enjoyable than the films. Particularly the MacGregor novels. When I'm reading them (I happen to be reading one now), I'm reading an Indiana Jones story. I don't give a single moment of thought to where they are on some sort of official Lucas website\time-line\guide book\canon\etc - nor do I care what Lucas has decided they can or can't be.

Lucas doesn't make mental decisions for me.

Terrifically put StoneTriple! Weather they are canon or not really depends on whether you liked the story or not. If you loved the story enough you would still love it whether or not GL came along and said “actually, you know what people, no... that’s not canon." (Not that he would- I don't even think he's ever read a Indy novel ;) ). You wouldn’t just burn the book and be done with the story just because he said it wasn’t canon. And if you would do this, please get opinions of your own soon!

For me I would consider:
• Peril at Delphi
• Dance of the Giants
• Seven Veils
• Genesis Deluge
• Philosopher's Stone
• Hollow Earth
• Secret of the Sphinx
All fine additions to the canon (though I am a little conflicted by the marriage to Deidre) and I don’t care if GL was to come out and say all of the Bantam book stories are canon I wouldn’t suddenly acknowledge the others (with the exception of Unicorn's Legacy and Dinosaur Eggs which are starting to grow on me). And you know why, because I like them not because someone says it happened in the EU. And then this might not be exactly true for the next person and that doesn't matter to me! :hat:

Sorry for the rant!
 
Last edited:

Montana Smith

Active member
Col. Detritch said:
Sorry for the rant!

No apologies necessary, Col.

I agree with StoneTriple's assessment, and I suspect this is also the manner in which he would view the James Bond stories/films.

You enjoy what you want to enjoy, however it fills your imagination.

Me being me, however, I do like chronologies to be all nice, neat and orderly. I like to see the connections between books or between films. When something suddenly seems out of place and realistically cannot be fitted into that order, then it's a niggle. I just tell myself that the piece that doesn't fit was the result of a character seeing or hearing something from a different viewpoint: a misunderstood fact. That way, there need be no conflict. :)
 

Col. Detritch

New member
Originally Posted by Montana Smith
Me being me, however, I do like chronologies to be all nice, neat and orderly. I like to see the connections between books or between films. When something suddenly seems out of place and realistically cannot be fitted into that order, then it's a niggle. I just tell myself that the piece that doesn't fit was the result of a character seeing or hearing something from a different viewpoint: a misunderstood fact. That way, there need be no conflict. :)

I too like things to fit chronologically but don't like it when it gets in the way of that aforementioned enjoyment. I think you sentiment about a character hearing or seeing something from a different view point is what people should be doing when it comes to things like this.

Philosopher?s Stone and Iron Phoenix both deal with the Philosopher?s stone as the maguffin and I like both stories so I chose to see it as Indy dealing with two different stones both with the same name. My reasoning is that IP deals with Albertus Magnus and his version of the story of the stone and PS involving Nicholas Flamel and his account of the stone. These are both separate historical accounts about a 'Philosopher?s stone' but the origins behind them are completely different. But that?s just me over analysing for my own benefit; however this, in its own way, helps me overlook the nagging urge to choose when it?s not necessary to be able to enjoy a decent narrative. :hat:
 
StoneTriple said:
NONE OF THIS IS REAL. There isn't real make-believe vs false make-believe. The novels can be whatever you want them to be. The novels are Indiana Jones stories, Lucas' thoughts on them are inconsequential.
Montana Smith said:
I do like chronologies to be all nice, neat and orderly. I like to see the connections between books or between films.

He was born on film and for me, THAT is the be all end all.

I agree with Stone Triple on many points, but most of all that this can all be what you want it to be.

I like things to be orderly as well. Unfortunately the past like the future is always in motion, so default/defacto are the films.

To me the other stuff is just fluff however much fun. I still have a great copy of Greedo being fried first, as such I'm thankful the Cairo Swordsman still hasn't "shot first."

I go back once again to "Splinter of the Mind's Eye." A fine book no doubt, but meaningless, contradictory and as a child I deemed it a waste of time. I wanted to know more about Star Wars and this was a dead end. So, no such thing as a "Grand Admiral Thrawn", no such thing as "The Solo Twins" (can't wait for THAT Nickelodeon series)...screw that crap.

Same with Indy. Read them enjoy them. Build a universe out of them, waste your time. The films either validate or invalidate ALL other material.

So until we have some Blu-Ray tweaks, there's only one Indy "canon" and it fell off the cliff with Vogel.



As Lao(land) Che(e) writes:

Lao_Che said:
He hasn't stopped them being canon.
 

Stoo

Well-known member
Stone Triple said:
I generally find the novels much more enjoyable than the films.
Really?:confused: Other than that, I agree with everything you wrote above.
Col. Detritch said:
Philosopher?s Stone and Iron Phoenix both deal with the Philosopher?s stone as the maguffin and I like both stories so I chose to see it as Indy dealing with two different stones both with the same name. My reasoning is that IP deals with Albertus Magnus and his version of the story of the stone and PS involving Nicholas Flamel and his account of the stone. These are both separate historical accounts about a 'Philosopher?s stone' but the origins behind them are completely different.
Plus, Indy also goes after Nicolas Flamel's account of the stone in the French comic, "Indiana Jones et le Grimore Maudit". All 3 of the Philosopher's Stone stories were published within a few months of each other in 1995. Oh, the conundrum!:eek:
Lao_Che said:
He hasn't stopped them being canon.
True and if anyone would know, it'd be you.;) However Lucas has said things here & there which indicate that they're not.
 

StoneTriple

New member
Stoo said:
Really?:confused: Other than that, I agree with everything you wrote above.
They're deeper and more detailed, which is to be expected. You can only put so much detail into a two-hour film. Don't get me wrong, man, I dig the films and watch them regularly. I also listen to full-film rips of the audio tracks regularly, as a sort of books-on-film type deal. However, if I want to get deep into detail I go for the books, particularly MacGregor.
 

StoneTriple

New member
Montana Smith said:
I agree with StoneTriple's assessment, and I suspect this is also the manner in which he would view the James Bond stories/films.
It is. In a series of films and novels spanning 57 years there are going to be things that don't necessarily fit perfectly. It's not something I ever give any thought to. In a licensed franchise such as Indiana Jones, there isn't correct & incorrect. If the owners commissioned and allowed it, that's good enough for me.
 

Montana Smith

Active member
Rocket Surgeon said:
He was born on film and for me, THAT is the be all end all.

Really?!?

:p

Well, there's no point doing anything you don't want to, or don't have to, because...

Rocket Surgeon said:
...this can all be what you want it to be.

Rocket Surgeon said:
I like things to be orderly as well. Unfortunately the past like the future is always in motion, so default/defacto are the films.

To me the other stuff is just fluff however much fun.

Apart from the WEG Role-Playing Games, movie novelizations, comics and Young Indy, I haven't strayed into the expanded universe of novels. That could mean the movies are holding my attention enough not to want to. In which case we're probably seeing this from the same angle.

In any case, the films come first whenever the chronology is in doubt.

I still have a great copy of Greedo being fried first,

In the darkest moments, when all looks lost, and uncle George appears to have totally lost the plot, I'll put in the original un-ameliorated Star Wars DVD, and enjoy watching Han shoot first.

...as such I'm thankful the Cairo Swordsman still hasn't "shot first."

One of the greatest and most cynical gags to ever grace the big screen! If George ever messed with that scene, well...

Rocket Surgeon said:
I go back once again to "Splinter of the Mind's Eye." A fine book no doubt, but meaningless, contradictory and as a child I deemed it a waste of time. I wanted to know more about Star Wars and this was a dead end. So, no such thing as a "Grand Admiral Thrawn", no such thing as "The Solo Twins" (can't wait for THAT Nickelodeon series)...screw that crap.

I loved Splinter. So much so that I'll make it fit into the canon no matter what it takes! Especially since Alan Dean Foster was the ghost writer of Star Wars! My favourite novels were those early ones - the original Han Solo and Lando trilogies. That was the tone and settings that the prequels should have gone for. As it is we got three movies that were quite alien to the original three.

So, whenever we come up against the issue of canon/non-canon and disappointing movies or books, we all have the choice of making the effort to view them the way we see best (the customer is always right!), since it is, after all, only entertainment.

Rocket Surgeon said:
So until we have some Blu-Ray tweaks, there's only one Indy "canon" and it fell off the cliff with Vogel.

:D

StoneTriple said:
They're deeper and more detailed, which is to be expected.

The novelizations are a great companion to the films. Because I'm hungry to know everything there is about the story, the books are essential. They add back story and extra scenes, and reading them is like imagining watching a longer version of the film itself.
 
Top