o rei leão TLK6NA books are NOT canon nor semi-canon!

bendaimmortal posted on Jun 22, 2010 at 07:59PM
So why do you spread its information as such? Please read this post through, before commenting back, or else you miss my point. (:

If I lack some essential knowledge on the books that proves my feelings to be out of ignorance, then by all means, correct me but please give me a link to your source of information while doing so.

I just have to get this off of my heart, so that I can move on and stop making it unnecessarely an issue for myself because it doesn't really make a difference in my life. And I mean no offense to anyone.

The Six New Adventures books have obviously been approved for profit purposes by Disney, but does that alone make it a confimation of a "yes, that's what we view it like, too!"? I don't think so. So - unless someone can point me to a reliable source where Disney stated TLK6A is also their view, I'd consider the books nothing more than profit fanfiction.

I'm thinking it completely ok if you consider the books to be your personal canon and wish people to know you do, but for Heaven's sake - you ought not to make them into the canon for the entire fandom! Ie. by making up pop quiz questions and answers on based on them, failing to mention that it's not officially Disney!

And you ought not to go around Q&A sites, answering people's questions with these books' information as if they were official information! "Does Simba have a son?" "Yes, Simba has a son! His named Kopa!!" NO, he does not! But there are unofficial books wherein Simba has a son named Kopa. "What was Scar's name before he got his Scar?" "It was Taka!" No, it was not. It was Taka only in an unofficial book.

There's even so completely false information going around, as something along the line: Scar's father gave him the scar in rage! ?! Someone's seriously confusing them to Zira and Kovu from TLK2. Just because that happened so in TLK2, doesn't yet mean it happened exactly the same way with Scar.

I'm complaining here because I could imagine that trying to make unofficial things official in everyone's eyes, is horribly misleading to those new to the fandom. And though it likely won't do any (serious) harm, it in the least is limitting their own creativity, when it wouldn't have to be that way. I acknowledge the situation is nothing away from me, but I just want to raise this topic, as I hate false information going around as facts.

I personally like the story 'A Tale of Two Brothers' alright, but I don't quite get what is so utterly fascinating about that particular fanfiction to so many? Why is it so faschinating to so many, that it's being spread all over the fandom in a claim of being hard, solid canon, when it's not? I'm probably not the only one in the entire fandom who feels frustrated about this, though liking the TLK6A story/ies.

I fell in love with the moment, when young Mufasa leapt to stand between his uncosnscious brother and the huge buffalo herd, ready to fight a battle he could not possible win. As in, him genuinely willing to give his life, just to try and save his brother, whereas the brother in time, will murder him in a similar situation. It's brilliant! BUT, it also happens to seem quite unoriginal, in my eyes for a situation wherein Scar got his Scar. And I'm not too convinced that kind of a scar can be cause by a buffalo horn. If it was just a random situation and not the scar-matter, it would be nothing but brilliant for the brothers' bond matter.
last edited on Oct 15, 2010 at 08:39PM

o rei leão 5 replies

Click here to write a response...
over a year ago bendaimmortal said…

"The problem is, there are several other books that Disney has given its "stamp of approval", and they contradict the content of TLK6NA. For example, "Friends in Need", Mufasa rescues Zazu from Shenzi, Banzai and Ed when he is an adolescent and he eventually decides to make Zazu his advisor. In TLK6NA, however, Zazu doesn't start serving Mufasa until Mufasa is an adult, after his mother Zuzu became Ahadi's advisor when Mufasa was an adolescent. I also read on a Wikipedia page (now down, unfortunately) that some TLK storybooks mention that Rafiki presented Mufasa to the Pride Lands when Mufasa was a baby, while in TLK6NA, Rafiki doesn't arrive in the Pride Lands until Mufasa is an adolescent.

It's pretty much impossible to accept all "semi-canon" material. You invariably have to choose which parts you accept and which parts you don't."
-Akril at MyLionKing

I don't think that's a problem at all in the matter. The fact that there are so many completely different book universe views that contradict each others, is just yet another SHINING proof of how the books are nothing more but profit fanfiction (especially if their authors do not even belong to Disney's company like TLK6NA's authors apparently don't.) I mean, if Disney is approving so many contradicting views, they certainly don't mean them as semi-canon but as seperate fanfiction views.

Semi-canon has to be tied into the canon source and not one of those books are. They haven't even been approved but instead denied by the canon's creators as in the film makers. And now they apparently even contradict each other.

We are again resulting in the books being profit fanfiction and nothing more.
over a year ago LifesGoodx3 said…
I completely agree! I didn't read these books, and all the talk of them really confused me! I don't think that people should be spreading this false information, and if they do, as you said, they should make it clear that it is not canon.
over a year ago glelsey said…
While I have been a fan of The Lion King ever since the first movie, I only started getting involved in the online fandom a few years ago. I'd never heard of these books, and it really confused me when people were bringing up topics about characters and situations I had never heard of.

I've heard so much about these books now, and other TLK-related things that didn't appear in any of the movies, and I'm just really confused about what is and isn't canon. I understand Kopa; I've even heard theories about how maybe the outlanders killed him before Kiara was born, and that explains Simba's tendency to overly-protect her (though I presumed it was merely because of his own experiences in the events of the first film).

What about Mheetu (another character I've heard things about)? Is he a canon character? Was he in a Disney-approved story, or did he appear in 6NA, or was he created by a fan on the internet?

So much confusion about what is and isn't canon! I'm going to have to look into which storylines have been approved by the creators; I consider the first and second movies to be canon, and always presumed the third (or 1 1/2 as it's called in the US) was intended to just be a bit of fun rather than canonical, but when it comes to the books it turns out I have much research to be doing!!
over a year ago bendaimmortal said…
I see you already found my review article link which explains what is and isn't canon as for the cub at the end.

As for Mheetu, see my review article link.
Mheetu was intented into the original film by its makers but was cut out in early production with not much development. Mheetu was cut out before The Lion King was even The Lion King. Back then it was still called "King of the Jungle". So Mheetu is by no means canon or even a real character.
last edited over a year ago
over a year ago castlefan1 said…
i like these books , i just wish people would stop claiming them as cannon when they are not. disney denied them.