Neonnothing

is kakasaku canon, like for real??

That…is an excellent question. Scoff not, fandom, and let’s seriously consider this (sans tin hat theories).

The answer depends on notions of what ‘canon’ and ‘authorship’ are. If you believe Kishimoto, as the writer-god, has full control over how his characters are portrayed and perceived, then the answer is a flat no. No pairing will ever be canon, except whichever one(s) that singular man writes directly onto the pages.

There are other ways of thinking about this question, however. Since the 1970s, in both scholarly and fannish circles the concept of ‘authorship’ has been changing. Now, the process of reading is more commonly understood to be a participatory act, a kind of negotiation of meaning between what the text says (both explicitly and through subtext) and how the reader interprets it. Choice is a significant part of this process in that one reader may choose to focus on reading certain elements one way, while another may focus on others. This is why some people are shippers and some aren’t; it depends on whether you choose to read works for potential romantic subtext or not. This also explains ship wars, as some people read for a favored pairing (and sometimes almost modify the text itself in their determination to justify their ship). Furthermore, the same reader can read with critical distance sometimes, and read with very close personal investment at others. The point is that reading is a dynamic act that involves both free choice and writing, in a sense (your perception, what you see in your head, is itself a kind of writing). In that light, every work of fiction has (at least) two ‘authors’, the creator/producer AND the reader. For this reason, no single reading can be considered ‘correct’ or ‘true’ anymore. It is whatever you make of it.

Given that, is KakaSaku canon? That literally depends on who you ask. If you ask me, it is part of my personal canon. I read lots of extratextual works (fanfic, fan art, etc), and choose to read KS, because I like each character and imagine they’d have an appealing dynamic romantically (incidentally, I feel the same about several other pairings, so I choose to multiship). Just because I could not go through the original source material and point to instances that justify romantic readings of KS (I think most KS shippers are aware there simply aren’t any) doesn’t make my reading any less valid; for me, Kishimoto wrote a third of the text, I wrote a third (when I read it), and the fandom wrote the final third when they produce fanwork. So two-thirds of the ‘authors’ of the thing I call ”Naruto” agree KS should be canon, and that’s good enough for me.

senjju, neonanythingsecond, ladyofsnark, boriie, cowmaster

Ladies (and gentleman), any thoughts?

is kakasaku canon, like for real??

That…is an excellent question. Scoff not, fandom, and let’s seriously consider this (sans tin hat theories).

The answer depends on notions of what ‘canon’ and ‘authorship’ are. If you believe Kishimoto, as the writer-god, has full control over how his characters are portrayed and perceived, then the answer is a flat no. No pairing will ever be canon, except whichever one(s) that singular man writes directly onto the pages.

There are other ways of thinking about this question, however. Since the 1970s, in both scholarly and fannish circles the concept of ‘authorship’ has been changing. Now, the process of reading is more commonly understood to be a participatory act, a kind of negotiation of meaning between what the text says (both explicitly and through subtext) and how the reader interprets it. Choice is a significant part of this process in that one reader may choose to focus on reading certain elements one way, while another may focus on others. This is why some people are shippers and some aren’t; it depends on whether you choose to read works for potential romantic subtext or not. This also explains ship wars, as some people read for a favored pairing (and sometimes almost modify the text itself in their determination to justify their ship). Furthermore, the same reader can read with critical distance sometimes, and read with very close personal investment at others. The point is that reading is a dynamic act that involves both free choice and writing, in a sense (your perception, what you see in your head, is itself a kind of writing). In that light, every work of fiction has (at least) two ‘authors’, the creator/producer AND the reader. For this reason, no single reading can be considered ‘correct’ or ‘true’ anymore. It is whatever you make of it.

Given that, is KakaSaku canon? That literally depends on who you ask. If you ask me, it is part of my personal canon. I read lots of extratextual works (fanfic, fan art, etc), and choose to read KS, because I like each character and imagine they’d have an appealing dynamic romantically (incidentally, I feel the same about several other pairings, so I choose to multiship). Just because I could not go through the original source material and point to instances that justify romantic readings of KS (I think most KS shippers are aware there simply aren’t any) doesn’t make my reading any less valid; for me, Kishimoto wrote a third of the text, I wrote a third (when I read it), and the fandom wrote the final third when they produce fanwork. So two-thirds of the ‘authors’ of the thing I call ”Naruto” agree KS should be canon, and that’s good enough for me.

senjju, neonanythingsecond, ladyofsnark, boriie, cowmaster

Ladies (and gentleman), any thoughts?