Is This Canon?

... or Lost and Hidden Secrets Awaiting Discovery.

One of the hesitations I have about gaming a well known setting is staying consistent with the source material. A well known historical setting, like 20th Century Earth, poses certain problems for any author of fiction, gaming or otherwise, because there are facts that may limit the fictional narrative. Doing our Research and "getting one's facts straight" have been an accepted and essential part of writing historical fiction, or of making a roleplaying game that feels plausible. Taking "liberties" with what is generally known to have happened, is tricky ground at best. Yes, so called "alternative history" narratives exist, but frankly I find them unappealing (and generally not to my taste). 

This concept of "accepted facts" can be extended to certain fictional settings which are widely known and written about. As a result of this condition, and of my personal bias against alternative history, I have made a practice to avoid using anything in my games that could be easily "fact checked" against the sources, whether one is looking up "what really happened" in history, or merely consulting the accepted canon on a fictional world such as Tolkien's Middle-earth. It just seems more appealing to stick to the fuzzy edges, the unknown areas where known facts are fewer and details are lacking. That way I feel "anything is possible" and I have more freedom to be imaginative and "make stuff up".

As an example, take the classic 1920s mythos setting. Even H.P.L. himself created a fictional New England city and its associated university, mental hospital, river valley and coastal town, all so that he could avoid direct historical or geographic conflicts with the actual happenings in actual places. Inventing a fictional location and a made-up cast of people, none of which appear on the pages of ever really existed but are a close approximation to other better known aspects of the setting, I find helps enormously with the suspension of disbelief that is so necessary in order to engage an audience of readers, or role-players.

With all of that in mind I (much like many other fans) am still drawn to and want to game using certain popular settings including Middle-earth and the 1920s mythos. My approach is as follows... Avoid using "famous characters" drawn from the fiction or from the pages of history and a large element of the problematic becomes less of an issue. Invent a few "fictional" locations and take liberties only with what is essentially the "fuzzy" areas regarding known places or use those for which details are not widely available and I can feel more comfortable with basing an adventure in one of the known world settings.

Another approach is to treat all the generally accepted lore as written by an "unreliable source". Stories about people, places and things are just that. Each witness likely sees things from a slightly different perspective and any narrative they give will reflect just that. Eye-witness accounts, especially when drawn from a memory of remote events, is notoriously unreliable. We can reasonably alter a few minor "facts" and probably not spoil the effect of leveraging our audience's familiarity with the subject setting. In all fairness to ourselves, authors do it all the time.

I have recently read The Book of Lost Tales part one. One title in the 12 volume History of Middle-Earth series, Lost Tales gives us a look at the early, previously unpublished manuscript versions of many of J.R.R. Tolkien's works later published in more "polished" form. It is a peak behind the curtains, to borrow a phrase, which reveals an "alternative" version of some stories, alongside some other narratives which were presumably cast aside in favor of the author's later thinking. What it gives me the reader and fan of the fictional world, is food for thought.

In part one of Lost Tales we are told of a mariner who arrives on a remote island to discover a lost people who tell fantastic tales which our mariner presumably writes down for us to now read. Included are early versions of the story of the musical making of the world, the awakening of the various peoples and the early struggle with the shadowy one who detests light. Yes, the tales I just mentioned appear in other later and more polished versions in The Silmarillion, a work published after the author's death, but also many decades ago and are now accepted canon. 

Alternative versions of the lore, you say? That is very interesting. 

I am reminded that "authorship" of The Hobbit is attributed to Mr. Bilbo Baggins writing his "memoirs" and what comes down to us as The Lord of the Rings is supposed to be a "Red Book" penned by Master Frodo Baggins, with additions by a certain Samwise Gamgee? All completely reliable narrators with complete understanding of their times, at least one would presume so.

While as referee and loremaster I prefer invention over adaptation, I do find there is some advantage in leveraging what is commonly known about the familiar world. Real "horror" is only possible when it is starkly and unexpectedly introduced in contrast with a complacency born of an otherwise mundane and predictable setting.