Regarding the Canonicity of Dates in Canon and Fan Fiction

[Deleted member 11515]

I'm still working on my Fan Fiction [see my other topic for more information XD;]

What do you guys think is more acceptable:

A. Going along with the PokeDex/Canon Information and set a story in the past to a point where it becomes a tad more difficult to write about

or

B. Using 'poetic/creative license' and setting in in a time period that the author is more comfortable with?


To elaborate, Canon says that this event occurred roughly 500 years ago - however, in order to have this event flow with what I intended to be the story, it'd be better if it occurred roughly 150-200 years ago.

I just wanted everyone's opinions.
I realize it probably would be better to go with choice A, but eh.

 

[Keroro]

Erik, go with A!! My name starts with A! And also pokedex info would makes more sense.

 

[Diddy]

I dislike canon. The idea that there are invisible rules out there restricting creativity actually sickens me.

I'm currently writing something myself that happens to be set in the past, not as far back as what you're planning but still, I'm enjoying the challenge of changing things and places to what I think they'd be like at the time.

Creative license is one of the greatest tools in a fanficcer's arsenal, and I hope you wield it to your advantage.

 

[psilva]

I believe canon should always be considered when writing a fanfic, although you should be able to bend the rules a little. Be as creative as possible but try to stick to canon, in my opinion. Also, my first post - Disregard this opinion if you see fit.

 

[Mnemesis]

I actually have a question for you!

Why would it be difficult to write something set 500 years ago?
We all know that technology there is some good years ahead of ours, and it was never shown in canon how the pokemon world was back then, so...
[Please note that I don't take the anime canon into consideration. They often contradict the games and bleh D:]

 

[Umbreon Ruler]

I think that canon should be a default when writing, because there are people out there who will dislike a story simply because it's not canonical. However, if you think your story would be significantly better if you bent the rules a little, then I think that's worth it. So it really depends on you, and what you think your capabilities are.

 

[oRaNgE~1337]

The technology 500 years ago could be like our technology 200 years ago? Is that what you're saying, Mnemesis?

Sounds good to me.

I dislike canon. The idea that there are invisible rules out there restricting creativity actually sickens me.

If you don't like canon, go write a real story then. :/ I mean, there's no point in writing fanfiction if it has nothing to do with the fandom. I mean, if there's contradictions in the fandom itself, go ahead and choose one, but...

Oh, I'll just let Valentine of PC explain this. She's a cool guy.

On the subject of restrictions, I'd like to note one thing. While I know original fiction is the more respected form of literature (and requires its own research and its own brand of creativity), it also comes with its own restriction: the element of disbelief. As in, your reader will follow you wherever you take them, but if you do something like violate the laws of physics, you'd better come up with a decent explanation that fits the world of your story. Otherwise, it just doesn't work. So, in a sense, original fiction is bound only by reality. Once you acknowledge that, you work with it to get over that and connect to the reader without sacrificing the tone of your story, if that makes sense.

Meanwhile, fanfiction has a pretty obvious restriction in that you can't violate canon (which is the reality of that franchise) without a good explanation. It's really more or less a lot like working with the reality barrier in original fiction, though, except you tend to work closer with it in fanfiction. Don't think of it like "this is canon, and I have to work around it to get my fic to work." Think of it like "this is canon, and I have to use it to get my fic to work." There's a subtle difference in that the first idea means you see canon as a barrier to which you add tweaks or which limits your creativity, whereas the second, you creatively use canon in order to suit your needs. For example:

- A bad author does not acknowledge canon, so his Professor Oak snaps at his grandson because the author doesn't understand that the canon character acts a certain way.
- A mediocre author acknowledges canon but sees it as a limitation or a crutch. Therefore, the only role Professor Oak serves in his story is as a Pokédex/starter Pokémon dispenser. Professor Oak is usually never seen again.
- A good author knows canon well enough to know how to play with it. Therefore, the fanfiction has Professor Oak as a main character, investigating ancient Pokémon in ruins recently found in Sinnoh that are not necessarily canonical. Professor Oak is accurately in character in this fanfic, and the location of the ruins (along with the species of the Pokémon in them) is believable enough to pass without making someone feel as if the writer is forcing something to be in a nonsensical location.

In other words, canon is there, and it may feel like a crutch, but really, it doesn't have to be. It's a lot like trying to write a story about your friends in a real city. You need to know both, yes, but creativity should really jump beyond that and build up from the foundation canon (and basic reality) provide, not fall back onto facts as a safety net, if that makes sense. You don't even necessarily need to create your own parts of the world or otherwise avoid canon characters or places in order to get creative. The principle works in fanfiction in franchises where there isn't as much flexibility as there is in Pokémon as well.

Point is, all too often, I see the "canon is a safety net" argument and the "canon restricts my creativity" one, but it's really not supposed to be like that unless you're not entirely confident in your use of canon. If you are, then you really can produce something that can be as good as or better than published original fiction because canon is nothing more than the same kind of reality obstacle that original fiction experiences. Knowing how to use it requires a brand of creativity that's slightly different from working with original fiction (where pulling sparkly vampires straight from your *** will get you loved by millions of angsty teens), but it's not like fanfiction is inherently a less creative or less possibly revolutionary venture than original.

(However, it does mean that the impact fanfiction makes on a population tends to be restricted only to the fans of that franchise. This is the only way fanfiction will never be as "monumental" as original.)

Sorry for the rant. I really do respect original fiction equally to fanfiction. Writing is writing for me, and there's such a thing as good and bad writing in both. Likewise, yes, original fiction allows you to establish your own laws, but, as I've said before, that can only happen if you take the time to clearly define those laws because otherwise, you really can't suspend the laws or facts that already exist in the real world.

 

[Negrek]

Dammit, I was going to smack him with Valentine's post about canon...

Regarding the original post, though, I would agree that you should do your best to work with canon. Although I'm honestly not too sure about the pokémon timeline, even within canons as opposed to between them... I haven't really paid all that much attention to it, but it might be contradictory to the point where you'd just have to pick something and deal with it stomping on some aspect of canon or another anyway.

 

[Manchee]

Lol, I'm one of the only ones who voted for Choice B.

I dislike canon. The idea that there are invisible rules out there restricting creativity actually sickens me.

I'm currently writing something myself that happens to be set in the past, not as far back as what you're planning but still, I'm enjoying the challenge of changing things and places to what I think they'd be like at the time.

Creative license is one of the greatest tools in a fanficcer's arsenal, and I hope you wield it to your advantage.

That basically sums up anything I'd say. I like it better when author's use their own ideas/stuff (i.e. Stephanie Meyer with vampires, she didn't really stick to "traditional" vampire things). >< That was a sucky reference, but it could possibly help :3


BA~~

 

[Blackjack Gabbiani]

Technically, most "traditional vampire stuff" doesn't fit with actual tradition. Like in Romanian lore, a powerful enough vampire can go out in sunlight with no ill effects.

Anyway, in this specific case, and it's already been pointed out, the tech level is a lot higher in the Pokemon world than it is here. I know they didn't have their moon landing until they had ours, but they have stuff like warp tiles and computer-based item storage, so they might have just focused more on the terrestrial world rather than outside it. And that gives a lot bigger chance that the industrial revolution took place a lot earlier for them than it did here.

As for historical events, we know very little about the history of the Pokemon world, both their events and what crosses over with events from ours. There was some war that the US was involved with somewhere in the world within about ten years before the first games, given that Surge is probably around 30 (people assume it was Gulf 1, but in that world that may not have happened). Some weird stuff happened in Ecruteak with its guardian birds a few hundred years ago (and I have the feeling that's what you were talking about to begin with). And then a bunch of minor events refered to.

 

[Venia Silente]

Oh lord vampire lore and someone had to mention Twilight... XD

In my opinion the timeline(s), if any, in the Pokémon world do not cause too much trouble. Even the apparent conflicts in one same canon, like game!canon, can be worked around with just a bit of care and without the need to dismiss or ignore something more official.

Take "dates", for example. If we go by game!canon, there's a specific calendar that includes the First Moon Landing (1969-07-20). But we're not given any other particular date or reference that would allow us to pinpoint how much time ago was that, even when the games are supossed to occur "now" (after all, it is one who is being avatar'ed into the game). Yet take Gen II and Gen IV into consideration. These are stated a the beginning of D&P to take place pretty much at the same time, which by all purposes is "now". G/S was 10 years ago and the player character had a Game Boy (I think) at home, but surprise!! -- "at the same time" ten years ago, the D/P player character had a DS and a plasma or flat TV. So that leaves us with two easy (to avoidentangling the plot) choices:

a) games!now is a future moving back and forth relative to "our" time (so that, for example, a Nintendo Virtual Mindcube 128 appears in the game).
b) timeline is fundamentally different and particular dates such as First Moon Landing are a coincidence or a out-of-universe convenient naming.

I'd personally go with a) because I love floating timleines, which are a very comfy plot device to help dealing with the different speeds of progress in a fic. For examples of prominent floating timelines (with regards to their own universes) one can watch TV shows such as Third Watch, 24, Boston Legal and Cold Case. I'm not sure if and how anime and manga make use of this device.

One can take into consideration that, as said a couple of posts above, industrial revolution could have happened before, tech development focus could have been moved to medical sciences during the period of time "our" world focused on the Space Race, and such. But the important thing is, once you pick an initial diverging point, you are pretty much free to work up technology and dates any way you like (as long as they make internal sense, of course).

Heck, for all we know, the First Moon Landing in the Pokémon world could have been part of a scientific bet between two competing agents, and was abandoned after that and discarded in favor of Poké sciences. I mean, the "shuttle" image is at a museum in the same section as Pokémon fossils.

Going strictly by the OP's question:

To elaborate, Canon says that this event occurred roughly 500 years ago - however, in order to have this event flow with what I intended to be the story, it'd be better if it occurred roughly 150-200 years ago.

Going by that info alone, 500 years ago the following events ocurred (source: Bulbapedia)
* The first Spiritomb is sealed in the Hallowed Tower.
* The Cianwood City Pharmacy is built.

Question: why do you need the event 150~200 years ago?
If it is because there is a particular and convenient event or technology in our universe that you need, you can simply stop here: mention (do not "offer" or "explain") an alternate timeline with thre pivotal points: the present of your story, the Spiritomb/Cianwood event that you state to have happened 150 years ago, and an undefinite time in the past where the timeline diverged from ours and the Pokémon world's. Period.
If it's because there is an in-universe event or technology which you need to integrate (Bulbapedia says the Ecruteak Tower burning and the first Tournaments taking place), read below.

I'd say these two events pose no trouble to work around by floating the "general" Pokémon world timeline.
Spiritomb's sealing is a bit difficult to timefloat: you may require working around legends involving Spiritomb, the place's architecture and the people's awareness about it, what happened to subsequent spiritombs and such, but is workable.
As for the Cianwood event that is pretty easily timeflotable because you can simply alter the past's rate of progress as long as you reach their "known" present (Gen II/IV?). It may be a trouble if Olivine City is featured too because you'll have to alter its past progress rate too because of the Lighthouse and the Whirl Islands, but I do not see more trouble.

Do not want to float? Choice B: you can simply use some creative license (which is not the same as defiling canon!) to propose that the canon information originally provided refers to the events in an "incomplete" (eg.: 500 years ago the first Cyanwood Pharmacy was built, but the one that exists nowadays was built 150~200 years ago) or "inconcluse" (eg.: it is believed that Spiritomb was sealed 500 years ago because that was around the time it disappeared) fashion. I can not see any of these conflicting with other elements of (well-known) game!canon as long as you remember to work around the local cultures a bit, in particular the Spiritomb as, if I recall correctly, is tied to the history of Solaceon Town.

I hope my suggestions are useful.

 

[Diddy]

If you don't like canon, go write a real story then. :/ I mean, there's no point in writing fanfiction if it has nothing to do with the fandom. I mean, if there's contradictions in the fandom itself, go ahead and choose one, but...

I do, and in great frequency.

But that wasn't really the point. I understand the characters in the fandom, I understand how they act and how they would act in certain situations. But saying that I'm not allowed to portray Professor Oak as a senile old coot who paints ekans' as dratini and gives them to newbie trainers isn't something I'd welcome with open arms.

I enjoy writing in the pokemon world because it's perfect for fiction. You have countless characters that can be worked with and wonderful locations and myths and legends.

- A bad author does not acknowledge canon, so his Professor Oak snaps at his grandson because the author doesn't understand that the canon character acts a certain way.
- A mediocre author acknowledges canon but sees it as a limitation or a crutch. Therefore, the only role Professor Oak serves in his story is as a Pokédex/starter Pokémon dispenser. Professor Oak is usually never seen again.
- A good author knows canon well enough to know how to play with it. Therefore, the fanfiction has Professor Oak as a main character, investigating ancient Pokémon in ruins recently found in Sinnoh that are not necessarily canonical. Professor Oak is accurately in character in this fanfic, and the location of the ruins (along with the species of the Pokémon in them) is believable enough to pass without making someone feel as if the writer is forcing something to be in a nonsensical location.

Someone's opinion, not saying it's wrong but I do have to bring some things into question.

So she's saying that you can't be a good author, unless you fulfill these criteria, so having Professor Oak snap at his grandson automatically means you're a bad author who doesn't acknowledge canon, maybe you did but thought it wasn't helpful to follow in the situation, so you're automatically a bad author. That kind of labeling is something we should striving to abolish.

I'm sure Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King didn't work tirelessly to do the same. Maybe I'm overstepping the mark a bit, it does seem canon following and racial oppression can't be juxtaposed but the principle is the same.

If you're going to go around listening to one side of the argument as if it's law, then you might as well be a religious extremist. It comes down to open-mindedness. "If you can dream it you can do it" I believe Walt Disney said.

But I suppose I must thank you, you've given me a great idea for a one-shot.

 

[Breezy]

So she's saying that you can't be a good author, unless you fulfill these criteria, so having Professor Oak snap at his grandson automatically means you're a bad author who doesn't acknowledge canon, maybe you did but thought it wasn't helpful to follow in the situation, so you're automatically a bad author. That kind of labeling is something we should striving to abolish.

You're reading it too literally, Diddy; these are examples, not criteria. I think she really means is something like you're a "bad" author if you write Professor Oak in a way that is not canon to his actual character. Professor Oak is portrayed as something as kind-hearted, carer of pokemon, a little forgetful, and likes Haiku. Quite rarely would he snap at someone. So writing about him "snapping" at a young trainer sounds kind of odd (do not confuse lecture with snapping; those are two very different versions of "yelling").

If you're going to take a character, transform it into some beast (in personality) that I can hardly recognize as Professor Oak, then why use the name Professor Oak at all?

Continuing Valentine's post (or "labels" as you call it), a "mediocre author" acknowledges that Professor Oak is kind-hearted, takes care of pokemon, sometimes forgetful and likes Haiku. Therefore, if the good author were to write about Professor Oak, he/she would write him as such and keep within the boundaries of canon. However, though, the author doesn't fully use Professor Oak's character and usually limits him to where he's usually seen in the canon (the lab giving pokemon, for example).

A "good author" toys around with canon and uses it to the best of his advantage. Valentine gave an example of Professor Oak researching the ruins. A seemingly out of place location for the good Professor Oak. However, the author writes/details it and keeps Professor Oak IC so it seems believable and reasonable for Professor Oak to be there.

Or something.

Better explanations by others I'm sure. Either way, Valentine listed examples; they're not criteria you follow.

 

[Diddy]

If you're going to take a character, transform it into some beast (in personality) that I can hardly recognize as Professor Oak, then why use the name Professor Oak at all?

Maybe I don't like Prof. Oak's personality, maybe I want to make him into a disgruntled cynic, a more tortured genius type character. Let's say I exchange the character of Prof. Oak with that of Gregory House.

I could have bags of fun with that.

Now would you really begrudge me the chance to do that? Would you shout at me and say that it was wrong of me to do such a thing? Would you say my characterisation of Oak was so bad that you would consider doing the unimaginable and linking me to AFAA?

Now if you answer yes to any of those questions then I don't agree with that. If you say no to all of these questions then I don't have a problem with that.

Now I'm really considering writing that, either that or making Oak into a Murderer. Which do you prefer?

 

[The Big Al]

Pokemon "canon" doesn't exist beyond there are a bunch of creatures with elemental powers that can be captured in little balls. There's no consistency over the various media. Game canon is different from anime canon, is different from manga A canon, is different from menga B canon, etc. You can even have your own canon as long as you have Pokemon. I'd even go so far as to say writing Pokemon fanfiction is almost writing original fiction as there are so many different takes on it in official media having your own is fine.

 

[Negrek]

So she's saying that you can't be a good author, unless you fulfill these criteria, so having Professor Oak snap at his grandson automatically means you're a bad author who doesn't acknowledge canon, maybe you did but thought it wasn't helpful to follow in the situation, so you're automatically a bad author. That kind of labeling is something we should striving to abolish.

I'm sure Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King didn't work tirelessly to do the same. Maybe I'm overstepping the mark a bit, it does seem canon following and racial oppression can't be juxtaposed but the principle is the same.

Yeah, you kind of missed the point in a huge way. Valentine's post isn't prescribing things that you can or cannot do in a specific sense--she's talking about a general way of understanding canon and its relationship to fanfiction. As Breezy has said, the passage that you quoted, specifically, are just examples of one situation that could arise, and ways in which she imagines authors of different skill levels would approach a situation. I don't know how you got "if you don't do things this way, you are fail writer forever" out of that passage, but she's suggesting that good writers tend to approach fanfiction in one way as opposed to another. She might tell you that writing Professor Oak as you described is a Bad Idea, but I hardly think she'd say you're not allowed to (as preposterous a notion as that is).

I must admit that the little tag about Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks at the end really ****** me off because it suggests that you have no ****ing clue what they were all about, but given that it could get ugly if I really went into that, I'll leave it with: you have just compared to someone not liking another person's attitude towards fanfiction writing with years of severe prejudice towards a large minority group. Really. REALLY.

For the record, responding to someone's post with, "Well you can't tell me what to do! You're oppressing me for not respecting my opinions and liberties!" without any actual arguments against their post, and while suggesting that they have the characteristics of a religious extremist, is neither good debate nor particularly conducive to people respecting your opinions and liberties.

Edit: Will probably have to edit this after ninja.

Maybe I don't like Prof. Oak's personality, maybe I want to make him into a disgruntled cynic, a more tortured genius type character. Let's say I exchange the character of Prof. Oak with that of Gregory House.

If you don't like Professor Oak's personality, why would you write about him and not some other professor character who has the characteristics you want? This sentence basically states that you want to up and replace Professor Oak with somebody else, but still call him Professor Oak. How does that make sense?

Now would you really begrudge me the chance to do that?

Of course not. You can write whatever you want, but I reserve the right to...

Would you shout at me and say that it was wrong of me to do such a thing?

...not like it if I find that it's poor form.

Would you say my characterisation of Oak was so bad that you would consider doing the unimaginable and linking me to AFAA?

Some people may not take this "fanfiction" thing as seriously as you do. I might consider linking you to a good writing guide, though.

But, just a shot to The Big Al--it's true that the pokémon canon is wonderfully diverse and contradictory, which means that you have a great deal of leeway to do what you want with it. I agree, there's a great degree of leeway in what you write. But surely there's more similar than the fact that "pokémon exist." I'm pretty sure there's no canon that says things like, say, Mt. Coronet is in the middle of Kanto, or Arcanine are primarily aquatic, or suchlike. It's about seeing where you have leeway and where you don't, isn't it?

 

[The Big Al]

Those are characteristics of the Pokemon and basic geography. They're set in stone. I'm not saying you can do absolutely whatever. However, in original fiction, you can't have Michigan south of Ohio and robins swimming and not flying. It falls into the sense of disbelief of what happens in the Pokemon world and not what is canon.

What I mean is the characters and events are different depending on the media you reference. Let's take the Professor Oak example. The Special Manga introduced him as a standoffish curmudgeon and not the friendly and famous man he is in the games and anime. So, if you want to have a cynical Oak, you can point to the Special Manga for your reference.

 

[Diddy]

I must admit that the little tag about Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks at the end really ****** me off because it suggests that you have no ****ing clue what they were all about, but given that it could get ugly if I really went into that, I'll leave it with: you have just compared to someone not liking another person's attitude towards fanfiction writing with years of severe prejudice towards a large minority group. Really. REALLY.

Yes really. I'll also add that I don't appreciate being swore at.

you said it yourself. someone not liking another person's attitude. I'm pretty sure the two aforementioned people didn't like some white peoples attitudes and they fought against that. I don't claim to be an expert on social political nonsense or the Civil Rights Movement, but I do know the bare bones of it. I did say I might have been overstepping the mark, I knew I was comparing elephants and dormice, but when it comes down to it, they have the same characteristics.

Yeah, you kind of missed the point in a huge way. Valentine's post isn't prescribing things that you can or cannot do in a specific sense--she's talking about a general way of understanding canon and its relationship to fanfiction. As Breezy has said, the passage that you quoted, specifically, are just examples of one situation that could arise, and ways in which she imagines authors of different skill levels would approach a situation. I don't know how you got "if you don't do things this way, you are fail writer forever" out of that passage, but she's suggesting that good writers tend to approach fanfiction in one way as opposed to another. She might tell you that writing Professor Oak as you described is a Bad Idea, but I hardly think she'd say you're not allowed to (as preposterous a notion as that is).

It didn't come off as that to me when I first read it. The way she wrote it gave me a 'holier than thou' sense. That she knows what makes a good author and what doesn't. I stand on the side of almost anything can be good writing if looked at in a certain way, people's vastly varying opinions make it thus. I don't see how you got 'fail writer forever' from that but as I misconstrued Valentines post, maybe you did mine.

For the record, responding to someone's post with, "Well you can't tell me what to do! You're oppressing me for not respecting my opinions and liberties!" without any actual arguments against their post, and while suggesting that they have the characteristics of a religious extremist, is neither good debate nor particularly conducive to people respecting your opinions and liberties.

duely noted.

I'll just say that when it comes down to creative liberty. I have strong opinions for people who try and suggest that creativity has to be channeled in a certain direction.

If you don't like Professor Oak's personality, why would you write about him and not some other professor character who has the characteristics you want? This sentence basically states that you want to up and replace Professor Oak with somebody else, but still call him Professor Oak. How does that make sense?

It makes sense to me, I find the idea of a cynical Oak giving out pokemon to kiddies quite fun. Just because the anime says he's a kind-hearted guy, doesn't mean thats how it's going to stay.

Some people may not take this "fanfiction" thing as seriously as you do. I might consider linking you to a good writing guide, though.

It's not fanfiction, it's writing. I do take it seriously because it's one of the only things I have ever loved doing and I would greatly appreciate that link.

 

[Breezy]

Maybe I don't like Prof. Oak's personality, maybe I want to make him into a disgruntled cynic, a more tortured genius type character. Let's say I exchange the character of Prof. Oak with that of Gregory House.

That's not Professor Oak then. That's the body of Professor Oak with the personality of House. The only time I would even consider that okay would be in cases of AU where you ask the question, "What if Professor Oak was a sarcastic, cynical old man?" or "What if something bad happened in Professor Oak's trainer life that he didn't become the kind-hearted man he was?"

And yes, I would point it out to you if you wrote Professor Oak so out of character that I can't even SEE him anymore.

Now would you really begrudge me the chance to do that? Would you shout at me and say that it was wrong of me to do such a thing? Would you say my characterisation of Oak was so bad that you would consider doing the unimaginable and linking me to AFAA?

Again, I would point you to AU. Unfortunately, people consider AU as it being okay to change EVERYTHING about the characters when you would only change *one* aspect of a character/story and write how each character IC would act/react to the change. So if you were going to make Professor Oak insane, you would write how the characters in canon would react and how their journeys/life would have been effected. Would Ash have gotten Pikachu, for example?

Canon doesn't limit you to doing things, but you have to keep it in mind to make your story sound plausible. Let's go back to original fiction (kind of copying Valentine's post here, but eh). If your break the rules of gravity, physics, have people flying (extremes, but you get the point), then SOMEONE is going to question it. The same goes for fanfiction. If your character in certain canon, like anime Professor Oak, is extremely different from what he's portrayed as without proper explanation or reason, then someone is going to question it. I would, anyway.

For example, let's go back to the "snapping" thing. It would be unrealistic and somewhat unreasonable for Professor Oak to just snap at a young trainer just because he wanted to or something ridiculous. This doesn't mean that you CAN'T have him snap at someone. It would sound reasonable for Professor Oak to snap at a person if they were abusing a pokemon in some way.

It also depends what you mean by "snapping". I'm writing snapping as in yelling, harsh temper, etc. Do you mean snap like deranged snap? Quite frankly, it IS possible for Professor Oak to go that route, assuming you address and make it reasonable as to why he would. Frankly, though, it sounds more like a humor, crack fic because Professor Oak got a teensy weensy bit angry because people kept trashing his poetry.

The entire point of Valentine's post was working with what you have, not being limited to what is there and set in stone.

 

[Mnemesis]

Doing OOC purposedly is something that always have made me curious.
If you are capable of creating an entirely new character that is more interesting than the original one, why don't you just... Create an entirely new character?

Of course, if you say that Oak only pretends to be the way canon portrays him in front of others, but is actually a completely different guy behind the cameras, then I'd say that's a pretty interesting idea