AP>-> Except for the fact that the novels aren't stand-alones that are their 
own
AP>-> mythos.  Their very existence comes by virtue of their devolution from 
the
AP>-> TV creation of TGBOTG.  Since by axiomatic
AP>-> definition a creation can never be greater than its creator (due to the 
fact
AP>-> that the creator is the standard by which it is measured), the novels 
can
AP>-> therefore never dictate what is/is not Trek over the show itself. };)
AP>The novels also change what we see on the show... or I read something in a
AP>novel and it sounds great and it's only disproved in the next episode I 
watch.
Or in the next novel by another author. }}:)
AP>In otherwords... novels are definately NOT canon.
We get in so much trouble if we even *breathe* the c-word these
days.   There *has* to be some standard, some consistency, for
there to *be* a mythos to build on.  This sort of thing was the
inspiration for this tag; yeah, it makes a lot of people mad, I
admit --  but I've never seen anyone who was able to refute it.

---
 þ OLXWin 1.00b þ HEY, hyperfan! Don't like the show? Change it in a novel!
---------------