behind the laughter

Many people consider this show to be noncanonical (although some disagree). I was wondering whether Matt Groening or any of the others involved in the Simpsons directly had commented on this (e.g. MG said that the Halloween specials are not canon - has he said the same about this episode?)

Thanks

[email] wrote:

Who cares about where shows are canon or not. The Simpsons are a show in which you judge each episode on its merits, not whether or not the episode fits neatly into the simpsons universe. You could ask questions like is Smithers being black canon? is the fact that Krusty wants to eat pork in season one canon?

mad2physicist wrote:

There are far too many continuity inconsistencies - including intentional ones put into episodes - for "canon" to have any reasonable meaning with the show.

-- Don

Granted, that it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to talk about a "canon" in a show with "flexible reality" like the Simpsons have. Despite this, Groening has explicitly stated that the Halloween episodes are specifically non-canonical and do not have to follow any established continuity at all, and I was just wondering whether he had made a similar statement about the episode Behind the Laughter (clearly BtL contradicts itself in different airings about where the "real" Simpson family lives, so to some degree it doesn't make sense to talk about the whole thing as being "canon," so really all that I am interested in is whether there has been an official statement on the matter - I'm well aware of the logical problems one encounters when trying to define a Simpsons canon, and I'm also not trying to argue for the merits of attempting to do so, nor am I attempting to do so - I am only wondering whether he's said anything about this specific episode).

I don't understand the canon reference.

Aaron Xpac3 Mvx3vm

wrote in message news:[email]...

Perhaps if you were cannonized... http://capefeare.com/tour30.jpg

Cannon was a detective played by "William Conrad". On a TV show 30 years ago. But I can't seem to remember the name of the show. William Conrad was also the narrator for that cartoon that starred Rocky and Bullwinkle, but I can't seem to remember the name of that show, either.

Boris Badenov: "keeel moos and skverril wid bom!"

Aaron Xpac3 Mvx3vm

mad2physicist wrote:

Understood. I don't think an "official" statement was ever made. (Simpsons Bible Stories probably isn't canon, mainly because of its ending.) In fact, the only circumstance I can think of under which Matt made a statement regarding THOH was some comment he made about how either he or the writers consider it their favorite episode(s) as "we don't have to follow the rules". Was there anything more "official" ever said?

-- Don

Perhaps not. I thought I remember reading something somewhere about him making a statement to the effect that the rules don't apply to the Halloween specials, but perhaps what you stated was it. I can't be sure, and I unfortunately don't recall exactly where I found the reference (I think it was when poking around snpp.com, however, so you would probably know where to find it better than I :) ).

Anyway the general consensus that I've heard (and with which I agree) is that this episode was intended not to follow the usuall "semi-continuous flexible reality" in the same vein as THOH specials, but I thought perhaps someone involved in production would have commented.