In the Beginning Was the Canon
15 de feb. de 2026 — Juan Ruocco 🧙♂️
For a while now I've been wanting to "activate" some kind of new, recurring material. While that need is generally covered by the video podcast "Circulo Vicioso", for some time I've wanted to write and/or talk about topics that exceed the format's boundaries.
I gave it a lot of thought, considered recording a new podcast (but it felt too cliche), producing "video essays" (but that felt even more cliche), so I settled on the simplest yet most inevitable option. Why, instead of trying to fold myself into whatever the era demands (video essays, podcasts, newsletters), don't I go against the grain -- a bit like always -- and go back to basics. So here we are, once again, on another blogging adventure.
I chose text which, at this point, is the simplest form of production. Any of the other options would have involved, at minimum, writing a script and then producing the material, whether in audio, video, or both. I have neither the time nor the desire to keep venturing into that style of communication, at least not for now. The "YouTube" angle, as I mentioned, is already covered with CV, and I think that's more than enough. So let it be text only, and let high end die. It's (my) time to go back to lofi.
This is about reviving an old idea that's been in my head for years -- part idea, part fantasy, part delusion. But every time I think about it, it gives me a good feeling. For a while now I've toyed with the idea of putting together a book (or a large magazine), although in reality it would be something more like a phone book, with a soft cover and thin pages, where all the material that, in my humble opinion, is mandatory to watch, read, and listen to before you die would be compiled. I've always thought of this fictional guide as a "canon."
It all started kind of as a Twitter joke where I'd post a movie like, I don't know, Commando, and just write the word "canon." From then on I started doing it regularly, saw that it had some merit, and if I hadn't deleted those tweets I could be quoting them here. But I can't. Anyway.
The idea that there's a canon of a certain kind of cinema, a certain kind of music, and a certain kind of books and a certain kind of comics that form a cohesive whole really excites me. Even more so if I get to be the one who determines what's in and what's out of that canon. Something like a personal canon of the cultural works I loved the most or that, at the very least, shaped the way I see the world.
Because that's kind of what this whole thing I have with fiction, stories, tales, and myths is about. They're fictions, but they influence, in some way, my ability to see reality. My way of understanding the world. My way of feeling, too.
What Is a Canon?
In his book "In the Beginning God Created the Canon," Argentine philosopher Eduardo Rabossi discusses the formation of philosophy as a practice built upon a certain canon of texts, and states:
"[...] every profession presupposes the existence of a canon, that is, a basic set of precepts that stipulates and defines the domain, the theoretical and practical assumptions, the goals, objectives, and values that are proper to it. The canons of professions underlie the formal requirements demanded for professional practice, determine the general conception of the discipline, and set the limits of its legitimate exercise."
Perhaps this definition is a bit advanced or explains much more than what we're trying to say. We can think of multiple canons, governing multiple disciplines.
A canon, in a simpler definition than Rabossi's, is ultimately the body of texts that results from applying a selection criterion to another body. A canon is the result of a function that consists of applying a criterion to a body and, in that way, obtaining another one. As Daniel Dennett says, "an author is the mechanism by which one library becomes another."
Let me give a somewhat rough but simple example. The Bible is a collection of books that come from a bunch of different literary traditions and even tell different things. The Bible, moreover, wasn't written at the time of the events it describes but rather is posterior (setting aside the whole problem of its historicity). On top of this, there's the problem of the division between the Old and New Testaments. The Old Testament recounts all the experiences of the Jewish people from Genesis to the era of the prophets, while the New Testament begins with the appearance of Jesus as the messiah of the Jewish people.
In any case, there was a moment in history (I believe in the Middle Ages) when Christians said: this collection of texts goes into the Bible and all these others stay out. In fact, one of the significant differences between Catholics and Protestants has to do with some Old Testament books that weren't included in the reformists' versions. Anyway, in this case the selection of texts forms the biblical "canon," and all the other texts dealing with the life of Jesus that aren't included in the canon are considered "apocryphal."
This idea of canon became very popular over time in fictional universes where, given the sheer amount of material about each character -- for example Superman -- it created the need for fans to distinguish which of all the texts are canonical, that is, part of the official selection that makes up the story of a character or universe. This also gave rise to the explosion of the fanfiction genre, which allowed users themselves to create "apocryphal" or "non-canonical" stories about their favorite characters. In fact, one of the biggest events following Disney's purchase of Star Wars was "de-canonizing" everything known as the "Expanded Universe," which was the collection of comics created within the same universe as the original trilogy. The struggle over stories is always the struggle over the canon.
My Canon
"[...] a basic set of precepts that stipulates and defines the domain, the theoretical and practical assumptions, the goals, objectives, and values that are proper to it."
Going back to Rabossi's definition: why create a canon? Isn't it just a fancy name for a simple selection of cultural materials? Yes, it's very likely just a whim. However, I think something will emerge throughout this search: not a common criterion, but rather a reflective exercise about the materials we include. Why we include them, how they relate to other materials in the canon, and what they contribute. I also think that using the word "canon" is a way of democratizing the concept a bit. While it's already popular enough to have lost some of its mystique, it still resonates in certain places of cultural value. What is "culture" if not the struggle over defining the canon? In this sense, the play is clear. Instead of trying to dispute or reform other people's canons, what better than creating your own. Made in the image and likeness of your own tastes and neuroses.
With this introduction out of the way, all that's left is to wait for the next installment with the first "canonical" material. And with that, begin to "stipulate and define the domain" as well as the "goals, objectives, and values that are proper to it." That is, what I want to say about the fine art of storytelling, through a fine selection of works that, in many ways, preceded us. And perhaps with some luck, and a lot of perseverance, determine the general conception of the discipline and set the limits of its legitimate exercise.
Post Script: One detail, not a minor one, that somehow guides the spirit of this space is that the production/distribution company behind a bunch of the films we're going to include in our canon was called Cannon, and its logo is the image that illustrates the beginning of this post. The signs are always there for those who want to see them.
