eregyrn-falls:

Sorry that it took a little bit to get to this. But here are my thoughts:

To be honest, I DO NOT think that things mentioned in the DVD commentaries, and especially not the deleted scenes, are “canon”. But, I think that depends partly on how you define canon. Others may define it differently from the way I do.

The way I tend to look at these things: what was actually in the show is “canon”. “Secondary canon” is still that was in official auxiliary materials (Journal 3 and the Blacklight Edition, various books, including the graphic novel). In my view, secondary canon material is nice, and I might accept it if I like it, but I don’t necessarily feel bound by it, especially if it contradicts something seen in primary canon (the show). Then there’s “tertiary canon” – stuff that comes from commentary in interviews, twitter, or the dvd commentaries. Again – sometimes it’s really nice to know, but I tend not to feel bound by it. I’ll borrow from it if I really like it. Alex Hirsch himself has implied that stuff from interviews and twitter and stuff like that are “his headcanons”, which puts that material an even further rung down in importance. (Use it if you like it! If not, ignore!) Again, the show is the final arbiter.

This is just the way I work. It also goes without saying that I find discussions and weighing of canon interesting. Other folks may feel differently!

Anyway – it was truly never “canon” (in any sense that I am aware of) that Bill survived in Stan’s mind. As far as I know, that was a popular fan theory, based on various pieces of reasoning; but it was never explicitly stated in the show (canon), or even in any piece of secondary canon that I’m aware of. Don’t mix up popular or even plausible fan theories with what is “canon”.

Even the idea that Bill might have “survived” in some sense – and the evidence in favor of this, like the dying messages and the codes – never actually confirms that his method of survival was inside Stan’s mind. Different theories could be created to explain his “survival”. We aren’t told explicitly.

Why include those hints at all? I think, partly, because it’s “fun”. The viewpoint of Alex and others on the show seems to be that mysteries are fun, and they know that the fan base enjoys digging out evidence of those mysteries, and spinning theories. Sometimes that activity is an end in itself. Asking questions and wondering and making theories is often much more satisfying than being given answers. (Although, I think Gravity Falls is a rare instance of a show that raised questions and mysteries that it then answered in very satisfying ways. But it still left other mysteries unanswered, because it wouldn’t be as fun if everything was solved.)

For this reason, I don’t see Alex’s comments on his view of it, in the DVD commentaries, as denying or destroying fan theories or headcanons. He has said several times that his headcanons are just that – his headcanons. He thinks that fans should feel free to have their own headcanons, and they should not privilege his over theirs. He wants fans to keep having fun with the material, not to shoot them down.

And sure, maybe it doesn’t matter to the story any more – but that’s not the only reason for Alex (and others who made the show) to continue to talk about it. They’re just talking about what was in their minds when they created the show. Some fans find that kind of behind the scenes look at the creative process really interesting (I absolutely do!). The value of such commentary is not solely about whether it tells us something regarding where the story goes after the finale of the show.

To be clear: it’s okay if you value it for that! And if you are particularly interested in that! But that may not be Alex’s or others’ aims in making the comments, and other fans may value the information in other ways.

But, if you find yourself unable to continue to hold a theory because Alex said something that contradicts what you think, that’s more about your decision to regard his comments as more important than your ideas. I don’t think it’s what he (or others who worked on the show) are trying to do.

Finally – I honestly don’t think that he is “milking” Gravity Falls. I think he genuinely loves the show and its characters; and I think he’s genuinely touched by the continued love and enthusiasm shown for it by its fandom. I think that what he’s given us since then has been things that the fans have been very loud in saying we want. The DVD set, with its bonus material and commentaries, is also a way of creating a lasting monument to the show, that hopefully will be available to future viewers for years to come.

I do think it’s worth keeping in mind, though, that whenever you ask a creator for more material, there’s always the chance that you won’t like what they give you as much as you liked the original thing. I think fans always have to be prepared for that. Many people have loved many aspects of some of the further material that we’ve gotten – the Journal and its blacklight edition, the books, the graphic novel, the DVDs. But not everybody has loved every aspect of those works, and that’s okay. You don’t have to love it, or even incorporate what’s in it, with the same level of love that you might have for the show.

At this stage, I don’t really know how many more Gravity Falls things we can really expect to see, either. I’m hoping for an Art Book, with a lot more behind the scenes looks at the development of the show. I don’t know whether we’ll ever get another graphic novel, with post-finale stories, or not. I think that Alex, and many others who worked on the show, have new creative projects to focus on, and that’s cool. I’m looking forward to seeing what many of them do next!