I am a storyteller and a Potterhead, which means I've always looked at HARRY POTTER AND THE CURSED CHILD differently than most.

Confession time: I LOVE books, but reading tends to be more of a challenging than relaxing activity. I can never concentrate on the story. I see the man behind the curtain and linger on paragraphs, never moving from line to line without the desire to reach for a red pen. Which is why I lean toward audiobooks.

When I first heard of this play and how JKR was giving another writer a chance to develop NEW MATERIAL in her world, I was speechless. The universe was continuing to expand, and she was handing the quill to her fans.

And they weren't chosen to tell just any old story. No, this was the future of Harry, Ron, and Hermione.

As a writer who could have, in some alternate reality, found himself in that scenario, I was ecstatic for Jack Thorne and John Tiffany. After reading the script, however, I was disappointed and underwhelmed and kinda embarrassed for them. I wondered what could've been created, were I to have such a responsibility. Would I have written the play with such obvious inconsistencies? Of course not! I realize this is not a fair criticism. There could be any number of reasons why it was written this way. Still, as a storyteller, I have yet to let it go.

As the days carried on, readers found themselves feeling the same frustrations. Soon, a phrase made its way across social media: NOT MY CANON.

This statement provoked a lot of debate: On what grounds did Not My Canon originate? What are the benchmarks for canon, and who decides? And what exactly is canon, anyway?

Canon is short for canonical - The work in question is recognized as the depiction of historical events and genuine characterization within the framework of a fictionalized world. It is fully endorsed and accepted by the utmost authority within the fandom. As the root word for "authority" is author, it's safe to say that J.K. Rowling's opinion is the ultimate determining factor on what is or is not canon. Typically, a pronouncement from JKR would go unquestioned.

But if we're not allowed to question her authority, why are 9/10ths of the fandom standing in open opposition to her?

For some, the initial response to the script book was resoundingly negative, forcing an almost physical reaction - the illogicality of the text making the decision for them. Example: If you walk outside and the sky is green, you ignore anyone who tells you it's still blue. Your eyes simply cannot accept what they are seeing as reality. It reads like fanfiction, therefore it must be (despite what the creator has to say on the matter).

Next, it's the knowledge that Jack Thorne was the official scribe for the play. This is the easiest argument for fans to rely upon when called to defend their reaction that it doesn't feel like a Harry Potter book written by J.K. Rowling. If the litmus test of canon is whether the material is written by J.K. Rowling, this work should not be deemed canonical. Plain and simple. She did not physically write Cursed Child.

The problem we face is that it's public knowledge that JKR was a key part of the process in the development of the plot. And if she even partly created this new content, couldn't you say that it's canon? If anything she writes is considered to be canon, then "creates" versus "writes" is just an argument of parsing words.

Some fans, myself included, needed to find a way of plausibly denying the reality that she was involved in Cursed Child. There had to be an explanation, because JKR would've never written something so atrocious. It is not her style. The dialogue and characterization are all wrong. The central plot device, a Time-Turner, is presented in a way that doesn't follow the laws upon which it was introduced. How can we consider this to be canon when the plot hinges on basic factual negligence? Any argument in favor of canon is instantly discredited. It's so wrong, she couldn't have written it in any capacity.

Lastly, many of the core story elements are pulled directly from fanfiction. (You know the elements of which I speak. I will address them soon enough. Not emotionally ready.) Let's just say that many of us were VERY familiar with the story points and tropes in Cursed Child, and it left us severely unimpressed. JKR would never do that to us. Not canon.

So why, then, is it categorized as canon by "the utmost authority of the fandom"? Whether she played a big role in the creation or not, how could she ever give this story her well-respected seal of approval? Some of the more cynical voices believed that Rowling's name and affirmation of canon was vital for the success of the endeavor. Her name is a money-maker and a fan magnet. Without her, the marketability of this undertaking is much less fruitful.

That's one view. Another could be stubbornness. She's shown a propensity for that in the past. Honestly, her assertions of canon-compliance are so easily disproven, what other argument makes sense?

But it seems like so much more than that. She is outwardly, publicly praising Jack Thorne. Maybe admitting that he did a poor job would reflect poorly on her, since she is the one who approved of him in the first place? Maybe...

Or maybe she really likes it.

Regardless of the reason, fans were irritated that JKR called it canon, so they reacted in open revolt. Not My Canon is a statement of rebellion, a declaration of resistance - that fans reject the legitimacy of Cursed Child. Despite that the book was a bestseller, or that the play is doing well, or that we may actually enjoy the performance, we renounce it as canon. JKR has opened our shared world to potential damage, whether by unknowingly adding inaccurate details, or by misplacing her trust in another writer who did so on her behalf. Therefore, we had no choice but to construct some kind of mental barricade.

As well, Not My Canon was a way of standing up against it so the voices of the fanbase could be heard. But naturally, we didn't all agree.

We had "the angry voice": Tearing the story to bits, they compared JKR to George Lucas, and practically warned the franchise gods not to dare place Cursed Child in the same category as the Harry Potter books.

We had "the decisive voice": JKR could call it canon until she's blue in the face. It's not canon, and never will be. Might as well act as if it doesn't exist. They were thankful for the trolley witch. It gave them an easy page in which they could turn when anyone asks if it's worth reading.

We had "the doubter": Because when it comes from JKR, canon is relative. They were quick to point out that Pottermore had to alter their official explanation of time travel for Cursed Child to even work. If a world-building element can be amended so casually, it means nothing.

We had "the ridiculer": "Hey, guys. Check out this totes good Scorbus fanfic by some dood named Jack Thorne."

Then we had "the depressed, but devoted": There's no reason to argue that it isn't canon. It's not really up to us to decide. Just accept that Delphi exists, whether we like it or not. If JKR tweets that it's part of the wizarding world, it is. C'est la vie.

We have "the rationalizers": Sure, the plot sucks. Can't argue with you. And JKR's opinion stopped mattering to me years ago. But I'm sure the play is amazing. I'll hold back my judgement until I see it in person. Which will probably never happen. So...I guess I can't tell you what I think, one way or another. I'll just pretend that this is a fun little side story that didn't really happen. Easy to ignore.

Then, my favorite... "the diligent and frenzied sympathizers": Either it was great, and you're all wrong: The sky is blue, dammit! It won nine effing Oliviers. That's no easy feat. Can't happen if the play is no good. Those people know better than you. Your opinion is nothing. It won for Best New Play. Jack Thorne got a gold trophy. So...

Or maybe it wasn't great, but it's not her fault: Fine, it had mistakes...but she wasn't involved. Rowling just signed off on it.

And how dare you argue: At the end of the day, her version of what happened to Harry is the "official" version. She can change her mind tomorrow and you can't complain. She's allowed to do that. This is her story, not ours.

Because she is infallible: Her word is the "gospel truth". If she says canon, it's canon. Her testimony shan't be questioned. Get used to it.

Sounds a little extreme, doesn't it? The most shocking detail is that JKR sees herself in that final example. Here's the background image she once used on Twitter when fans were questioning her reasoning for stating that Dumbledore was gay, long after the books were published.

No matter what I, or anyone else, thinks, when JKR writes new material (or coordinates with writers, or just states that some random idea has canonical validity), we are forced to reimagine the events that took place within the seven Harry Potter novels. There is nothing wrong with backstory, or expanding the lore, or elevating our enjoyment of the books - AS LONG AS IT MAKES SENSE. Because even the smallest addendum will inevitably provoke reinterpretation, and therefore alter our understanding of (and connection with) the originals. Which is why separating the canon into three categories is vital to the security of Harry's legacy. That way, fans of the books can feel safe arguing, "No...that is not canon. At least not book canon."

If this concept is new to you, you can borrow my interpretation of canon. All work should be divided into three distinct categories: OS-Canon, JKR-Canon, and WW-Canon. OS-Canon means Original Source books, Harry Potter 1-7. JKR-Canon is any details J.K. Rowling chooses to share, either through Pottermore, tweets, interviews, etc. WW-Canon is the wizarding world continuity canon, which could be considered a catch-all for everything beyond the other two categories, like the movies, play script, video games, card games, toys, theme parks, etc.

I know this isn't easy. We just want to enjoy Harry Potter and not have to think so much. Frankly, when most of us heard about the play, we were looking forward to grabbing hold of a portkey that would jettison us back to the magical world of those original stories. The posters of the book cover promised us it would happen. This was supposed to be the eighth installment of the series. How could it fail?

Had JKR never claimed it to be canon, we could find things we enjoyed about the play. Cursed Child would just be another fanfiction... and in that world, there are no rules to break. The strange and unacceptable deviations can be glossed over. Heck, they're almost encouraged. In fan works, we should be pushing the boundaries and taking risks. Use tropes if you want, it's all for fun!

But HARRY POTTER AND THE CURSED CHILD isn't fanfiction. It was sanctioned by the original author. And she called it canon, painting with a broad brush. Content is either canon (it exists and happened in the wizarding world) or not canon (it did not happen).

I can accept that I've often painted with a broad brush at times. I wanted to use this chapter to emphasize our differences. Some of you may have REALLY enjoyed Cursed Child. I don't think the counterarguments hold up under scrutiny, and I personally believe the whole thing feels more superficial than the epilogue to Deathly Hallows... BUT that's me. For real, I don't want to diminish your enjoyment of the play. JKR may still be your hero. To the rest of us, however, her Sword of Gryffindor has lost a bit of that impressive shine.