In defence of 'headcanon': I am old, and dislike jargon, buzzwords and new words being coined when perfectly good ones exist already.
However, I came across this term very recently and thought it was a neat way of describing how one's personal interpretation of a narrative/subtext may overlay the author's intention, or be maintained even when the author later adds material which contradicts, or provides a 'definitive' reading.
I don't know much about literary criticism, but I would have thought there would have been examples as soon as some medieval scholar found that the later chapters of a manuscript had been eaten by rats en voyage from Alexandria.
In defence of 'headcanon': I am old, and dislike jargon, buzzwords and new words being coined when perfectly good ones exist already.
However, I came across this term very recently and thought it was a neat way of describing how one's personal interpretation of a narrative/subtext may overlay the author's intention, or be maintained even when the author later adds material which contradicts, or provides a 'definitive' reading.
I don't know much about literary criticism, but I would have thought there would have been examples as soon as some medieval scholar found that the later chapters of a manuscript had been eaten by rats en voyage from Alexandria.