Zelda is a legend in the traditional sense: every Zelda game is a retelling of the same folk tale, passed down through the generations in a society without a written history. Details are lost, forgotten, mixed up or intentionally changed, depending on who's doing the telling, but the core of the story remains the same. This is the only canonical connection between any two Zelda games.

The only exception is Zelda II, which was written as a sequel to The Legend of Zelda in the same way that the Book of Mormon is a sequel to the Bible. It's accepted as canon by a small group of zealous devotees, but it's just an interesting footnote to everyone else.

Hyrule Historia is the King James Bible of the Zelda mythos: it's a quasi-official version of the legend released by a ruling body who claims to have the authority to do this, but it's just as flawed as any other interpretation. Some people with a need for organizational certainty accept that HH is the real, official version of the legend and that's that, but the story of Link, like the story of Jesus, transcends any one text.

Follow

Obligatory footnote to clarify that I'm full of shit and you can believe whatever you want about the Zelda timeline, which is my real point: canon is only important to the extent that it helps people. Fuck the authority, make your own canon

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Cybrespace

cybrespace: the social hub of the information superhighway

jack in to the mastodon fediverse today and surf the dataflow through our cybrepunk, slightly glitchy web portal