Dusk Raven 
"[@moonlightaveger":](/1448166#comment_6226476
)
>
> [bq="moonlightaveger"]
"@Dusk Raven":](/1448166#comment_6223397
)
> I disagree. Because, to me, without that, I think you might as well be writing your own story. Just let me make something clear here: I'm all for people talking about their headcanons and all the theories that the story spins in their head. I do that all the time. But I also think that it's important to keep it well contained in a separate box from the canon. You can say that my way is a lot more limited, because it is, but I think it's the right way to understand a story someone is telling you. It's THEIR story.[/bq]
There are several large gaps between "interpreting something differently than the author intended" particularly when the author's intent is unclear, and actually writing your own story, partly because - why_*should_* they write their own story when this is simply how they see a story that exists?
[bq]
> We're talking about something much simpler here, and there are no real-life attitudes that one can take because they believe or not that Daybreaker is actually a part of Celestia.[/bq]
I'm not sure why that particular difference is relevant.
[bq]
> Of course not! If I said that in another post you can be sure it wasn't my intention. But that is what your story is: fanfiction. Maybe it's headcanon that fits canon so well that it just might be. (Like when people started writing fics about Luna and her ability to enter dreams before season 3) But just because it makes sense, and it explains a hole in the canon, it's not canon. Call it pedantic if you will, but those don't mix in my head.[/bq]
I've never claimed otherwise and have stated as such repeatedly, and I_*also_* agree with keeping an awareness of the nature of one's own headcanon as non-canon, so I'm not sure why you're still trying to make this point given I've never voiced opposition to it.
[bq]
> For example: it makes sense to me that Celestia can be calm, collected and keep under control in a tense situation, capable of making an actual hard and important decision, commanding an army, or even that she is a very powerful individual (both politically and magically) and at the same time freak out because she needs to send Twilight away and could potentially mess up Twilight's life. The problem is that the cartoon only tells me the last part of all that and because of that, I don't feel "comfortable" going in a conversation about the character and saying that Celestia certainly kicked some major ass and made Equestria the quasi-utopia that it is. As of now, the canon Celestia would crack like a twig the moment she needs to actually do anything.[/bq]
And that is_*your_* headcanon, because canon Celestia can and has made major decisions without breaking down - and while it's possible for something to really affect her, it's also rare. Even during the S4 finale, when explaining the decision to Twilight that she and the other princesses would be giving up their magic to her, she was calm despite what this meant. Even Twilight is capable of making decisions like that, and she's _*far_* more neurotic and prone to panic than Celestia. "A Royal Problem" was the one instance of Celestia coming close to panicking in a crisis, and the S7 opener showed her worrying but she also wasn't under any sort of time pressure so she had time to worry. Really, if you take away S7 there's no basis for the notion that Celestia would "crack like a twig" and the only reason she hasn't done more is because the show doesn't _*let_* her, and she's often taken out of commission for narrative purposes.
You see the difficulty sometimes in separating headcanon from canon? The distinction isn't always obvious, and people can disagree on what exactly the canon_*is_* in the first place. For the reasons mentioned, I disagree that the concept of "canon Celestia" you described is actually canon.
"@Amethyst_Crystal":/1448166#comment_6224172
I felt it was heavily insinuated she was upset about Daybreaker, and that she was being indirect about it.
Whether Daybreaker really is as terrible as her her own ’dark side’ or not, that is less easy to determine.
To me, Celestia was upset at her incapacity to fix the problem (Which was the point of the whole thing: their lack of appreciation of each other's jobs) and Luna was worried about Starlight Glimmer and not Daybreaker. I can definitively see why people think the way you do, but I feel like there should've been a line of dialogue where Luna explains that Celestia is letting her fears make the situation worse, if that was the intention. [/bq]
Have Opinion, Will Write
>
> [
"
> I disagree. Because, to me, without that, I think you might as well be writing your own story. Just let me make something clear here: I'm all for people talking about their headcanons and all the theories that the story spins in their head. I do that all the time. But I also think that it's important to keep it well contained in a separate box from the canon. You can say that my way is a lot more limited, because it is, but I think it's the right way to understand a story someone is telling you. It's THEIR story.
There are several large gaps between "interpreting something differently than the author intended" particularly when the author's intent is unclear, and actually writing your own story, partly because - why
[bq]
> We're talking about something much simpler here, and there are no real-life attitudes that one can take because they believe or not that Daybreaker is actually a part of Celestia.
I'm not sure why that particular difference is relevant.
[bq]
> Of course not! If I said that in another post you can be sure it wasn't my intention. But that is what your story is: fanfiction. Maybe it's headcanon that fits canon so well that it just might be. (Like when people started writing fics about Luna and her ability to enter dreams before season 3) But just because it makes sense, and it explains a hole in the canon, it's not canon. Call it pedantic if you will, but those don't mix in my head.
I've never claimed otherwise and have stated as such repeatedly, and I
[bq]
> For example: it makes sense to me that Celestia can be calm, collected and keep under control in a tense situation, capable of making an actual hard and important decision, commanding an army, or even that she is a very powerful individual (both politically and magically) and at the same time freak out because she needs to send Twilight away and could potentially mess up Twilight's life. The problem is that the cartoon only tells me the last part of all that and because of that, I don't feel "comfortable" going in a conversation about the character and saying that Celestia certainly kicked some major ass and made Equestria the quasi-utopia that it is. As of now, the canon Celestia would crack like a twig the moment she needs to actually do anything.
And that is
You see the difficulty sometimes in separating headcanon from canon? The distinction isn't always obvious, and people can disagree on what exactly the canon
"@Amethyst_Crystal":/1448166#comment_6224172
I felt it was heavily insinuated she was upset about Daybreaker, and that she was being indirect about it.
Whether Daybreaker really is as terrible as her her own ’dark side’ or not, that is less easy to determine.
To me, Celestia was upset at her incapacity to fix the problem (Which was the point of the whole thing: their lack of appreciation of each other's jobs) and Luna was worried about Starlight Glimmer and not Daybreaker. I can definitively see why people think the way you do, but I feel like there should've been a line of dialogue where Luna explains that Celestia is letting her fears make the situation worse, if that was the intention. [/bq]