Mirror, Mirror notes

True. Also, you are such a dick.

Hahaha, but in all seriousness, does anyone really hate when writers allow actors to express range by tweaking the possibilities in like 8% of a total series? Ah well, everyone's mileage does vary.

 

I have to disagree with your assessment of "journey To Babel" as it showed both Spock and Sarek acting very much like your average Vulcan.

Also in "Amok Time", both T'Pring and Stonn were very much your average Vulcan.

My point? If there's one thing TOS did well it showed that both Humans and various alien species (such as the Vulcans) believed themselves to be better than they were in reality.

Vulcans like to think of themselves as completely logical and above emotional entanglements. Sarek, T'Pring and Stonn or prime examples of how Vulcans actually behaved as opposed to the ideal of how Vulcans liked to believe they behaved.

 

Related to these excellent points: TMP is my 2nd favorite film behind Wrath of Khan primarily because of Spock's character arc. I am a rare breed to be sure, but that is what it is.

 

In an infinite multiverse, literally anything can happen. Thus, the existence of the mirror universe as we know it, which follows the prime universe so closely but in an evil manner, is simultaneously no MORE and no LESS likely than any other universe.

 

Yup. I was unaware it was so difficult to grasp.

 

Journey to Babel:
Anyone who refuses to speak to their father for Years,
is in a Highly Emotional state of mind.

Add a couple more:
Galileo 7: Spock is in a highly emotional state of mind when he jettison's the shuttle's fuel. he's essentially committing suicide on the off chance that a space ship is in visual range and looking. The writers were so intent on making that point that they had Kirk spell it out in the end of the episode.

Devil in the Dark:
Let's let a heavily wounded alien take over his mind so Spock can scream and cry and grieve.

Honestly: In the end, the character of Spock isn't defined by him being logical and unemotional.
The character is more defined from the times he goes out of character.

Scott Kellogg

 

One aspect, however, that got seriously out of control, for example in Dark Mirror novel and especially in Discovery episodes, was the assasination aspect. From the original episode we can conclude that 1) Imperial Starfleet command can order assasination of the captain, if it looks like he stopped following orders and 2) Ambitious officers can try to kill him, if they have a hunch that nobody will investigate under these circumstances (or, as a Sulu, they can blame somebody else). At least in mirror Enterprise, Archer could do a simple coup as an instigator of a plan that was presented as profitable for the Empire. Compare it with Discovery, where it looks like duels and assasinations are just open everyday business.

 

Hey, look. 70% of the earth's surface is water.

Therefore, the earth's surface is more defined by when it's not land than when the surface is land

- said no scientist ever.

 

All kidding aside: Journey to Babel, Galileo Seven, Devil in the Dark are some of Spock's greatest moments in my mind ... you seem to forget that the writers established Spock was half human and never meant for Spock to act perfectly logical in all his moments. They never promised us that - implicitly or otherwise.

They showed us that Spock wanted to act perfectly logical all the time. His human half peeking through is a constant thing that makes him so intriguing as a character.

You started out with a point about when they introduced artificial means like "spores" and "alien possessions" to bust on the writers,

but you are going so far into a flawed deconstruction of Spock that makes me wonder how you can so fundamentally misunderstand him? Oh well.

 

Agreed on the first part.

It appears that the Terran Empire's rules on this sort of thing are the same as the Klingons (either universe): Anyone can challenge a fellow officer (all the way up to the Captain) to a fight to the death, if they feel that the other is weak or has acted against the interests of the Empire. No "investigation" is necessary, because such challenges/assassinations are legal.

f you win, you move up in rank; if you lose, you die. Everyone knows this going in. That's the end of it, really.

(In the Terran Empire, if you are so bold as to challenge the Captain and win, you apparently don't become Captain; his/her XO would take command, and everyone else moves up in rank. That's what mu-Chekov said, anyway. Don't know if this is the case with the Klingons.)

 

Infinite multiverses are still governed by logic and physics, in theory anyway (unless you have a universe specifically defying this). So with logic and physics, you can't have humans living on the Sun in one universe and in another universe they can't because of the physical properties of the sun and human bodies. Therefore, you can't logically and physically have a universe where everything is identical but just in an 'evil' way, because things will start to veer off very quickly from the same starting point based on the actions in each universe.

Yes, I realize this is all fiction, but unless it's explained with logic and physics how a human can live on the Sun, it's not a believable concept.

 

Mirror Chekhov was mentioning investigations, thats why I did .

 

Because he wasn't to he unemotional as he went. Nimoy played him as someone with intense emotions always under restraint.

 

When a discussion about alternate universes comes up I often can't help remembering a Sliders episode.

In this Sliders episode, The protagonists think they're finally back in their home universe until they see that the Golden Gate bridge is painted blue.

Robert

 

And that's precisely why I said, this stuff blows my suspension of disbelief.

Scott Kellogg

 

Hahaha, good try. Your claim was impossible, but you knew that. Hahaha

 

Yes, I remember this one. It's one of the early ones, maybe the third or fourth one.

 

Actually, they're governed by whatever the writer says.