Harrison in the Prime Universe

[The Wormhole]

It has been suggested that, had Picard and crew not appeared in the past of 2063 as shown in ST:FC, that the Mirror Universe resulted from it.

Meaning: the MU, and the resultant Terran Empire, is the 'natural' evolution of the timeline, and it was only Picard's interference from the future that created the 'good' regular universe. Not surprising, as in the 24th century of the MU there is no Empire, no Imperial Starfleet, and thus no mirror universe Ent-E, to travel back in the first place...

Problem is, there is divergence going back before 2063. According to Enterprise's two-parter, Earth literature is different between the two universes, the Prime's literature is "soft and weak" compared to the MU's. Except for Shakespeare, he's the same in both universes. There's a line stating the Terran Empire had already been around "for centuries."

Then there's my personal theory that Earth spins in the opposite direction in the MU (the sun rises in the west). I base this on the animated logo of the Terran Empire seen at the end of the Enterprise credits, which depicts Earth spinning in just a way. Hey, we've never seen which direction MU Earth spins on screen, who's to say it doesn't spin the opposite way?

 

[Procutus]

Problem is, there is divergence going back before 2063. According to Enterprise's two-parter, Earth literature is different between the two universes, the Prime's literature is "soft and weak" compared to the MU's. Except for Shakespeare, he's the same in both universes. There's a line stating the Terran Empire had already been around "for centuries."

I believe that what you're referring to there is from Diane Duane's TNG novel, 'Dark Mirror'. It's been years since I've read it, but I don't think this came from ENT's two-parter, as I've seen that about ten times.

 

[BillJ]

Problem is, there is divergence going back before 2063. According to Enterprise's two-parter, Earth literature is different between the two universes, the Prime's literature is "soft and weak" compared to the MU's. Except for Shakespeare, he's the same in both universes. There's a line stating the Terran Empire had already been around "for centuries."

I believe that what you're referring to there is from Diane Duane's TNG novel, 'Dark Mirror'. It's been years since I've read it, but I don't think this came from ENT's two-parter, as I've seen that about ten times.

It's a discussion between Phlox and T'Pol.

 

[The Wormhole]

Problem is, there is divergence going back before 2063. According to Enterprise's two-parter, Earth literature is different between the two universes, the Prime's literature is "soft and weak" compared to the MU's. Except for Shakespeare, he's the same in both universes. There's a line stating the Terran Empire had already been around "for centuries."

I believe that what you're referring to there is from Diane Duane's TNG novel, 'Dark Mirror'. It's been years since I've read it, but I don't think this came from ENT's two-parter, as I've seen that about ten times.

As mentioned above, Dr. Phlox makes that comment about Earth literature to T'Pol in PArt 2. They're in the Defiant's mess hall.

Diane Duane's Dark Mirror novel features a Shakespeare play which is very different from the actual version.

 

[Procutus]

OK my bad, I'm going to have to pull out my ENT DVD and watch that again. I seriously don't remember that being mentioned.

That aside, I agree with you totally that I always believed the MU to have existed completely parallel to ours, from the very beginning. No divergence in a timeline, just two independent universes that evolved differently (much like in Fringe).

 

[F. King Daniel]

I'm pretty sure the FC divergence point idea is from Shatner/Reeves-Stevenseseseseses Spectre or Dark Victory. A coin toss by Cochrane as to whether to te the Vulcans about the Borg or not.

As for "In a Mirror, Darkly" - remember that nasty regimes throughout history have rewritten literature to suit their causes. The same could easily be true of the evil Empire. Thus, the Phlox/T'Pol chitchat may not be indicitive of an earlier divergence point.

 

[BillJ]

OK my bad, I'm going to have to pull out my ENT DVD and watch that again. I seriously don't remember that being mentioned.

That aside, I agree with you totally that I always believed the MU to have existed completely parallel to ours, from the very beginning. No divergence in a timeline, just two independent universes that evolved differently (much like in Fringe).

They likely had to be connected somehow though to continue to evolve in such a similar fashion.

 

[Procutus]

^


There is that, with so many people existing in both sets of universes. I once wrote a novella dealing with a parallel universe, though I never got too deeply into the mechanics of how it evolved - only the idea of people dealing with their not-so-nice counterparts.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

It has been suggested that, had Picard and crew not appeared in the past of 2063 as shown in ST:FC, that the Mirror Universe resulted from it.

I'm not so sure seeing as in a Mirror Darkly had what looked like Armstrong planting a Terran Empire flag on the Moon, which would mean the Terran Empire would be around at least since the 1960s in the Mirror Universe.

Come to think about it that would only be about 30 years after certain time travel incident that would have a major effect on the outcome of WWII, makes you wonder doesn't it.

 

[Dukhat]

It has been suggested that, had Picard and crew not appeared in the past of 2063 as shown in ST:FC, that the Mirror Universe resulted from it.

Meaning: the MU, and the resultant Terran Empire, is the 'natural' evolution of the timeline, and it was only Picard's interference from the future that created the 'good' regular universe. Not surprising, as in the 24th century of the MU there is no Empire, no Imperial Starfleet, and thus no mirror universe Ent-E, to travel back in the first place...

I don't quite agree. Aside from what Hartzilla said (which is essentially correct anyway), I just don't see FC's Zefram Cochrane as the type to pull out a shotgun and blow someone away who was very clearly unarmed and not a threat. Actually, I don't see him as the gun-toting type at all. He would probably have gotten scared and run away from the Vulcan ship and gotten himself shitfaced drunk instead.

Now with that said, the Reeves-Stevens's novel (which predated IAMD) does have FC as the convergence point, but with Picard and Co. still involved. IMHO, the novel's take makes much more sense.

 

[Dale Sams]

It has been suggested that, had Picard and crew not appeared in the past of 2063 as shown in ST:FC, that the Mirror Universe resulted from it.

Meaning: the MU, and the resultant Terran Empire, is the 'natural' evolution of the timeline, and it was only Picard's interference from the future that created the 'good' regular universe. Not surprising, as in the 24th century of the MU there is no Empire, no Imperial Starfleet, and thus no mirror universe Ent-E, to travel back in the first place...

I don't quite agree. Aside from what Hartzilla said (which is essentially correct anyway), I just don't see FC's Zefram Cochrane as the type to pull out a shotgun and blow someone away who was very clearly unarmed and not a threat. Actually, I don't see him as the gun-toting type at all. He would probably have gotten scared and run away from the Vulcan ship and gotten himself shitfaced drunk instead.

Now with that said, the Reeves-Stevens's novel (which predated IAMD) does have FC as the convergence point, but with Picard and Co. still involved. IMHO, the novel's take makes much more sense.

I was going to post on this, then my head blew up.

 

[Procutus]

Come to think about it that would only be about 30 years after certain time travel incident that would have a major effect on the outcome of WWII, makes you wonder doesn't it.

I can't that thought out of my head, now that I've read it. What a perfect divergence point to create the MU.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Kirk through Picard (including when Picard says FC with the Klingons was a disaster

The Vulcans were furious with Archer meddling in Klingon affairs (in "Broken Bow" and other eps) and so were the Klingons. Some historians would probably view Archer's actions as "disastrous". I see no conflict there.

 

[Dale Sams]

Kirk through Picard (including when Picard says FC with the Klingons was a disaster

The Vulcans were furious with Archer meddling in Klingon affairs (in "Broken Bow" and other eps) and so were the Klingons. Some historians would probably view Archer's actions as "disastrous". I see no conflict there.

But you have to accept the entire temporal war as a predestination paradox. There's as much reason to (more even if Enterprise sought to be free of continuity*) believe the timeline has been changed as there is not too.

*I don't actually believe that. I'd say they just wanted to go to the time-travel well.

 

[Nerys Myk]

The studio wanted time travel.

 

[DaveyNY]

Is it possible that Harrison is a relative of Mitchell...?

Could that be the revenge angle?

 

[The Wormhole]

I think it's time we accept the possibility that Gary Mitchell has nothing to do with this movie.

 

[CommanderRaytas]

John Harrison is probably a pseudonym. He could be anybody - not necessarily anyone we met in the prime timeline who's named Harrison.

Me, I think he's either Garth of Izar or Gary Mitchell.

If it is a pseudonym...then why make him Garth or Mitchell in the first place?

You know what I think is curious? Where did this idea that "John Harrison" is a pseudonym come from? I saw no official statement that even hinted at that, so... is there one, or is this just fan speculation? I genuinely want to know.

 

[gastrof]

Was it ever an official statement that the bad guy in ID would be someone we've seen before during TOS?

If so, Harrison could very likely turn out to be a fake name.

 

[Enterprise is Great]

John Harrison is probably a pseudonym. He could be anybody - not necessarily anyone we met in the prime timeline who's named Harrison.

Me, I think he's either Garth of Izar or Gary Mitchell.

If it is a pseudonym...then why make him Garth or Mitchell in the first place?

You know what I think is curious? Where did this idea that "John Harrison" is a pseudonym come from? I saw no official statement that even hinted at that, so... is there one, or is this just fan speculation? I genuinely want to know.

Several reputable websites claimed that Khan was going to be the villain of the movie. When it was announced that Cumberbatch was playing John Harrison people came up with the idea that it was a pseudonym for Khan. So yeah, fan speculation.