Miri - Based on Anything?

[SpyOne]

In the episode Miri we are shown a planet that looks just like Earth and in the same era that Trek was being filmed. Did it have a real life parallel? Were there any experiments going on in the 1960's that attempted to prolong life using viruses? Was the writer warning that man shouldn't be attempting this kind of thing?

I find fault with your original premise: the world shown did not look much like Earth of the 1960s. If anything, it looked like several decades before (the cars looked 1940s and the streets and buildings looked like the generic hollywood backlot they were).

That said, I think the warning was more broad: the law of unintended consequences. The things we do always, always have effects we did not plan for. That is why it is best in all things to proceed with caution.

That and the fun of a "what if" story. What if someone trying do do good had things go horribly wrong? What if someone was doing genetic manipulation of viruses without proper safeguards, and it got out?

 

[ToddPence]

The whole aspect of the planet being an exact duplicate of the Earth is not present in the James Blish adaptation of the story, leading me to believe it was thrown in at the last minute to give a "hook" to the teaser.

 

[Pauln6]

The exact Earth was an odd premise that warranted far more explanation. However, the first evidence that Rand isn't as dumb as hay is in this episode: she recognises that the planetary dimensions are identical to Earth before the planet flashes onto the viewscreen. Methinks she just plays dumb (very effectively) just so she can stay the Captain's woman!

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Rand never struck me as other than intelligent.

 

[Pauln6]

Have you seen her scene in Star Trek VI? She didn't come across as particularly sharp did she? Having said that, neither did Saavik in TWoK.

In fairness to Rand, she was often fulfilling the role of Dr Who assistant i.e. asking obvious questions so that a smarter character could explain things for the audience.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Have you seen her scene in Star Trek VI? She didn't come across as particularly sharp did she?

No one came across as particularly sharp in ST 6, and honestly I don't remember her at all in it.

 

[Captain Robert April]

She was Sulu's comm officer on the Excelsior.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

That would make her someone in a goofy red uniform, right? I don't remember any of those folks over the sound of how delighted George Takei was to have rank.

 

[T'Bonz]

I always liked Rand. Was sorry that she was removed from the show. I didn't much care for her part in STVI though. The character was snotty.

It would have been nice to have had more female characters somewhere between "I'm frightened, Captain!" and "look at my tits in this tight catsuit. I'm the ice queen and I'll get a whip and beat your ass, submissive!"

Even my favorite self-sufficient Trek female, Major Kira, was stuck in black leather for an ep or two. Yeah, it was "Mirror Universe" but still...

 

[Pauln6]

I always liked Rand. Was sorry that she was removed from the show. I didn't much care for her part in STVI though. The character was snotty.

It would have been nice to have had more female characters somewhere between "I'm frightened, Captain!" and "look at my tits in this tight catsuit. I'm the ice queen and I'll get a whip and beat your ass, submissive!"

Even my favorite self-sufficient Trek female, Major Kira, was stuck in black leather for an ep or two. Yeah, it was "Mirror Universe" but still...

Hey now - even women with tits in cat suits are allowed to be frightened! They can really chafe (er... so I'm told).

Rand was never going to wave a flag for feminism but I too lamented her absence from the show; it was certainly a little less fun without her. Miri wasn't really a good episode for her though as she was a bit doolally and far too passive, generally just running around at Kirk's elbow and making no effort to persuade the children to release her so that Kirk could hog the limelight.

It would have been interesting to see some kind of investigation into the duplicate Earth (a race of planet-builders?) but sixties shows were very light on follow-up. A plot like the Chase spread over several episodes could have been fun.

 

[Timo]

...Of course, future Trek is free to look into this.

I mean, a story arc spread over several spinoff shows and decades (and broadcasting companies!) would surely be even more interesting than one spread across a couple of TOS episodes.

And seriously, a mystery that big on the cosmic scale might well take a couple of centuries to unravel. Although one would probably just run into some boring old omnipotent entity in the end anyway - or into a magnificient cosmic phenomenon that would only excite the cosmologists among us...

But it would have been fun to see another duplicate Earth in "Bread and Circuses", for example. And again have it left unexplained.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Pauln6]

...Of course, future Trek is free to look into this.

I mean, a story arc spread over several spinoff shows and decades (and broadcasting companies!) would surely be even more interesting than one spread across a couple of TOS episodes.

And seriously, a mystery that big on the cosmic scale might well take a couple of centuries to unravel. Although one would probably just run into some boring old omnipotent entity in the end anyway - or into a magnificient cosmic phenomenon that would only excite the cosmologists among us...

But it would have been fun to see another duplicate Earth in "Bread and Circuses", for example. And again have it left unexplained.

Timo Saloniemi

Lol - yeah I think this is why this aspect of Trek annoys me more than say B5 or Farscape, which stuck to a mythology about more powerful aliens and built ongoing stories around it. We have the Preservers, the Progenitors, the Q etc. While I loathe Trek's too-frequent all-powerful (as opposed to a bit more powerful) approach to some powerful aliens, any one of the above could have been developed gradually to form an interesting over-arching plot.

I also hate the vast number of undeveloped, irritatingly humanoid aliens in Trek, but I loved the concept of the Chase as a plausible excuse. I was just disappointed that it was squandered in such a brief story and then forgotten. I'd rather they spent more time with the Medusans, the Tholians, the Sheliak, and the Jarada to name but a few.

For that matter, it would be fun to see cultural gulfs with Federation partners. Non-interference should mean that the Federation tolerates some pretty nasty practices. Lets have a bit of infanticide among the Trill if their children are unlikely to make good hosts or something.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I think in the future Trek should stick to telling stories that are dramatic and meaningful, like this episode or "City On The Edge Of Forever" or Abrams's movie, or "Amok Time" etc. and leave the ridiculously obsessive rationalizations of throw-away nonsense like "parallel/duplicate worlds" to fans who are so inclined.

If they do that, folks might keep watching.

 

[Pauln6]

There is no such thing as 'folks' though is there? Some people like one thing while others like another. If they limit themselves to only one type of story then fans that like a different type of story wont watch at all. They need a mixture; the secret is ensuring that the mixture maximises the interest of a broad spectrum and sadly that means dumbing down certain aspects so as not to confuse the less scientifically able. AbramsTrek manages to pull this off.

There's no point doing a parallel Earth story and then totally failing to follow up on it but that is framed against modern storytelling standards of character development and ongoing plot threads. I suppose at the time, Trek was in its infancy and they quote a scientific theory of parallel development from the sixties don't they - they were probably just trying to be topical.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

There is no such thing as 'folks' though is there?

Well, it's possible to count them, which is what enables a TV series or film series to continue if it's to do so.

It doesn't matter how badly a small number of uberfans want to see continuity issues addressed, details explained and canon respected if it's boring most potential viewers to tears.

"Parallel/Duplicate worlds" may have some broad appeal as a premise for stories that are otherwise interesting, but that's all. Might as well do a series about cadets studying for final exams on the (ahem) science of warp drive.

The only "doing a parallel Earth story and then totally failing to follow up on it but that is framed against modern storytelling standards of character development and ongoing plot threads..." would be that the events of the story are potentially exciting and engaging or moving to a great many millions of people. And there is in fact no "modern standard" of ongoing plot threads - simply a fashion that is useful to some series and not to others.

 

[scotpens]

I suppose at the time, Trek was in its infancy and they quote a scientific theory of parallel development from the sixties don't they - they were probably just trying to be topical.

From Gene Roddenberry's original outline for Star Trek, as printed in The Making of Star Trek:

The Similar Worlds Concept. Just as the laws of matter and energy makes [sic] probable the other planets of Earth composition and atmosphere, certain chemical and organic laws make equally probable wide evolution into humanlike creatures and civilizations with points of similarity to our own.

All of which gives extraordinary story latitude — ranging from worlds which parallel our own yesterday, our present, to our breathtaking distant future.

Topical, schmopical. The “scientific theory” of parallel planet development was something Gene Roddenberry pulled out of his ass. It was strictly a writer's device to sell the show and to make a wide variety of stories possible.

 

[Pauln6]

Topical, schmopical. The “scientific theory” of parallel planet development was something Gene Roddenberry pulled out of his ass. It was strictly a writer's device to sell the show and to make a wide variety of stories possible.

Oh dear, that's dreadful. Good excuse to save money in the sixties; terrible that the concept had such longevity.

 

[Captain Robert April]

There is no such thing as 'folks' though is there? Some people like one thing while others like another. If they limit themselves to only one type of story then fans that like a different type of story wont watch at all. They need a mixture; the secret is ensuring that the mixture maximises the interest of a broad spectrum and sadly that means dumbing down certain aspects so as not to confuse the less scientifically able. AbramsTrek manages to pull this off.

It managed to bring in a big broad general audience, which is not the same thing, because it did it by hitting the lowest common demoninator.

The different tastes of the viewership, however, is a key reason why Star Trek really only works in the medium in which it was born, television. Don't like this week's episode? Tune in next week, maybe that one'll be more to your liking.

As opposed to "don't like this movie? Check us out in a couple of years, maybe you'll like that one." Not bloody likely.

 

[xortex]

Parallel/duplicate worlds are fine as long as someone will come along and explain why, and someone will, and not because of budgetary reasons but because of metaphysical ones.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Topical, schmopical. The “scientific theory” of parallel planet development was something Gene Roddenberry pulled out of his ass. It was strictly a writer's device to sell the show and to make a wide variety of stories possible.

My emphasis on the second phrase. Roddenberry really did seem to conceive Trek, early on, as a way of doing a show like "The Twilight Zone" in a more practical way.

Space travel was key to the format less because he was interested in space exploration or the future per se than because he was seeking a format in which the continuing characters could encounter just about any conceivable situation or setting, at any period of history.

This somewhat naive notion that the "infinite universe" made anything and everything plausible served that end.