this post was submitted on 12 Apr 2026
62 points (98.4% liked)
Risa: Your Home Away from Spacedock
585 readers
6 users here now
Welcome to Risa
All the pleasure of shore leave, none of the holodeck glitches.
Rule 1 — Be Civil, Not Klingon
This is a vacation planet, not the neutral zone.
- No harassment, brigading, or trolling
- No bigotry
- Keep the banter playful, not hostile
Rule 2 — No Prohibited Cargo
Some things aren’t welcome aboard.
- No spam or scams
- No porn or sexually explicit content
- No illegal content
- NSFW memes must be properly tagged
Rule 3 — Keep It Trek
Posts should be Star Trek memes or Trek-adjacent humor.
- Crossovers are fine
- Low-effort “unrelated” memes may be spaced out the nearest airlock
Rule 4 — Gatekeeping Belongs in a Black Hole
You’re welcome to have your own opinions on what counts as “real” Star Trek but forcing your view on others or pretending it’s the only valid one? That’s not the Starfleet way.
Everyone’s Trek is valid, from TOS purists to Lower Decks shitposters, and you don't get to dictate what is real or not for everyone.
If you see a post that violates the rules, or that doesn't inspire Jamaharon, report it so the mods can handle it.
Otherwise grab a horga’hn, order a Risan Mai Tai, and enjoy your shore leave.
founded 6 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Why do you disagree?
While I don’t necessarily disagree with your characterization of the mirror universe as a “what if “. I do disagree with your characterization of it as not a plot device, and with your characterization of “what if”s in general as not plot devices.
For instance, several of the mirror universe episodes revolve around characters that are dead in one universe or the other, or have otherwise been incapacitated. Thus the plot could not exist without the mirror universe existing. In my opinion that pretty squarely makes it a plot device.
Its a story device, definitely, but one that is self-contained. It does not impact the plot of the shows overall. It helps with character depth, which is something I think the 90s shows did exceptionally well. But that's it's largest impact, and thus is as meaningful a plot device as any other throwaway storyline from a particular episode. Its only defining trait in that regard is that the DS9 writers made it a recurring one.
What about it as a "plot device" do you think is contrived or lazy? Or is there some other aspect that you find distasteful about it?
Regardless of how much you diminish it, it’s still my least favorite of whatever category you want to put it in.
Mostly, it has to do with that each series of Star Trek, at least from the 60s to the 2000s, were vastly rooted in the best science that day could offer. These are shows of science fiction not science fantasy. One might even go as far as to call them speculative fiction, though that can be debated. But then out of nowhere, we’re throwing in the facial hair evil twin universe in the story line. Even with DS9 trying to dress it up a bit still left me with a bad taste in my mouth. They, to my memory, never tried to explain it like somehow our universe was split Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde style or even some Q fuckery. Which could’ve actually made it a bit more interesting and helped it fit in with contemporary theories and other storylines regarding multiple universes. So all of the mirror universe episodes ended up coming across a bit like Voyager’s Threshold to me, and making that an integral part of the ongoing plot of Discovery is a large part of what ruined that series for me. That and the similar ludicrousness of the mushroom drive.
Technobabble was basically invented for Star Trek, I dont know where you get the idea that it's somehow based on some verifiable scientific principles. Its nowhere near (how I hear) shows like The Expanse approach science fiction. 99% of the time they just plain make something up to explain away a plot point.
Heck, the very first episode is "What if certain people become gods if they leave the confines of the galaxy". I dont know what scientific principles that was based off of, but I'd like me some of that.
As far as the origins of its dark nature, I believe that was (technically) explored in Enterprise. The main difference is that, when the Vulcans landed to make First Contact with humans, the humans decided to violently take over the Vulcan technology instead of peaceful(ish) coexistence. Not exactly a big stretch, and (loosely) based on scientific theories and sci-fi tropes regarding alternate universes.
In the 60s, they thought they could make atoms turn into specific things, like a shaving cream atom. In the 70s ESP was still being studied. God like powers were definitely within the realm of scientific theory at that time. This was during the time when people were very much misinterpreting that whole we only use 10% of our brains quote. They didn’t even know Jupiter had rings yet.
More importantly, though, I definitely have to disagree with the idea that technobabble was invented for Star Trek. I enjoy really old sci-fi. Which yes can be cheesy, but is often still the best they could do then too. Technobabble was very much a thing back in the Flash Gordon days and even in old radio show dramas. None of this is to say that I don’t feel like Star Wars has its place. I just like my science fiction and science fantasy to be separate.
Admittedly, it’s been a bit since I’ve watched through Enterprise. So I may just have forgotten if they touched on that.