#obligatory disclaimer that this is just my interpretation of the mirrorverse!! i think it's so cool that everyone has their own thing

[dustykneed]

can you share some of your mirror verse hcs?

(gladly! ... as you can see this really got away from me in terms of length and i am SO sorry in advance for springing a whole short essay on you skdjsdh)

to open with a bit of a shocker, perhaps, well, the way i interpret the mirrorverse, i just... cannot see mirror mcspirk happening. now don't get me wrong! i think mirror spirk is absolutely possible, and in fact highly probable, and not even as just a sleeping together thing. i think their dynamic could absolutely yield a form of co-dependent emotional attachment on a highly personal level. everyone defines love differently, but i think that in the mirrorverse, if not love, it is certainly as close as you could get. but mirror mcspirk i actually can't see, believe it or not, and this is for a couple of reasons:

the thing about the mirrorverse is that it is all about the death of humanity (not humans, but for what we know as the human capacity for empathy, kindness and hope. i've seen the mirrorverse described as "the universe where no hope can survive". i think that is a very apt summary of what i explore here.) one key assumption of my interpretation of the mirrorverse is that the characters themselves, initially, are no different from how they are in any other universe at the core, and it is the varied external factors of the universe in which they exist that produces the people they become.

to examine the effects of the mirrorverse on the triumvirate, we might begin by looking at the original triumvirate's relationships with the concept of "goodness", with reference to the principles of ethos, logos and pathos.

one of the fundaments of kirk, as a character, is his relationship with goodness as a choice. he represents ethos, morality, in that his goodness is the result of a conscious decision to be good, to do good, as far as possible, to pick the least of any evils if he absolutely must and even if it is difficult, to keep going for the greater good. in the end, it all boils down to his core motivation to be a net force of goodness on the world, or in other words, to train his eyes on the bigger picture when interacting with the situation at hand and to believe that goodness can always prevail in the sense that he will have a net positive impact on the world around him.

spock, on the other hand, is arguably characterized by his relationship with defining goodness. his struggle to reconcile logic and emotion goes hand in hand with his desire to know if, and why, what he is doing is right-- logos. other vulcans rationalize displays of emotion by interpreting them through the lens of logic. spock, i think, is unable to do this because while he has been taught that emotions are illogical and undesirable, and internalizes this to perhaps a far stricter extent than most vulcans due to being held to unfairly high standards to prove himself "vulcan enough", he recognizes on a subconscious level that there is no inherent contradiction between logic and emotions, and that goodness is a mixture of value judgements and rational, ethical methodology.

but mccoy, i think, is a little different, in that goodness in itself is what defines him as a character. instead of ethos (making the right decision) or logos (understanding what makes something right), mccoy's pathos (an unrefined, innate compulsion for goodness; something similar to mencius' theory of good human nature) is not a conscious decision or a principle of action, but a visceral, impulsive, desperate, sometimes irrational and neurotic need to do good no matter the cost, simply because he instinctively knows that it is the kind thing and therefore the right thing to do-- which, sometimes, makes him disregard the bigger picture, and, ironically, do the wrong thing out of irrationality.

(to digress-- i actually think that kirk is actually far more logical than we sometimes give him credit for, especially in the context of spirk. the dynamic of a logical, stoic character and an emotional, affectionate character whose very souls find solace in one another is a hugely compelling and moving one, and i cannot fault people for applying that dynamic to their relationship-- but, well, by virtue of being relatively less direct associations of their character dynamics in the context of slash, i think what happens sometimes with spones, mckirk and mcspirk is that in the process of fumbling around for ways to fit them together believably, people often end up doing a greater degree of exploration of their character dynamics and nuances that is like catnip to me xD)

for kirk and spock, as men whose worldviews are rooted in tangible logic, where the goodness they have seen is the driving force for their pursuit of morality, i do not doubt that without external proof of goodness as a feasible, worthy path, the same traits that grant them their steadfast belief in humanity and hence their great devotion to goodness will be the traits that drive them to turn away from that goodness in the mirror universe. in a world where hope cannot survive, where cruelty and ambition are the only constants, kirk's resourcefulness prompts him to adapt to his environment and seek what he sees as the bigger picture-- ambition and power. spock, a being of logic, observes that cruelty is simply how the world functions, and as a result applies this science to his interactions with it, seeking power not because of a specific ambition, but, again, because it is a logical course of action according to his observations.

i see spirk as highly probable in the mirrorverse precisely because of how alike they are in this regard. they are capable of great compartmentalization of personal sentiments in order to do what they consider "the right thing", or take the "logical course of action", and this is what makes them effective in command roles, where dwelling on the implications of a wrong decision could either kill you from the sheer crushing guilt, or kill more of your men because of your indecision. they are comfortable in their pursuit of power by use of force because they have internalized the rules of the mirrorverse, and are able find solace in each other because they are evenly matched as opponents and a force to be reckoned with when in alliance, which gives them the space to develop that personal attachment and tension in the first place.

but mccoy? mccoy's goodness isn't rooted in logic, and as a result, this facet of his character largely remains untouched even in the face of the greatest cruelties and atrocities his world can offer. his great stubbornness (or illogic, or perhaps even self-delusion) lends him the ability to, against all odds, still believe that people are inherently worthy of kindness and compassion. he believes in good without ever having experienced it, because his belief in good is illogical by nature.

i have no doubt that mccoy would possibly love kirk, and spock, in part simply because he resonates subconsciously with the capacity of kirk and spock to show great kindness. it is possible that he sees the apparitions of what they could have become, had the world not been so unkind to them, and his love for them is tinged with an undercurrent of mixed grief and disgust, and pity. but fundamentally he doesn't trust spirk-- and because of that i think he could never bring himself to truly fall in love even though he has the capacity for it, because that would require betraying his love for humanity.

i think, based on the way mirror kirk and spock likely treat mccoy, as technically their subordinate (and especially in mirror mirror, when mirror spock mind melds with mccoy to figure out why he saved his life without so much as a moment's hesitation, because he doesn't see mirror mccoy as a threat, so why would a mccoy from a softer, kinder universe ever be anything more?) i wouldn't be surprised if they saw mccoy as... lesser. you know? they know that mccoy isn't capable of seeking power the way they do. that makes him weak. i think they trust him far more than anyone else other than each other, perhaps less out of respect for his profession or character, but more because they are able to clear him as a possible threat, as something too pathetic to seize power even when given the chance. they definitely have some interest in his motivations-- like you would a pet, or a plaything, because kindness makes you a target, a weakness, and a liability. a fascinating study, but ultimately, inadvertently disposable.

and it makes sense, in a way, that they are unable to bring themselves to ally themselves with mccoy the way they have each other, because in the mirrorverse, to believe in kindness is a death sentence. they might pity mccoy or regard him with contempt borne out of inexplicable regret, the same way mccoy pities them, for his wasted potential as an asset (and maybe even as a partner). by insulating themselves against their inevitable loss of mccoy, conciously or otherwise, they save themselves another hurt in their world where hope is a lost cause.

(i definitely have more bouncing around in my head about mirror bones especially, but i think 1.5k words is enough for one sitting LMAO so sorry i think i'm halfway in finals mode still. but this is why i could never take literature lol i can never help myself and it takes a lot out of me xDD)

(oh and @callofdooty i think the mirrorverse as a place where no hope can survive quote was from you during our conversations about mirror bones! but either way i think you might enjoy this hahah)