Kirk had to KILL her
- Thread starter RobertScorpio
- Start date
In the episode "Tomorrow Is Yesterday" didn't Kirk say the 1960s era US Air Force Pilot Captain Christopher would be useless in the their time (23rd Century), that he would not be able to adapt. If that is true wouldn't the same be true for Edith Keeler from the 1930s? So Edith would be useless in the 23rd Century even if the Guardian allowed her to travel back to the future with Kirk.
I think Kirk would have been happiest with Starfleet Lt. Marlena Moreau (actess Barbara Luna) from the episode "Mirror Mirror".
Navigator NCC-2120 USS Entente
/\
I think Kirk would have been happiest with Starfleet Lt. Marlena Moreau (actess Barbara Luna) from the episode "Mirror Mirror".
Navigator NCC-2120 USS Entente
/\
Last edited:
As for Edith, McCoy had stopped her from dying at somepoint, that caused the screwed up timeline, therefore Kirk needed to make sure McCoy didn't save her. That happened. End of that story.
Agreed.
Agreed.
Last edited:
Thanks for the chuckles. Sadly, your post seems too much like many real posters on Internet fora these days...
Doug
Nope, because that would be changing FUTURE history. People forget that history doesn't end a second ago. It proceeds and grows as we go forward moment by moment. There has been over 40 years of history between that episode and now.
Just because Kirk discovers the Guardian in the 23rd century doesn't mean it doesn't have access to future events. Who is to say they can only see time as linear? It was The Guardian of Forever, not The Guardian of Up Til Just Now. It said it could only offer the past "in this manner" but since it was not asked about the future, it said nothing about it. That doesn't mean it can't see it.
Even if it can't, the past is the past and the Guardian knew that Edith Keeler died by being hit by a truck at a certain time. She was then, presumably, taken and buried. She might have had family, we have no idea. So they would know if she just vanished. We do know the entire neighborhood knew of her and would notice if she just disappeared. Then people would be busy with a missing person search instead of what they were originally doing. Instead of a policeman saving a child's life, he would be looking for keeler and this hypothetical child could have died. That child could have been someone important who now suddenly doesn't exist past a certain point. History is altered.
She could not be taken to the future, history had to be returned to how it was. Her death in that accident was the only way to make this happen.
[This post supports Kelso's and Babaganoosh's comments]
Correct. She couldn't be taken into the future just as she couldn't die on the staircase. Her fate was sealed because in a sense it had already happened. My only problem with the episode is the logical Spock knowing she dies in a car accident still wants to let her fall down a staircase. It's entirely possible she could have survived the fall. Imagine if she had broken her leg. Then she would not have been able to walk, and would have stayed home rather than being hit by a truck. The wrong timeline would be Spock's fault. Not McCoy's.
That little nickpick of Spock knowing she dies in car accident but still fretting because kirk stopped her from falling is my only small little problem with the episode. But, i always rationalized it with that Spock wasn't sure if she had to die the same way it had happened before.
And as had been said before, only when the timeline was restored would the guardian return them, there was no way for Kirk and company to take Edith back to the future, unless they found a delorian lying around.
Also Kirk had to be the one to let her die, it would have destroyed the character to have him be indecisive
And as had been said before, only when the timeline was restored would the guardian return them, there was no way for Kirk and company to take Edith back to the future, unless they found a delorian lying around.
Also Kirk had to be the one to let her die, it would have destroyed the character to have him be indecisive
RobertScorpio
Pariah
And its simply more dramatic..If I told you that you had to kill your wife to restore the future, that would be far more hard to than letting someone else do it...Kirk was the ultimate hero by doing what had to be done...
Rob
And it's the most OBVIOUS easy solution...and what any TV show would do with its lead character, rendering him/her blandly noble, as always.
I would love to see Mirror Universe currency with a picture of Edith Keeler on it. Just in passing.. that would be so awesome.
I guess that's one way to look at it. I have always seen it as Ellison making sure that every one was able to follow along and not get lost.
Jim loves Edith.
Edith must die.
Spock drives the point home to Jim.
Will Jim let her die??? Dun, dun dun.
It was about a subtle as driving a push pin with sledgehammer. But fortunately, it was the only real problem in an otherwise very good Ep.
I don't think that what you're describing is Ellison's at all.
In Ellison's first draft, Edith slips, Kirk reaches out but then closes his hand and lets her fall. She looks up, sees his extended but closed hand. She seems to know he let her fall, and "a confused, hurt expression crosses her face." Spock is nowhere to be seen, and we see that Kirk does know why he's there, and he's capable of letting her die, but he's conflicted and we're not sure if he'll let it happen at...and he's not sure.
Well if that's the case, I guess it wasn't Ellison who felt the need to portray the scene the way it ended up on screen. (I don't have access to the first draft, so I wasn't privy to that information.)
"City" was rewritten so many times only a few lines of Ellison's actual dialog survive into the final draft.
What makes City on the Edge of Forever such a memorable episode is because of the decision Kirk had to make in regards to Edith. Im not sure it would be one of the top episodes of any Star Trek series if Edith lived somehow (providing the Guardian of Forever permitted bringing her forward to the future)
Similar threads
