David Marcus - What did Kirk know and when did he know it?

[Tim Thomason]

Well, Timewalker failed to see the irony in Kirk's statement. Irony is a difficult concept, and it is a stretch that his "bastard" son was killed by a (metaphorical to Kirk) Klingon bastard. The irony is that he is using bastard in a pejorative sense to describe the murderer of his literal bastard offspring. This is ironic because he seems almost hypocritical in accusing Kruge of being like bastards, while disregarding his own son's birth status.

As a bastard myself, I am a bit alarmed by Kirk's statement, and it doesn't seem like something that would be said in the 2200s (especially by someone otherwise unfamiliar with our profanity). Even when Bennett wrote the line in the 1980s, I don't think he made the connection.

 

[Timewalker]

Well, Timewalker failed to see the irony in Kirk's statement. Irony is a difficult concept, and it is a stretch that his "bastard" son was killed by a (metaphorical to Kirk) Klingon bastard. The irony is that he is using bastard in a pejorative sense to describe the murderer of his literal bastard offspring. This is ironic because he seems almost hypocritical in accusing Kruge of being like bastards, while disregarding his own son's birth status.

If you're going to snidely denigrate my post, say it to my virtual face, not in a "discussing the poster" manner, 'k? I'm well aware of what irony is, and it's nowhere near the big deal in this movie that you're making it out to be.

My point is that for the most part, people don't seem to make as much of a big deal over children born out of wedlock these days as they used to. Common-law situations are... common, and living together isn't the disgrace it was back when I was younger and my father and I were living with his girlfriend and her kids, with them having no plans to marry.

On 23rd-century Earth I should think that most people would have gotten over such negative attitudes. It would be different if Spock had a child out of wedlock (oh, wait... there's this rumor going around that the reason Saavik stayed on Vulcan is because she was pregnant with Spock's child). Vulcan traditions aren't as forgiving as even 21st century Earth.

As a bastard myself, I am a bit alarmed by Kirk's statement, and it doesn't seem like something that would be said in the 2200s (especially by someone otherwise unfamiliar with our profanity). Even when Bennett wrote the line in the 1980s, I don't think he made the connection.

Kirk was using the word to refer to the Klingon's character, not his parentage.

As for describing David as a bastard, that's not what Kirk did, and I don't think he would ever do that. It's a denigrating word, and although he and Carol broke up, there's no reason to think he ever disrespected her.

 

[Nyotarules]

"I did what you wanted...I stayed away" doesn't make a helluva lot of sense in any other context but Kirk knowing that David was his son.

From a personal perspective they made a terrible mistake, they did what was best for them and not for the child (I have been that child) yet it makes Kirk 'the great hero captain' human for making this error. The same for Marcus , since IMO no mother should deprive a child from knowing who its father is, its a selfish decision but a 'we are humans who screw up' one. It makes that scene in TSFS even more tragic.
I feel the same about Bones who in TAS has a daughter yet spends most of his career travelling in space, having not much to do with her and hardly mentioning her at all. Another deadbeat dad?

 

[Tim Thomason]

If you're going to snidely denigrate my post, say it to my virtual face, not in a "discussing the poster" manner, 'k? I'm well aware of what irony is, and it's nowhere near the big deal in this movie that you're making it out to be.

No worries. I'm not denigrating anyone. You asked where the irony was, and I answered (albeit, in response to another poster) to the best of my ability. I agree that the irony is barely present, except perhaps in the dramatic sense.

I'm sorry if I offended you by not responding to you directly, but it didn't feel appropriate to answer you originally, since the question was not in response to me. C'est la vie.

 

[STEPhon IT]

(Mods: This is a question the originates in the movies, but it also hits on TOS, the novels, and the comics, so I put it in General Trek. If you disagree that it belongs here, please feel free to move it.)

TWOK is the first time that viewers became aware that James T. Kirk had a son, David Marcus, with his old flame Carol Marcus. But it's a little unclear exactly when Kirk found out about David. He knows that Carol has a son by that name, but Kirk obviously doesn't know David well enough to recognize him in the Genesis Cave ("Is that David?"). Kirk and Carol's private conversation afterwards (added during reshoots to clarify things) is still ambiguous at best:

So we know that Jim and Carol had a bad breakup with hurt feelings on both sides. And Carol, afraid that David would follow in his father's footsteps, asked Kirk to stay away, out of their lives and her son's upbringing. But it's not really clear from the movie when that occurred. Was it when she was pregnant with David? After he was born? At some point during his childhood?

Another factor to consider is that Carol Marcus is previously acquainted with both Spock and McCoy and that both of them are aware of her significance to Kirk. McCoy reacts when he hears her name in the turbolift ("It never rains but it pours.") and Spock reacts to her on sight when they're viewing the Genesis proposal in Kirk's quarters ("Carol Marcus." "...Yes.").

Carol and Spock are also reintroduced to each other in the transporter room, and she greets him in a friendly manner:

David definitely seems to find out about that Kirk is his father at some point during TWOK, but even he seems to have had a previous encounter with Kirk:


Kirk didn't ever act like a man who knew he had a son somewhere out there during the run of TOS, but some of the novel and comics writers (including D.C. Fontana) have done stories where that's the case. Trek comic book writer Glenn Greenberg told me that Michael Jan Friedman's 1992 novel Faces of Fire is a post-TOS story that depicts Kirk finding out about David, who is a young boy during the story, and that Spock deduces their father/son relationship over the course of the book. I haven't read the novel, but it sounds like it fits the available facts.

So... the question for everyone is: What did Kirk know, and when did he know it? Is he a deadbeat dad, or did Carol leave him in the dark about David for years? Did he meet David as a child at some point before TWOK? Was he there for his son's birth, or was he long gone by then? Did he find out about David before TOS, during TOS, after TOS? Maybe even some time between TMP and TWOK? And have any of you changed your mind on this question over the years?

Only because I love TWOK, I've claiming Carol was the woman Kirk almost married because of Gary Mitchell's prank. In reality the timelines doesn't fit.

 

[lawman]

Can we leave Picard's no-money-we're-so-enlightened fantasies out of this? It's 80 years out of date.

I didn't mention Picard or the TNG era, FWIW, but if you think the Federation economy went through some fundamental overhaul between the TOS era and the later shows, feel free to explain why.

They don't use cash or other forms of physical currency. That's not at all the same as not using money. The Federation has an economy.

Sure. It's just a post-scarcity, post-capitalist economy.

That said, the laws and expectations of child support are likely to vary from planet to planet, but I can't imagine that any child born on Earth would be allowed to grow up without some kind of support.

I can't imagine that anyone on Earth, or any other Federation planet, of any age, would be allowed to live without support — from society, not other individuals. That's the point. In Trek people don't need to "make a living" any more; they're free to make a life.

 

[Timewalker]

I didn't mention Picard or the TNG era, FWIW, but if you think the Federation economy went through some fundamental overhaul between the TOS era and the later shows, feel free to explain why.

I'd love to, but it's off-topic for this thread.

 

[WraithDukat]

Why is that ironic?

Because his son is a bastard (literally).

 

[Timewalker]

Because his son is a bastard (literally).

Who cares? I would hope that in the 23rd century, society will have gotten past this nose-in-the-air, tsk-tsk, finger-wagging attitude.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

Only because I love TWOK, I've claiming Carol was the woman Kirk almost married because of Gary Mitchell's prank. In reality the timelines doesn't fit.

It fit a lot better for me when I moved the beginning of the Kirk-Carol relationship to Kirk's conjectural stint in command school in 2257-2258. I explain my reasoning for it over in this thread.

 

[Shawnster]

Who cares? I would hope that in the 23rd century, society will have gotten past this nose-in-the-air, tsk-tsk, finger-wagging attitude.

The point was to explain the irony, not a commentary on the acceptance of children born out of wedlock.

 

[1001001]

The point was to explain the irony, not a commentary on the acceptance of children born out of wedlock.

Exactly.

 

[Timewalker]

The point was to explain the irony, not a commentary on the acceptance of children born out of wedlock.

Exactly.

There's a lot of talking past each other going on here.

I don't give a damn about David's having been born out of wedlock. The "joke" or "play on words" or "irony" or whatever the hell else some are chewing on here is not a big deal, it's not some OMG, THAT'S IRONIC! shocking thing, and as far as I'm concerned, it's irrelevant.

 

[1001001]

I don't give a damn about David's having been born out of wedlock. The "joke" or "play on words" or "irony" or whatever the hell else some are chewing on here is not a big deal, it's not some OMG, THAT'S IRONIC! shocking thing, and as far as I'm concerned, it's irrelevant.

Why is that ironic?

​

So if it's irrelevant, why did you ask?



As is so often the case, you lash out at someone because you didn't understand what they were saying, then you run a small, humorous off-hand comment into the ground, then you bury it under a ton of righteous indignation.

It's tiresome. Please stop it.

 

[Timewalker]

So if it's irrelevant, why did you ask?



As is so often the case, you lash out at someone because you didn't understand what they were saying, then you run a small, humorous off-hand comment into the ground, then you bury it under a ton of righteous indignation.

It's tiresome. Please stop it.

I am fully aware of the definition and types of irony. I asked the question because I don't see the reason for all the hand-wringing about something that doesn't merit a fraction of the fuss that's been made about it.

I'm not the one who is posting "righteous indignation" here.

 

[The Old Mixer]

@Timewalker , this only became such a thing because you strung it out into one. For most everyone else, it was a comment worth a chuckle and moving on. I suggest just dropping it already.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

claiming Carol was the woman Kirk almost married because of Gary Mitchell's prank. In reality the timelines doesn't fit.

How so?

 

[Longinus]

I didn't mention Picard or the TNG era, FWIW, but if you think the Federation economy went through some fundamental overhaul between the TOS era and the later shows, feel free to explain why.

If such a thing happened, then the increased quality and availability of replicators would be a good explanation. (Sorry, off topic.)

 

[Shawnster]

Only because I love TWOK, I've claiming Carol was the woman Kirk almost married because of Gary Mitchell's prank. In reality the timelines doesn't fit.

How so?

Yes, please elaborate

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Yeah, Kirk could have met Carol Marcus years before fathering David and almost marrying Carol.