Was Kirk the CAUSE of Edith Keeler's death?

[NTRPRZ]

It’s always tough dealing with questions of time travel, but I’ve got one.
In “City on the Edge of Forever,” we learn the universe as we know it exists because a woman named Edith Keeler died before she could lead a pacifist movement that ultimately allowed the Axis to win World War II.
Spock learns via tricorder that Keeler dies from some sort of accident and despite the fact that Kirk has fallen in love with her, she must be allowed to meet her fate.
They decide that McCoy is the catalyst in that he saved Keeler’s life.
My question is this. We learn Keeler dies when she’s hit by a truck, but (and here’s my point) she’s at that particular locale only because she was with Kirk.
In the original, unaltered history, before McCoy went back and changed things, Keeler would have had no reason to be there and certainly would have had no reason to go dashing out into the street.
Does that seem that she would have died in a different manner, or that a paradox was created simply because Kirk and crew were there?
(I’ve got a headache now)

 

[T'Girl]

She originally died in a traffic accident, I don't remember Spock mentioning a truck.

Was that the original time and place of her death? Hard to say, but her death did seem to satisify history.

Having a different driver kill her might have guilt-rode that driver for the rest of his life, and the now guilt-free driver could have been impacted too.

Spock: "...no historical significance."

 

[DavidGutierrez]

It’s always tough dealing with questions of time travel, but I’ve got one.
In “City on the Edge of Forever,” we learn the universe as we know it exists because a woman named Edith Keeler died before she could lead a pacifist movement that ultimately allowed the Axis to win World War II.
Spock learns via tricorder that Keeler dies from some sort of accident and despite the fact that Kirk has fallen in love with her, she must be allowed to meet her fate.
They decide that McCoy is the catalyst in that he saved Keeler’s life.
My question is this. We learn Keeler dies when she’s hit by a truck, but (and here’s my point) she’s at that particular locale only because she was with Kirk.
In the original, unaltered history, before McCoy went back and changed things, Keeler would have had no reason to be there and certainly would have had no reason to go dashing out into the street.
Does that seem that she would have died in a different manner, or that a paradox was created simply because Kirk and crew were there?
(I’ve got a headache now)

The way I look at most time traveling that Trek does is that our heroes were always meant to go back in time and do whatever it is they did. I support this by pointing at "Assignment: Earth," where Spock speculates that the Enterprise crew were merely part of what was supposed to happen; "Time's Arrow," where Data comments on the inevitability of his death; Star Trek IV, where Scotty speculates the Plexicorp guy was the original inventor of transparent aluminum anyway; and the "Past Tense" two-parter, where Sisko assumes Bell's identity and everything goes off without a hitch.
Thus, there never was a timeline without McCoy, Kirk, and Spock interacting with Edith. McCoy was always meant to go back and mess things up and Kirk and Spock were always meant to follow him and set things right because the three of them were there already anyway.

 

[LMFAOschwarz]

Blaming McCoy (as the do) for changing history was a (at first, understandably) short-sighted assumption on the part of Kirk and Spock. I see it as all three of them were equally responsible.

McCoy jumps through the portal, and the Enterprise disappears."McCoy must have somehow changed history." seemed an obvious assumption. They couldn't have had the whole picture in mind. The moment Kirk and Spock entered the Guardian, they became part of the scenario which would eventually unfold into a different future, both men just as responsible as McCoy.

David Gutierrez is right. One time-line features Edith Keeler doing whatever it is she would have done on her own, which would unknowingly step her closer to meeting the President. The other "it was meant to be " time-line features Edith, McCoy, Spock, Kirk, Clark Gable and the truck and driver. There is no Edith-McCoy only time-line.

To assume that McCoy is the sole factor is like eating a piece of really good bread, and giving all the credit to the yeast!

Wait a minute, though...now I'm not so sure. I'm not going to think any more about it right now, though, because then I too will be heading for the aspirin!

 

[MacLeod]

ST like many shows that deal with Time-travel aren't always consistan with how they handle it.

 

[Shat Happens]

Let's face it: that Guardian of Forever was an asshole.

 

[Armored Saint]

Does that mean Bones, Kirk and Spock were temporal suppositories?

 

[JirinPanthosa]

Usually in scifi when there are predestination paradoxes they call attention to it. Also if that was the case McCoy going back in time wouldn't have killed the future.

I think they were just handwaving any Butterfly Effect implications for the sake of a clear narrative and the audience was supposed to consider that was her original manner of death.

 

[Methuselah Flint]

There is no Edith-McCoy only time-line.

Agree with everything that has been discussed, although in my opinion, I would say there was an alternate McCoy-Edith only timeline for a brief time, before Kirk and Spock went back. Once they went back, that timeline was erased, and they (and McCoy) played their eventually destined events in history as they were meant to.

 

[Mr. Adventure]

Does that mean Bones, Kirk and Spock were temporal suppositories?

I think you're being too anal about this.

 

[ZapBrannigan]

Does that mean Bones, Kirk and Spock were temporal suppositories?

I think you're being too anal about this.

Is this a backdoor way of suggesting the Guardian isn't all he's cracked up to be?

 

[Maurice]

Does that mean Bones, Kirk and Spock were temporal suppositories?

I think you're being too anal about this.

Is this a backdoor way of suggesting the Guardian isn't all he's cracked up to be?

If so, it must be a full Moon.

 

[LMFAOschwarz]

There is no Edith-McCoy only time-line.

Agree with everything that has been discussed, although in my opinion, I would say there was an alternate McCoy-Edith only timeline for a brief time, before Kirk and Spock went back. Once they went back, that timeline was erased, and they (and McCoy) played their eventually destined events in history as they were meant to.

That's exactly the part that gave me pause, that span of time they were on the planet between McCoy jumping back, then Kirk and Spock.

 

[Anwar]

I'm just wondering why the Guardian didn't let them just bring her to the future. It removes her from history but keeps her alive.

 

[Robert Comsol]

The way I look at most time traveling that Trek does is that our heroes were always meant to go back in time and do whatever it is they did. I support this by pointing at "Assignment: Earth," where Spock speculates that the Enterprise crew were merely part of what was supposed to happen; ...
Thus, there never was a timeline without McCoy, Kirk, and Spock interacting with Edith. McCoy was always meant to go back and mess things up and Kirk and Spock were always meant to follow him and set things right because the three of them were there already anyway.

Concise summary!

I believe the confusion arises from the opening premises in both “City On the Edge” and “Assignment: Earth”, according to which changing the past (according to Mark Twain aka Samuel Clemens) is possible but what both episodes actually and finally establish is Igor Novikov’s “You won’t”.

I don’t think the Guardian of Forever was mean. But rather than sit there and trying to explain to Kirk and Spock why it is imperative to go back he just switched into the “scary mode” suggesting that their existence is at stake if they don’t enter the portal (and it probably worked for the audience, too, wondering how our heroes are going to resolve the situation).

And I don’t recall that the Guardian could bring people from the past into the future. I was under the impression he could only bring back those that had already entered through his portal.

The catalyst is apparently McCoy. The moment Edith mentions “McCoy” to Kirk on the street is the moment Kirk abandons and leaves her on the street. In a “different” timeline (without Kirk and Spock) her and McCoy would have probably crossed the street without accident.

Bob

 

[T'Girl]

I'm just wondering why the Guardian didn't let them just bring her to the future. It removes her from history but keeps her alive.

History required a body in the street, not just a disappearance?

If you put some though into it, a few alternates come forward. One I like is Kirk marries Edith, they move to 1930's Montana and live on a ranch, Edith never energizes a peace movement, and Kirk breeds horses.

YMMV.

 

[Robert Comsol]

That's a good one, although I wonder if Edith would have really preferred to care for horses than people.

But apparently that couldn't happen:

KIRK: Make sure we arrive before McCoy got there. It's vital we stop him before he does whatever it was that changed all history. Guardian, if we are successful
GUARDIAN: Then you will be returned. It will be as though none of you had gone.

Bob

 

[Mario de Monti]

KIRK: Make sure we arrive before McCoy got there. It's vital we stop him before he does whatever it was that changed all history. Guardian,if we are successful
GUARDIAN: Then you will be returned. It will be as though none of you had gone.

If you take the last sentence of the Guardian literally, then Kirk did NOT cause Edith Keeler´s death. She would have been hit by that truck anyway, Kirk just made sure McCoy´s apperance didn´t change that - if that would even have been possible in the first place.

 

[Robert Comsol]

I understood that simply everything would be just before they left, i.e. timeline restored including McCoy and Kirk who always had a role in Earth's history (of which they previously had just not been aware of).

Okay, maybe the Guardian is an a**hole because the experience will have quite an impact on Kirk which the bloody device doesn't consider. "It will be as though none of you had gone" hardly applies for the emotional state of Kirk and McCoy upon their return.

Bob

 

[flexus lucent]

There is no Edith-McCoy only time-line.

Actually the novel Crucible: McCoy - Provenance of Shadows explores the possibility of such a timeline.