The City on the Edge of Forever: The Original Teleplay

by Harlan Ellison

The controversy has raged for almost 30 years--now readers can judge for themselves. Harlan Ellison wrote the original award-winning teleplay for "The City on the Edge of Forever, " which was rewritten and became the most-loved Star Trek episode of all time. Ellison sued Paramount in protest and won. This book contains the teleplay and afterwords by Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley, George Takei and others.

Genres: Science Fiction, Star Trek, Fiction, Tv, Audiobook, Science Fiction Fantasy, Time Travel

Audiobook

First published November 1, 1977

About the author

Harlan Jay Ellison (1934-2018) was a prolific American writer of short stories, novellas, teleplays, essays, and criticism.

His literary and television work has received many awards. He wrote for the original series of both The Outer Limits and Star Trek as well as The Alfred Hitchcock Hour; edited the multiple-award-winning short story anthology series Dangerous Visions; and served as creative consultant/writer to the science fiction TV series The New Twilight Zone and Babylon 5.

Several of his short fiction pieces have been made into movies, such as the classic "The Boy and His Dog".

Reviews

[Jim · Rating 3 out of 5]

The City On The Edge Of Forever was originally written by Harlan Ellison, aired April 6, 1967, & has been voted the best original Star Trek episode ever. This audio version is kind of a nerd's paradise since it is a teleplay of an early script & has other revisions all read by a great cast. I saw the original TV episode when it aired & loved it. I've seen it a dozen times since then & own it. (You can find the TV episode for free (if you have a login) on Hulu here: http://www.hulu.com/watch/283880) I'm going to assume everyone is familiar with the versions in this review.

Unfortunately, Ellison & Roddenberry got into a fight about this episode. Their argument is not surprising since they are both geniuses of imagination & production of their respective crafts.
- Star Trek was Roddenberry's baby from soup to nuts. Given his position, he probably wasn't a nice guy to work for. Ellison wasn't the only person who had issues with him.
- Ellison is a super talented writer. He used to sit in a book store window & would type a short story from a sentence people gave him. He's written a lot of screenplays & wonderful short stories. I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream was one of the early SF short story books I fell in love with, but IRL he's well known for being abrasive. He swears Roddenberry mutilated his baby (this story) & generally ruined him by lying. Whatever... It's been 50 years & I never gave a crap. Still don't. I'm in this for the story, not their fight.

The Good: I read this, Ellison's version, in print about 40 years ago & didn't care for it, but I can't get into screen plays when I read them cold, so I was very excited about this audio/teleplay edition which was funded through a KickStarter program in the fall of 2015 by Skyboat Media. They're a great audio book production company with Stefan Rudnicki, one of my favorite narrators. He & many other excellent narrators & authors, including Orson Scott Card & David Gerrold, are reading the parts in this.

The Bad: This is so anti-Rodenberry that it's like covering Granny's special cake with pig shit icing. Luckily, it's easier to scrape most off by simply skipping a section - Ellison's rant. Still, it's terribly biased which gets old & is disgusting. They lose the story in trying to villainize a dead man.

The Specifics:
1-01 Backers Dedication.mp3 there are 391 of us. Rudnicki & Gabriella Du Cuir alternate reading the names in groups of 5 for over 6 minutes. I was tickled that Gabriella pronounced my name properly at about the 1 minute mark. I've heard it butchered by too many.

1-02 Front Titles.mp3 - lists all those who read this.
Captain James T. Kirk - John Rubinstein
Mr. Spock - Scott Brick
Edith Keeler - Jean Smart
The Guardian of Forever - Stefan Rudnicki
The Trooper - Harlan Ellison
Dr. McCoy/The Orator - Richard Gilliland
Beckwith - Richard McGonagle
LeBeque - Alex Hyde-White
Janice Rand - Judy Young
The Cook - Jim Meskimen
The Janitor/Renegade - Paul Boehmer
Transporter Chief - Larry Nemecek
Crew Member - Veronica Scott
Tricorder - Gabrielle de Cuir

1-03 Dedication And Quote.mp3 to Alan Brennert

1-04 Would You Buy A Used Galaxy From This Man.mp3 sort of Rodenberry's version of what happened. It is less than 3 minutes long - a good length, if unbalanced. The Wikipedia article has a version too, if anyone cares.

1-05 Introductory Essay Perils of the City (by Harlan Ellison).mp3 & 1-06 Introductory Essay Perils of the City (by Harlan Ellison) Continued.mp3 is Ellison's 2.5 hour RANT of how Roddenberry screwed him, read by him. (70 pages in the original, I think.) I'll bet they had to wring out the sponge on the mic every few minutes as the vitriol & spittle flew. It's a shame to hear so much old, festering anger. I made it about 5 minutes, skipped through to see if I could glean any pearls, but found few. He's repetitive. He says it's about the money on their side, as if it is a bad thing, but the pot is calling kettle black. Ellison has the reputation for lawsuits to prove how much he cares for the money, too. He hated what happened to his original story, practically disowned it, but he still sued for residuals on it in 2009 (25%!!!) & I'm sure the path to the bank is wet with his tears. Worse, IMO, by his standards, he should pay royalties to Bradbury for the time change thing ("Sound of Thunder" 1952) & possibly Heinlein for the killing time loop ("By His Bootstraps" 1941) if they were even first with those ideas since he threatened to sue over the movie "Terminator". Besides, he was writing a script. From everything I've read about it (including an essay here by Snodgrass) script writing is a writing job in which you sacrifice your words on the alter of high pay.

The Scripts (The good stuff.)
1-07 Treatment 21st March 1966.mp3is 35m long, a rewrite by Ellison who uses his 'Cordwainer Bird' pseudonym as the author. That means he doesn't like it. A drug dealer's (Beckwith) trial, followed by an attempted execution by firing squad on a "must be" deserted planet & then exploring with him. Awful! 9' aliens with long white beards. They point out how Beckwith changed time explicitly. Pirates that beam them up? Yuck. Kirk frozen by indecision. Double yuck. On the cool side, the guardians words stick through to the final & Beckwith's part & punishment were cool. 35 minutes & yet just an outline in most parts. Too complicated & long for a 50 minute show, I'd guess.

1-08 Treatment 13th May 1966.mp3 is 41m long, another rewrite with Ellison's real name on it. Has the time issues to draw them in, but still has Beckwith (better done, no trial, just escapes to planet) & pirate ship. Better. Yeoman Rand in this, not a great part. Aliens speaking in riddles. Yuck. 40 minutes, even more of an outline.

2-09 The Teleplay_ Prologue.mp3
2-10 The Teleplay_ Act 1.mp3
2-11 The Teleplay_ Act 2.mp3
2-12 The Teleplay_ Act 3.mp3
2-13 The Teleplay_ Act 4.mp3
2-14 The Teleplay_ Epilogue.mp3 take about 2 hours in total. The whole, original enchilada much polished & with all the direction & dialogue in. Still has Beckwith, but Rand plays a great role. Still has aliens with beards speaking in riddles, but has the tricorder show the issue. Trooper plays a good part & touching thread. I don't care for all the fights with Beckwith, especially how he keeps taking out Spock. The Vulcan is supposed to be stronger, but his diet is great - Vulcan food mentioned.

2-15 2nd Revised Final Draft 1st December 1966_ Prologue.mp3
2-16 2nd Revised Draft 1st December 1966_ Act 1.mp3 a little over 25m in total. No more Beckwith or 9' aliens, just the portal although not as imagined on TV. McCoy gets bitten & runs rabid into time. Better, but this is just the setup & much is obviously from the prior versions since the 'Guardian' becomes plural later on.

My take overall: After listening to the various versions & rewatching the original, I think Rodenberry got it right overall, but it was a lot of fun seeing the other options & some great stuff got left out. It's a great episode, but it could have been better.
- I agree with Ellison that the loss of the original antiwar sentiment sucked, but it added a much better twist the way it aired. (Kirk: "She was right, peace was the way." Spock: "She was right, but at the wrong time.") Fantastic! What we'd like versus reality. It's also helped it age better.
- The simplification of characters & origin was definitely needed. Beckwith as a drug dealer on the run would have been great, but McCoy was good, but he didn't pack the same punch or point (bad people doing good), though. OTOH, the drug was cool, but too addictive & Beckwith was too evil.
- 9' aliens with riddles, glad they're gone along with the aging thing. I like the weird arch, but I wish it had told them the change or the tricorder got to it eventually. Spock putting all that crap together in the TV episode was ridiculous. Ellison's tricorder in the teleplay was the closest to doing this properly, but the TV gave the best explanation of why Keeler had to die.
- Alternate universe space pirates didn't make sense (Why could they beam them up yet were surprised?) & was hokey, but it's a shame that Ellison's final version of Rand got left out.
- Keeler definitely needed to get in earlier, as in the TV episode. The love was too fast in Ellison's scripts. The TV show beat us with it, though.
- Keeler was too forward thinking on the TV. Ellison wrote it, but gave it a better explanation through timing.
- It's a shame Trooper's story line didn't survive. "He was negligible" is a horrific epitaph & would have played well along side Keeler's. They should have fit him in & dropped the jury-rigging for the tricorder.
- Kirk stopping McCoy was a must. Cap'n Kirk (captain of a premier exploration ship) does not just stand around frozen by indecision! What the hell was Ellison thinking?!!! Thank Roddenberry that the Captain's persona remained intact. Wish they could have made the McCoy/Keeler love a bit more tangible.

THE AFTERWORDS
2-17 Afterwords (Peter David).mp3 read by Stefan Rudnicki, 22m. Points out the good points with Beckwith, but very biased & he misses the cool points of the TV episode.
2-18 Afterwords (D.C.Fontana).mp3 read by her, 13m. Very well balanced & she goes through the revisions. Also tells how the Guardian & ruins came to be. Listen to this!!!
2-19 Afterwords (David Gerrold).mp3 read by David Gerrold, 19m. YUCK! What an Ellison fanboy! Off topic, long winded. Not worth wading through.
2-20 Afterwords (DeForest Kelly, AKA Bones).mp3 read by Richard Gilliland, 5m. Interesting. I thought his love for Keeler came through. Good idea, Kelly!
2-21 Afterwords (Walter Koenig, AKA Chekov).mp3 read by Stefan Rudnicki, 4m. Ellison pisses him off, too. Still loves his writing. I don't agree that I have to love this more than the TV episode, though.
2-22 Afterwords (Leonard Nimoy, AKA Spock).mp3 read by LeVar Burton (AKA Geordi), 1m. "Success has many fathers, failure is an orphan". Liked the original script.
2-23 Afterwords (Melinda M Snodgrass).mp3 read by her, 5m. She's very biased & an idiot. Life is a trade off. You want the bucks, don't whine about giving up control.
2-24 Afterwords (George Takei).mp3 read by him, 4m. Liked the 9' aliens & thinks all drug dealers are evil. Weird.
2-25 Essays (Larry Nemecek).mp3 read by him. He's my age & he's happy that Ellison kept his vision alive. He points out some of the better parts of Ellison's contributions. Some are descriptive writing which is shown on TV, not read. Another Ellison fanboy.
2-26 Essays (Richard J Brewer).mp3 read by him, 8m. Another fan boy who thinks drug dealers are pure evil. He is right about Rand & feminism.
2-27 Essays (Ryan Britt).mp3 read by him, 7m. At least he mentions the "she was right, but wrong time".
2-28 End Titles.mp3 2m

I'd like to recommend this, but the bias is tough to take & I have to knock stars off for it. Still, it was great to hear such a fine cast reading the teleplay.

[Michael · Rating 3 out of 5]

Once you get past the 70 page essay on how Gene Roddenberry ruined his brilliant script, you can read the original Harlan Ellison version of the classic "Trek" episode.

And I can see why the changes that were made were made. This is a good script, a nice idea but it's not "Star Trek."

And the best part is finding out that D.C. Fontana made all the changes that Ellison berates Roddenberry for making in his inital rant. Pure genius

[Mark Muckerman · Rating 1 out of 5]

Okay folks, so here we go. . .

1. I'm a Trekker. And I'm old enough that I was also a Trekkie, before we somehow were renamed. That means I embrace the dream, the vision, and the possibilities of us finding other life and of humanity becoming part of a greater community and improving our collective lot in life as in Roddenberry's vision. That also means I'll buy just about ANY publication or piece of crap that has to do with Star Trek, no matter how bad. I have autographed pictures, coffee mugs, bottle openers, belt buckles, models, action figures and even an Enterprise pizza cutter. I have all the Tek books, Leadership Lessons from Star Trek, and even caught a Mardi Gras doubloon directly from Shatner's hand when he was King of Bacchus in 1987 (with apologies to the little old lady I trampled to get it). What that means is that I get the good & the bad.

2. This book sucks. It's an important tome to add to one's collection, as it provides balance and counterpoint to the conventional story and legend around "City", but it's brutal to read. Unless you're a hard-core fan, you'll be miserable. Even then, the best you can hope for is a steady grinding pain for 176 pages.

3. It's great to finally read the various versions of Ellison's original story - to see it's evolution and to compare it to my own memories of the version of "City" which aired (and which I of course have on both VHS and DVD). Ellison's original story treatment is great. With more time and if the output goal was a sci-fi short story or novella it would have been a really great read. A generation later where we now have an entire industry of fan fiction and novels based on TOS, he'd have made a killing on the story. However, all of the criticisms about why his version was not "right" for the small screen and the series are dead on: issues of character and pace; visual concepts that work well in the imagination would have been difficult or disappointing to produce with 1960's budgets and effects limitations; pace of story development and focus needed adjustment for a one hour TV show, and more.

4. WOW is he a bitter little man. I say this a) because he just is; b) he spends the first 50+ pages of the book on such a nonsensical rant against the world that one must question his rationality; and c) look at the cover picture: Shatner is NOT a tall man, and he's damn near squatting down to be in frame with Ellison (who, according to the Google machine, is 5'2"). I'm going to make an armchair diagnosis that there is definitely a case of "little man syndrome".

5. Is his bitterness justified? Most likely so. The collective legend tells that regardless of how the story started, the subsequent handling of the story, script, and revisionist history from Roddenberry & Co. was consistently critical and denigrating towards Ellison and his original work. There also seems to be broad agreement that Roddenberry was pretty much a dick around all things Trek, so it's not unreasonable that Ellison has an axe to grind.

6. So - what's my point? I really don't know. If you're a huge fan, you'll likely value the alternative view of history, but it's a hard read.

[Brad · Rating 4 out of 5]

I could probably go on and on about the City on the Edge of Forever debate, and the whys and wherefores of my feelings, but I don't really have the energy for that today, so I am going to sum up my thoughts in point form:

--Harlan Ellison's The City on the Edge of Forever is a superior piece of Sci-Fi, better than the version that made it to air. But it is not really a Star Trek episode.

--Gene Coon, DC Fontana and Gene Roddenberry's rewritten The City on the Edge of Forever is a superior piece of Star Trek, making it one of the greatest if not THE greatest episode produced for TOS.

-- Harlan Ellison was a pig headed jerk who was clearly not listening to the notes he was being given. How do I know? Harlan's own words tell us in his "rewrites." Each altered version is filled with pissy comments that could only have been answers to notes he'd received. He needed to let shit go.

--Gene Roddenberry misrepresented Harlan's work during Star Trek conventions through the years, and it seems fairly clear that he did nothing to make amends with Harlan when the author called him out about those "lies," but then it was Gene's show, and Harlan's early decision to put his own version of The City on the Edge of Forever up for the WGA Awards may have been enough to poison any kind of remorse Gene might have felt.

--This is a perfect text to teach aspiring screenwriters about the pitfalls of production and how to check their egos for the process rather than the "good" of their own precious work.

--Harlan Ellison should have stuck to novels.

[Betsy Boo · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is half rant, half tv film script. Ellison wrote the original script for this Trekkie favorite, which is also my favorite episode, (along with "The Trouble With Tribbles"). I had never known there was such a long winded controversy over this. Ellison has been angry for 30 years over not only what Roddenberry did to his script, but also because Roddenberry has been telling people for years how unfilmable Ellison's script was, and how he had to "save" it. It is an interesting look at what a writer goes through when he wants to see his work on film. Many times he must be willing to compromise his art & his vision to see the story on the screen.

The script, which won a Writer's Guild award was somewhat ripped apart for the show. I find myself ambivalent...I love the original script, but I also love the show that aired. I guess it would be nice if someone would shoot the original script and allow the comparison. At any rate, I recommend this book for Trekkies, Ellison fans and anyone who has thoughts of being a script writer. Forwarned is forarmed!

[Amy H. Sturgis · Rating 4 out of 5]

If you liked/loved "The City on the Edge of Forever," an episode generally held as one of the best single works in all of Star Trek, then you owe it to yourself to read the original script as Harlan Ellison wrote it -- or better yet, hear it. I listened to this in the 2016 full-cast audio recording marking the 50th anniversary of Trek, and it is superb. Special kudos to Jean Smart, whose Edith Keeler will forever be my headcanon. The original script is better in some specific and undeniable ways than the aired version.

The audio also includes Harlan Ellison's spirited narration of his lengthy but warranted defense not only of his original script, but also of his process, professionalism, and vision for the episode, all of which received considerable slurs for decades from Gene Roddenberry. I'm not a Roddenberry detractor or a wholesale fan of Ellison the man (his prose is another subject entirely), but in this case, all of Ellison's pent-up fury is understandable. Ellison's carefully supported (with real evidence!) narrative is also valuable for the light it sheds on the behind-the-scenes reality of Trek, science fiction in the 1960s, and writing for television in the 1960s.

This falls slightly short of five stars -- I wish I could give it 4.5 -- because some of the afterword essays are wonderful, but others are rather pedestrian, thin, and uninformed. The quality is uneven. On the bright side, they form a small fraction of the overall content.

Anyone interested in science fiction, television, and/or writing -- this deserves a wide net -- should enjoy this volume. I highly recommend the audio recording.

[Nate · Rating 3 out of 5]

The first half of this is Harlan Ellison waxing poetic about what a couple class A cocks Gene Roddenberry and William Shatner are and how his beloved screenplay was ruined by hacks. The second half is the various drafts and rewrites of the screenplay itself. It was interesting to see how the process works.

The actually screenplay itself is obviously quite different from the televised version but seemed a bit literary in the sense that it had more exposition without it being worked into dialogue. Some of the criticisms that came from Roddenberry were actually justified. Things like a starfleet officer being a drug dealer wouldn’t play well in the 60’s. most of the main story beats were there though, as well as some things that clearly influenced future episodes and movies like an alternate timeline where the crew are space pirates similar to the mirror universe episode.
All things considered his script was very original for the time but wasn’t far superior to the edited version that was aired. Some of the changes made sense for a low budget tv show like having the guardian of forever be a device instead of a group of nine foot tall guardians and their ancient city. It also made more use of the main cast instead of introducing new characters. Interesting to see what may have been though.

[Jim Cherry · Rating 5 out of 5]

For years Star Trek fans have considered the episode “The City on the Edge of Forever” the best episode from the original series. Harlan Ellison wrote the episode, and for almost as long as Star Trek fans have loved the aired version of that episode, Ellison has decried the aired episode as a pallid shadow of the episode he wrote. To prove his point, Ellison submitted his original screenplay to the Writers Guild Award and won! Since then Ellison and Star Trek fans (yes, the twain can meet! If you like science fiction you need to read Harlan Ellison!) have wanted to read the Ellison original to decide for themselves whether it was a greater story than the Star Trek aired episode. Now in “The Harlan Ellison Collection ‘City on the Edge of Forever’” finally puts in a volume Ellison’s teleplay plus additional drafts asked for by Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry.

The edition starts with a couple of forewords, one from a previous edition and one that updates events since the previous one. I’ll admit some of the material in the forewords is a bit redundant in the factual information. In the vociferousness of Ellison’s retorts let us not forget that those who have disparaged Ellison and his script over the years, while at not such a high volume, have had their viewpoint attain the reputation and imprimatur (Roddenberry and others in the Star Trek machine) that takes a loud voice to dispatch these now ingrained and oft repeated allegations.

Included in the text is 3-4 treatments of “City” Ellison wrote between March 21-May 13, 1966, some of which Ellison didn’t have to write (per union contract) but because he was committed to seeing his vision realized. Some problems included Roddenberry disliked that Ellison had an Enterprise officer selling drugs, wanted his crew members to be explorers and bring the best of humanity to the stars (this would imply the aliens encountered are in need of some sort of moral guidance), and Roddenberry disingenuously claimed that Ellison’s script would’ve been grossly over the Star Trek budget.

Television is a collaborative art. Ellison was well aware of that having already written what are now classic episodes of the Outer Limits (“Soldier” and “Demon with the Glass Hand”), so Ellison wasn’t a tyro writer coming in unaware of the process or that he expected his every word to be taken as holy writ. He probably expected some rewriting (and says he was aware of as much) and compromises to make his vision come to life on the TV screen. What he didn’t expect was Roddenberry taking the credit for “fixing” Ellison’s screenplay and the purposeful conflations over the years. It should be noted that every plot point that Ellison has in his original is included in the aired episode and ideas that appear in Ellison’s original treatment do seem to appear in later Star Trek episodes. In later years when Star Trek was moving to feature films, Ellison was consulted for story ideas. While he was never hired to write any of the films, again his ideas did appear in Star Trek films, and again in much more diluted ways.

There are a lot of afterwords. The two I found most enlightening, was one by David Gerrold, who wrote the second most highly regarded Star Trek episode “The Trouble with Tribbles.” He provides some insightful material on the culture behind the scenes of Star Trek. The second is by Dorothy Fontana, who for the first time revealed her input into the “City” screenplay (I’ve always thought there was a female hand in some of the episode’s scenes). The others by Leonard Nimoy, DeForrest Kelley, George Takei, and Walter Koenig are nice, but seem like character witnesses at a trial.

For all the above mentioned excesses in lesser hands these would be detrimental, but don’t forget THIS IS HARLAN ELLISON!

[Renee Hall · Rating 2 out of 5]

It was interesting to finally read the original teleplay and compare it to the version that was eventually aired. I was less interested by the seemingly endless bitter rant that precedes the teleplay. I'm not saying Ellison doesn't have good reason to be bitter, and I can imagine how cathartic it must have been to finally, definitively have one's say after so many years, but as a reader, it made for a tedious experience, and even when I felt Ellison's arguments were sound, I started losing sympathy for him.

All in all, I still prefer the televised version of "City", and after slogging through all the vitriolic material before and after the script, I started to feel like I, as the reader, was being constantly put down because I actually like Star Trek (and at one point the insults even extended into Star Trek: The Next Generation) and because I actually kind of like the vision Roddenberry had for the future, regardless of what he may have been like as a person. But according to these texts from Ellison and his supporters, I guess I'm just another plebeian slob for not recognizing the utter genius in every line of the original teleplay. *shrug*

At any rate, as a comparative text and from a Trek history point of view, I'm glad I read it. I'm just kind of sorry that I paid money for it.

[Jamie · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very interesting to experience Harlan Ellison's original script for what is perhaps the most revered Star Trek episode of all time. I skipped Ellison's extended vitriol and ranting at the beginning, and only read D.C. Fontana's recollections at the end. As originally written, it is a great story, no doubt. Kudos to Ellison. However, while the bones and outline of the story remained intact, it's obvious why it was rewritten. There were just too many extraneous elements (space pirates, drugs, unknown crew members, etc) and the relationships among the crew, especially between Kirk and Spock, lacked depth and the special qualities that characterized it. Highly recommended to fans of the original Star Trek series!

[Craig · Rating 4 out of 5]

The debate has gone on for over fifty years now... Ellison wrote a Star Trek. They changed the script a lot when they filmed it. Both versions were award winners. The episode is arguably the best Trek ever... Which one's better? There have been different versions and adaptations, and still the point is argued among the aged and aging fans. When Ellison's original script was published in this edition along with a very long introduction presenting his side of the argument there was much more hue and cry raised in the hallowed halls of fandom. I think it's much more remarkable to ponder the idea that the series achieved such popularity and is not only still remembered, but is still going almost as strongly as ever. Anyway, it's a terrific story and the introduction is of interest not only to Trekkers, but to students of pop culture and television the iconic American '60s. If you'll pardon the expression, it's fascinating!

[David Allen · Rating 2 out of 5]

The teleplay is good, of course. So was the finished episode. Ellison's heavily footnoted, spittle-flecked 73-page rant about changes to his script 30 years before contrasts neatly with D.C. Fontana's calm, 6-page explanation of how and why his script was rewritten. Dismaying from a writer of Ellison's abilities. What with the lousy layout and presentation, it looks like some nut's homemade fanbook. Suggested alternate title: "Ego on the Edge of Losing It."

[Jaksen]

Read enough to know I didn't want to read anymore.

No rating.

[Stephen · Rating 4 out of 5]

In the classic Star Trek episode, "The City on the Edge of Forever", Captain Kirk must chase a mentally disturbed man into Earth's past to save its future. Based on a teleplay penned by Harlan Ellison, it featured the kind of moral dilemma not seen again until Star Trek Deep Space Nine. Kirk falls in love with a woman of Earth's past, but if he saves her from a deathly fate, the Federation itself will -- through the usual 'want of a nail' reckoning -- cease to be. The original teleplay was heavily modified before it hit the screen, however, with many hands tinkering with it. Unfortunately for Star Trek, this tinkering wasn't routine, instead creating and sustaining a long-lived feud between Roddenberry and Ellison. It wasn't that Roddenberry merely altered the teleplay beyond recognition, Ellison hotly maintains here; it's that for years Roddenberry and his admirers mis-represented what was done, defamed Ellison's character and told outright lies about his involvement in the creative process. In this volume, Ellison first presents his side of the story, follows with the original teleplay and several revisions, and concludes with perspectives from other Trek luminaries like Nimoy and D.C. Fontana. For a fan of the original show, this is quite the read. Ellison's opening apologia bristles with contempt for Star Trek as a franchise, which had ceased to be about boldly imaginative stories and became a bland action-adventure series in space. Provided, however, that the Trek-loving reader is not a quivering bowl of jelly, Ellison's jabs can be absorbed and the peek into early Star Trek appreciated in full.

Ellison's original teleplay for the City on the Edge of Forever follows the opening essay/rant, and tells a dramatically different story from that portrayed on the screen. Oh, the basics are there -- time travel, New York, Edith Keeler -- but the motives and executions are different. Speaking of execution, that's how in the original story Kirk and company came to the planet to begin with. They were looking for a desolate cinder on which they could summarily execute a crewman for murder, peddling drugs, interfering with the affairs of other cultures, and the unauthorized use of a transporter without additional personal present, as required by the Federation OSHA. (Okay, I'm kidding about that last one.) The notion of an Enterprise crewmember selling drugs to innocent third-world space people was too much for Roddenberry to tolerate, never mind that throughout the show other Federation personnel would prove morally flawed. Think of Captain Tracey from the Omega Glory, or the crazy psychologist whose Tracey's actor also portrayed. In Ellison's original and in the revisions, the drug-peddling fellow seeks escape from justice by entering the temporal vortex on the planet. Kirk and Spock realize that their dope-peddler has changed history somehow, and thus enter the portal to pursue the plot along familiar lines -- until the end.

It is the end that makes City on the Edge of Forever. In the television version, Kirk is forced to make a heroic sacrifice, to allow the woman he loves to meet her deathly fate so that the Federation might be saved. That doesn't happen in Ellison's original. Instead, when push come to shove and Kirk sees death hurtling toward Edith, he fails at the last. Like Frodo, his moral stamina is exhausted at the precipice of Mount Doom, and he can't do it. Only this time, Spockwise Gamgee does the deed for him instead of Smeagol. This is a rare look at Kirk, a man whose pain, love, and yearning can overwhelm Steely Federation Resolve. Roddenberry wanted to make his Starfleet and the Federation perfect -- just see the TNG series bible -- but not only is that more fantastical than Lord of the Rings, it makes for really boring stories. What is left to work with, god-aliens and the warp core constantly threatening to overload? Fortunately, Deep Space Nine brought back moral quandries with a vengeance -- and none surpasses Sisko's "In the Pale Moonlight"!

There are other minor changes; in his afterword, David Gerrold comments on how Ellison's set directions were effectively disregarded or mis-read. He imagined an eerie city filled with runes, guarded by ancient creatures who seemed to be set in stone. What was built was...ruins, and a lopsided donut. (One person in the afterword alleges that the set director read the script while enjoying a night out at the bar, interpreted runes and ruins, and bob justman's your uncle. Seems a bit too tidy for me.) Altogether Ellison writes that he created five different revisions, grooming the story in an attempt to make Roddenberry happy. For instance, he dropped the enterprising drug peddler angle altogether, and has McCoy bitten by an alien creature and subsequently becoming addled. Not satisfied with Ellison, however, other writers were put to work axing this or that, and the doctor becomes a nincompoop who sticks himself with a hypo on accident.

Having read through all this, I can agree that in many ways Ellison's story was superior, even with some rough spots. In the first teleplay, for instances, he introduces too much too soon: the Guardians of Forever give Kirk the entire plot, telling him that the fugitive is going to try to save someone who is fated for death by the laws of the universe or somesuch, and he needs to rescue them. Later revisions improve this to make it more mystical and dramatic when Kirk has a sudden moment of realization. The drug-dealing plot I thought was rather interesting: I'm most partial to the original series when it reveals its rough roots, when we encounter details that demonstrate how Roddenberry was still establishing what kind of Earth this was he was writing about. The original Starfleet, for instance, had many more details and mores from 1950s military culture, including the death penalty for violating a specific general directive. (See "The Cage"/"The Menagerie") The narcotic Ellison used wasn't just some powder or fluid, it used sound to intoxicate the human brain. That's a concept I'd like to see explored!

In the end, the afterwards by Nimoy, Takei, Koenig, D.C Fontana, and David Gerrold (the latter two being Trek writers) add other brief perspectives and make this a book Trek fans should find considerable interest in. They will be insulted repeatedly in the beginning, but the story that follows is worth experiencing, especially given that it allows us a rare look into the creative process. Ellison's temper, which DC Fontana wryly notes is as dangerous as an H-bomb, and has a half-life just as long -- makes him a prickly fellow to get to know at first, but I've read enough of Leonard Nimoy's frustrations trying to work with Roddenberry to realize the "Great Bird of the Galaxy" wasn't the ideal visionary he was sometimes made out to be. I don't know of any Trekkies who hold him in that luminous regard, and that includes the TrekBBS community I'm an active member of. Besides, Isaac Asimov was great friends with Ellison, so he had to have been a good soul under the indignant defensiveness he displays here.

5 stars for interest, 4 for execution. Ellison's opening essay repeats itself a bit.

[Jay French · Rating 2 out of 5]

Imagine my confusion. I checked out “The City on the Edge of Forever Teleplay” by Harlan Ellison on audio from the library. This is the most popular Star Trek episode, and the audio boasts of many narrators, so I’m expecting something akin to an audio play. And since it’s Star Trek, I’m expecting about 45 minutes and I’m done. And then I notice that the package is 8 hours long. How can this possibly be? I start to listen.

This audiobook package is the culmination of a Trekkie pissing contest between writer Ellison and deceased Star Trek producer Gene Roddenberry. For the first two hours and 25 minutes of this production, Ellison lays out his claim that Roddenberry ruined his writing. The audio does this with Ellison himself making his cackling plea, and with various letters and articles about the “issue” read by different narrators. Ellison’s voice reminded me of the Wicked Witch of the West, though more catty. He approaches his arguments in a style reminiscent of Rush Limbaugh. Only after the almost legal pleadings do we get to the teleplay. But even here we are overwhelmed. There’s the original treatment. The original teleplay. The modified teleplay. Followed by the additional “McCoy’s gone nuts” beginning that was actually filmed. You end up going through the story many times, and you witness how the changes were made.

At this point, you realize you have about two hours to go. What could this be? For the remainder of the program, different people involved in Trek weigh in on what they think about the episode and about Ellison. Each section is voiced by a different narrator. You get a mix of opinions and criticisms.

The way the whole thing was set up was like a court case, with Ellison presenting his case up front, the evidence -- the screenplays -- are presented, and then the jury of Trek heavyweights weighs in. While I was not a willing participant in the court case, having stopped by just for entertainment, I will say that I liked Ellison’s early drafts, but I liked the story as rewritten by others better. That is, until I thought about what one of the jury said about the rewrite losing a good versus evil storyline by eliminating the drug pusher storyline and replacing it with McCoy with cat scratch fever. While the drug pusher storyline was powerful, it didn’t feel like Star Trek, and it still doesn’t. I'd say Ellison wrote a great scifi story, and Roddenberry and crew made it a great Star Trek story.

So would I recommend this audiobook? If you just want to hear the story changes, skip ahead to 2:25 and listen for a couple hours. You will be reminded of the episode and will learn how scripts are rewritten. If you want to step in the mud of writer’s brawling over credit, and you can deal with Ellison’s voice, this is interesting. Character driven. Would have made a great episode of Perry Mason.

[Patricia · Rating 2 out of 5]

As many people know and many more don't, Harlan Ellison has author credit for the Star Trek episode "The City on the Edge of Forever," in which Kirk & Spock must go back to 1930s Earth to restore a timeline.

What many people don't know is that the original story was heavily edited in order to make it acceptable to the story editors and producers of Star Trek. Ellison has since famously complained about the job that was done to his work, and a good deal of that complaining can be found at length in the preface to this book. You can skip the 70 plus pages of ranting that Ellison does here, it's self-serving at best and it isn't his best ranting. He's angry, hurt, and feels a need to justify his bile, but it comes across as being from someone little better than an ingrate. Is this guy fully grown? he comes across as an angry teenager. When you work for someone, whether as a builder, a sculptor, or a screenwriter, you do what you're told. If he didn't want to work with Star Trek or television, he should not have signed the contract. If he thought he could do better creating a television show - which, let's face it, is only a framework on which advertisements are hung - then he could try his hand at being an executive story editor himself. Oh, wait - he did, on Babylon 5. Well. I think we've all seen plenty of that show. Enough said, then - except at 70+ pages, Ellison has written much better work before, and more succinctly, too. Here, he loves the sound of his own anger so much that he won't shut up already.

The teleplay itself, while a good science fiction story, would have been a terrible Star Trek episode. It was out of character for a Star Fleet officer to be dealing drugs. Imagine if a Navy SEAL or a Ranger were to be doing that, and you might see what I mean. Yes, it's possible for Star Trek characters to have flaws - look at the pride of the top characters throughout the series - but that was over the top. Ellison disavowed the story - and then accepted a Hugo award for the final product, which he insists was not his vision. If he didn't write that final product, he should not have accepted the award for doing so.

I like Ellison a lot; I have many a collection of his stories, essays, and columns but this teleplay was an episode of "The Outer Limits" - the later version - at best.

[John Moretz · Rating 5 out of 5]

Classic angry Ellison. The book has Ellison's original script, re-writes, and treatments for all the world to read. These documents prove Scotty was never a drug dealer, as Roddenberry had claimed for many years.

Thus Ellison goes on a book length rant, ripping apart, among other things, Roddenberry's versions of events, Roddenberry's skills as a writer, and, in a foot note, referring to Glen A. Larson as "Glen A. Larceny". Ellison even has time to knock William Shatner by claiming Shatner was counting how many lines Kirk had in the script.

The book concludes with funny and sarcastic testimonials by various Trek related folk like Walter "Chekov" Keonig, George Takei, Leonard Nimoy, and D.C. Fontana.

TV shows have producers and story editors to insure series continuity and budgets, etc. As many have pointed out, it's a great script but it wasn't Star Trek. The aired episode was probably the best possible attempt at adapting Ellison's vision for the small screen at that time, thus we fans are thankful the story even made it to air.

But that is neither here nor there, for this book is about an angry and funny writer railing against the system, "the man", or more appropriately "Herbert", as represented by Roddenberry.

[Kevin Wright · Rating 4 out of 5]

As much as I love Harlan Ellison, now that I've read the original script, I actually think the Star Trek showrunners made some improvements to it. I like the character of Beckwith the interstellar drug-dealer and found his subplot engaging, but felt that Harlan spent too much time developing that and not enough time developing the relationship between Kirk and Edith Keeler, which is crucial to the heart and the point and the cruel irony of the story. I think the dialogue between Kirk and Keeler is both more to-the-point and more believable in the shooting draft. Watching the episode, I find it much more believable that Kirk actually fell in love with Edith in the short time that they were together (and I can't believe that was all due to Shatner's acting).

However, Harlan's rebellious attitude and unorthodox approach to the rigid strictures of the Star Trek franchise is bold and liberating. I would love to see his innovative script shot exactly as-is for the sake of the refreshing vitality, counterculture psychedelia and gritty realism that he envisioned.

[Jim Razinha · Rating 2 out of 5]

What an ass. I get that he's bitter, but he's still an ass. No one is safe, save perhaps Nimoy, from his invective. Reading that introductory essay makes me want to take a shower. Ellison worked in the industry...and is that naive? Give me one example of a teleplay/screenplay that was not re-written... Yeah. Never mind. He said they told him his original wasn't "Star Trek". Even as they were feeling out the canon so early on in the first season and had a myriad of inconsistencies, it wasn't Star Trek.

He could have said,
"I wrote this original screenplay, which won a WGA award. I still think it is better than what they turned it into. Yes, I hold grudges against Roddenberry, the production crew, and at least one of the actors, but you don't need to hear about that. Enjoy my creation."

But he didn't. He ranted like a petulant child for page after page, repeating himself over and over. What an ass. And frankly, his script wasn't that good.

I've not read anything by Ellison that was close to good. I guess I'm not reading the right stuff of his.

[Rob DeMillo · Rating 2 out of 5]

Look, here's the deal. I have loved Harlan Ellison since before I was probably old enough to understand his wonderful prose. He was an inspiration to me in a number of ways as I grew up. This book though, isn't filled with any interesting insights other than a big "Fuck you" to Roddenberry, and implied insults to the reader if they prefer the version that aired.

Harlan, if you are reading this: let. It. Go. Jesus Christ man, do you think you are the only person who was fucked over by a job? You even came out of it ahead of the game, man. Two awards for two different scripts? Most beloved episode ever? Move on, dude. We all know you are brilliant, but also we all know that in 19-fucking-66 TV was much different. Roddenberry had to play by the rules or his show would get pulled. He made compromises, yes, but you got the credit and you got the basically story arc in place. And you know what? The telephone as filmed was pretty damned amazing. So, relax Harlan.

[Paul Kinzer · Rating 3 out of 5]

The original teleplay is worth reading for Star Trek fans, but the author's rant is not. Do yourself a favor, after reading a little of the rant, skip ahead to the teleplay. I read maybe half of it before skipping ahead to the script. Five stars for the original teleplay, 4.5 stars the interim teleplay versions, 4 stars for the final revised teleplay, 4 stars for the epilogue reviews of writers & former cast members, 1 star for the author's incredibly long rant about how his teleplay was ruined. Yes, the original script was better, but that could've been said in a few pages.

[Sattik Deb]

A wonderfully performed audiobook, Ellison's essay over the first half of the book alone is worth the read. Reading the original concepts of City was so insightful and it was easy to see where Ellison and Roddenberry would have been in conflict, while also seeing the brilliance of Ellison's vision.

[Alice · Rating 4 out of 5]

Asimov was right, Harlan Ellison is one mean mf and I loved everything about this.
Getting to the real behind the scenes of one of my favorite episode of Star Trek from the point of view of the wronged and incredibly mad party was a ride.
And while Ellison's original script was marvellous, I would've almost preferred it being for a entirely different tv show al together. Still, Ellison describing Roddenberry as having "terrible vibes" was the highlight of my day.

[Justin Price · Rating 5 out of 5]

So somewhat of a confession: I was never really a big Star Trek fan growing up. Sure, I loved science fiction. But Star Trek never really interested me. It always felt somewhat antiquated as franchise. The characters, regardless of which version of Star Trek one is referring to, always felt lacking. Flat. Uninteresting. Dull. And I understand that the moral quandaries proposed by Star Trek is the chief draw of the show. And while the moral quandaries can be interesting, they began to lose their luster and spell when one realizes that the characters would not only do the right thing, but they would never truly struggle over it. Sure they may have a brief discussion, but there would not be any immediate ramifications nor would relationships break down over it.

Even then, I would tolerate watching episodes of The Next Generation and avoid The Original series due to how corny TOS could be at times. If TNG felt dull, TOS felt corny. Kirk had no depth beyond womanizer; Spock no depth beyond an emotionless logical being; and the rest no depth beyond whatever their assignment was. And while TNG had some fairly interesting plots, TOS plots did not feel all that intricate. Except for a select few episodes, TOS episodes felt basic at times and the characters felt more like a vehicle for the chosen theme or moral. At first, I thought it merely a difference in time or generation; Star Trek was made in the 1960s and it does feel its age. Yet after reading this book, I feel vindicated that it is not due to me being young or not getting it; it is the nature of the show.

This book not only contains the original script for City on The Edge of Forever as written by Ellison, but also details Ellison work on Star Trek, including his feud with Roddenberry. Now while this section does feel like a screed, it does illuminate how Roddenberry's ideas could be limiting to writers. Stating that there could be no arguments among the crew not only ignores that people differ in thought and can be passionate about what they believe, it limits character development and potential. Good characters have conflict with one another because they are passionate, because they care deeply about what they believe. Ellison understood this; Roddenberry did not. And you can see this in Ellison’s screenplay: Kirk, knowing that this Keeler has to die, yet finding himself unable to stop Beckwith saving her. Kirk fighting with Spock, in spite of knowing that if she lives, the future is changed irrevocably. All because he grew to love her. That was the kind of poignancy I felt was lacking in Star Trek. And while the filmed script does include some of these ideas, it does not explore them like Ellison’s script does.

In short, a very illuminating excursion into the process of writing for a major television show.

[Beth · Rating 4 out of 5]

I love "Star Trek," especially the original series. When I was in junior high and high school, I'd watch the reruns when I got home from school. It without a doubt shaped my worldview as I grew into adulthood and I still have that sense of optimism that we can all work together to explore new worlds or vanquish foes or solve seemingly insurmountable problems. (The Kobayashi Maru!) As is the case with so many other fans, "The City on the Edge of Forever" is my favorite episode. It is heartbreaking and it involves time travel and devastating disturbances in the space-time continuum.

The writer of that episode was Harlan Ellison, but the script was altered significantly by other writers on the show. This book includes Ellison's original script and his subsequent rewrites, as well as the final script as filmed. I have read about Ellison's legendary temper and general misanthropy, but perhaps he had reason to be angry about the alteration of this script. It is excellent. I still love the episode as filmed, and it remains my favorite. Ellison's script dives deeper into thorny subjects and I came away thinking what an outstanding film it would make. I wonder who has the rights to the original script?

I enjoyed all the outlines of the various iterations of the story and I enjoyed the afterwords written by some of the stars of the show (you are very missed, Mr. Nimoy). It was also fun to see the direction-speak, which explained how the scene should be shot. (My favorite was, "Construction of the Guardian should combine a minimum of expense with a maximum of ingenuity." If that isn't TOS, I don't know what is!) What I couldn't stomach was Ellison's lengthy foreword. I try my best to keep my head in a positive place, and after a few pages, I just couldn't take it anymore. It was so full of vitriol, anger, and negativity that it was unreadable for me. Once I decided to skip that and move on to the actual scripts, time "resumed its shape" and all was "as it was before."

An interesting read for any fan of the show, especially that episode. But damn, someone should really make that original script into a movie!

[TrumanCoyote · Rating 3 out of 5]

All of which goes to show that the actual filmed episode was better. I only read the script, not the accompanying materials--as I didn't want a faceful of Ellison's usual indulgent, self-serving crapola. The junkie stuff in the prologue did indeed have the wrong tone--and personifying the Gatekeepers made it gimmicky (not to mention that they intoned one fortune cookie after another). It was stronger to bring Edith Keeler into the story right away. Plus you miss great moments like Bones cracking up over sewing patients up with needles and thread, and Spock building a tricorder out of stuff he got from Radio Shack. And of course Shatner's immortal: "Let's get the hell out of here." And the sinister way the Time Portal signs off to them. The only weakness of the filmed episode is that you do get a little too much of the "Mr Spock, I think I'm falling in love with Edith Keeler"/"Edith Keeler must die, captain" exchange; and it is a nice touch to have (in the original) the evil Beckwith screwing things up because he actually does something good for a change in the past. But the alteration is unexplained in Ellison's version--just mystical; whereas the actual episode elucidates why she must die. And you also have the poignance of her talking to Jim about exploring stars in the future--and her intuition that he and Spock have served together. All of this is (it would appear) yet another instance of the arrogant (in this case legendarily so) writer thinking that nobody else can ever improve his stuff. You had the same problem with the original writers of It's a Wonderful Life.

[T. · Rating 2 out of 5]

The actual teleplay gets three stars. It is a nice story and getting to see the evolution (or destruction if you listen to Ellison) through its various treatments is lovely. Unfortunately, the first 70 or so pages of this book is really bring this whole thing down. If there was a Hall of Fame for pettiness, this essay would be its crown jewel. He repeats himself at least three times as he rails on everything Trek and Gene Roddenberry, which is fair. Ellison has a right to be angry. Yes, Scotty isn't pushing drugs in the original script or any of the treatments like Gene stated many times. Yet for a man who claims his writing can speak for itself, Ellison doesn't seem to believe it if he needed to allow this rant to go on as long as it did.

Within the teleplay itself, I had problems with the characterizations of Spock and Kirk. Spock is far too emotional and Kirk seems to be immature. Perhaps Nimoy and Shatner would have been able to sell any of the arguments within the script? I did enjoy giving Janice Rand the role as a capable member of the crew - tasked with holding transporter room for an indefinite period of time. It was a very nice touch and I wish some version of that could have been kept in the aired version.

Some of the afterwords left me rolling my eyes, specifically Gerrold and Melinda Snodgrass - to each their one I suppose. Truthfully my favorite part of this in the description of those who were in the afterwords. Deforest Kelley is described as "universally considered the nicest of the original cast" and if anyone said less they would be a jerk.

[Larry Bassett · Rating 4 out of 5]

I am not a big science-fiction fan, but this book is basically a lengthy rehash of a big science fiction issue involving Star Trek. I also did not watch Star Trek but I still found this book. Interesting because it gave a lot of insight about how television is or was created in the 1960s. And specifically how Star Trek was written, and came to the TV screen.

This book really focuses on one particular Star Trek issue, and one particular writer who wrote a script for the series that was ultimately rejected, but significantly rewritten and used. Strangely, both the version that was never Used for the program, and the version that was broadcast received awards for excellence. And yet the author of the unused version felt supremely abused by the process, and finally obtained a mechanism through the publication of this book and its audible release to completely tell his side of the story. And we have a chance to hear both versions of the story. And we also hear after the fact commentary by a number of people, including some who were involved in the original process at the end of the book. The audible book actually goes on somewhat longer than the e-book With the commentary.

People who are Star Trek fans might find this book more interesting than other people who have only a limited or passing knowledge of the series. I found listening to a variety of points of view to be a fascinating process.

[Pamela · Rating 3 out of 5]

This "book" is basically 200 pages of Ellison rant, Ellison's original teleplay, and some "supporting" statements by friends of the author.

The question is "Was Ellison screwed?" The answer is yes and no. Granted his work was the original, the one with the idea, but with all due respect, it was not the better Star Trek teleplay. There was just too much going on, too many plot lines and too many characters for a 50 minute show. The drug dealing scene, the search for an uninhabited planet, and the pirates--especially the freakin' pirates--were just strange and uncalled for. And why oh why did he give the dealer and the buyer basically the same name? That's just being an annoying git of a writer. And again.....PIRATES?

Was the McCoy maneuver better? It did omit the "bad guys sometimes do good thing" theme, but that is balanced by it leaving out the PIRATES. I vote for the McCoy maneuver as being the more Star Trek-ish version. Sorry, Harlan.

One quick note. It seems this "you stole my work" theme is not a new one for Ellison. He has a long and colorful history of suing producers, studios, and even internet service providers.

[Tony · Rating 1 out of 5]

If you are expecting this book to be Ellison's original teleplay of City on the Edge of Forever, you will be sorely disappointed. The original teleplay is here, but it is a relatively small part of the overall work. Close to half of the book is an "introductory essay" by Ellison, which consists of a long and rambling rant against Gene Roddenberry and all the other "pigs who dipped their snouts in the Star Trek trough." This diatribe is somewhat interesting and amusing at first. However, as it goes on (and on and on and on), Ellison becomes progressively less sympathetic and his assertions progressively less credible. The remainder of the book presents various versions of City, one of which is Ellison's original teleplay. I cannot imagine anyone other than a City scholar enjoying--or even reading--this composition from start to finish.