
A History of the Silmarils in the Fifth Age - mpweiher
http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/12/26/a-history-of-the-silmarils-in-the-fifth-age/
======
teilo
I realize this article is a tongue-in-cheek fan theory. However, it does make
me wonder what Tarantino was up to with Pulp Fiction.

The Ezekiel "quote" always bugged me because even without looking it up,
anyone who spent any amount of time in the Old Testament, could tell that it
was fabricated. "Finder of lost children" is not an OT motif in general, and
certainly not in Ezekiel. Obviously, Tarantino knew people would look it up
and go "what the heck is this?" Therefore I have to think it was an
intentional move on his part, but why?

I think it's a tell that there's a story-under-the-story in Pulp Fiction which
lends credence to the other observations. There's obviously something
supernatural going on. One of the things I love about the film is that
Tarantino doesn't explain anything. He lets mystery stay mystery, as any good
story should.

I don't buy the Silmarillion connection. Nor do I think that this movie is a
loose retelling of any specific classical tale, ala O Brother Where Art Thou.
It's more likely that he doesn't have any specific story in mind, but
sprinkled the supernatural element into PF to give it an air of mystery. But
I'd love to be proven wrong.

~~~
sevensor
I think Tarantino put mysteries into Pulp Fiction for the same reason Scott
wrote this post -- the mind likes to make connections where there are none.
Scott did this quite deliberately, to entertain us both on the meta-level and
on the level. I suspect Tarantino added inexplicable elements so that we as
the audience would be entertained by speculation. There's nothing underneath.

If you want to see what happens when the writers lose their nerve and try to
explain everything, watch _Lost_.

~~~
foobarian
On the other hand there is X files.

There really needs to be an "engineer plot" genre where plot stays consistent
to a small set of made up axioms. "The Strain" made an attempt. It boggles the
mind why not in a single one of the zombie stories out there nobody bothered
to wonder where the zombies get the energy? The way most of them work it's
like cold fusion landing in one's lap.

~~~
qznc
People who love this genre hang out at
[https://www.reddit.com/r/rational](https://www.reddit.com/r/rational) They
call it "rational fiction".

There is quite some overlap with fan fiction, because people like to "fix"
non-rational fiction. Eliezer Yudkowsky and his take on Harry Potter is the
prime example. I can also recommend Alexander Wales who also made original
fiction.

Probably the oldest related work is A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's
Court by Mark Twain.

Another name mentioned often in this genre is Brandon Sanderson and especially
his Mistborn series, but I have not read it personally.

~~~
foobarian
I can't thank you enough for this pointer. Just what I had in mind :-)

~~~
qznc
A slightly better pointer might be the wiki of the subreddit:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/rational/wiki/index](https://www.reddit.com/r/rational/wiki/index)

------
stared
As a note on Santa Claus being something different than we think: "Is Santa
Claus a god?" ([http://nautil.us/blog/is-santa-claus-a-
god](http://nautil.us/blog/is-santa-claus-a-god)).

tl;dr: Omniscience (of child's deeds), rewarding the good (with gifts) and
punishing the bad (with coal).

~~~
tootie
I always wondered how Christians were able to square the existence of Santa
with the 2nd commandment. Then again, how they can reconcile Jesus with the
2nd commandment is bit dodgy to me too so what do I know.

~~~
williamdclt
I don't think any adult Christian thinks that Santa is actually real, so
there's nothing to reconciliate

~~~
tootie
Sure, but they're teaching sacrilege to their kids.

~~~
krapp
Of course, but sacrilege is in the eye of the beholder. It used to be
sacrilege to own a Bible not written in Latin and for a layperson to read it
directly, now many Christians consider any Bible other than the King James
version to be sacrilegious. There's no objectivity or rational thought at
work, it's essentially cultural norms and politics.

Many Conservative Christians do believe Santa Claus is an attempt by the
"atheist establishment" to remove the Christian identity from the holiday, but
that's due to a modern interpretation of Santa Claus as a capitalist icon, and
the defensive nature of Christian conservatism. No Christian would likely have
questioned the "Christianness" of Santa Claus a century ago, when the status
of religion in Western society was unquestioned.

------
xyzzyz
If you enjoyed this, you'll probably enjoy the Unsong book, by the same
author. It's basically the same idea, only bigger and better.

[http://unsongbook.com/](http://unsongbook.com/)

~~~
itronitron
It reminds me of Thomas Pynchon's writing in which he threads together various
bits of historical information to explain current events in a new light, 'The
Crying of Lot 49' is a good start for anyone interested but unfamiliar with
Pynchon.

------
appearsonline
>I would guess that Maglor survived, found his Silmaril, lost his Silmaril
again, and that Pulp Fiction is an account of him getting it back.

And now I want to rewatch and reread everything again!

------
murrayb
Quite possibly the best thing that I have read in 2017.

~~~
pcnix
You might want to give Unsong a try then, it's the same author:
[http://unsongbook.com/](http://unsongbook.com/)

------
radicalbyte
Thanks, great read. It really reaffirms the brilliance of Tolkien's work. Lord
of the Rings isn't just a nice story, it's a world with its own mythos and
history.

------
elvinyung
Extremely relevant, there's a rational fic that's about exactly this topic:
[http://archiveofourown.org/works/3451040/chapters/7569143](http://archiveofourown.org/works/3451040/chapters/7569143)

------
chaostheory
> The movie Pulp Fiction centers around a mysterious briefcase. We’re never
> told exactly what’s inside

"Tarantino has admitted that there is no official explanation behind the
briefcase’s contents, and that it was simply written into the screen play as
an intriguing McGuffin."

I liked the soul theory better i.e. Marcelus's soul was in the briefcase and
he sold it to the devil.

~~~
logfromblammo
The briefcase held a new drug that had been in development for 10 years, ever
since Huey Lewis requested it in 1984.

The request that it not spill or come in a pill required a novel delivery
system, producing the high via modulated stimulation of the optic nerve, but
subtracting the shorter blue wavelengths that might disrupt the circadian
regulatory system and therefore keep the user up all night or make them sleep
all day. Hence, the golden glow.

Every time someone opens up the case, they are taking an e-drug.

~~~
chaostheory
"If you all are anything like me then you had no idea what was in the
briefcase in Pulp Fiction. So, through a friend of a friend of a friend who
had a two hour conversation with Quentin Tarantino himself, I now know, and I
thought I would pass along the information because it makes the movie even 100
times better than it already is.

Remember the first time you were introduced to Marsellus Wallace. The first
shot of him was of the back of his head, complete with band-aid. Then,
remember the combination of the lock on the briefcase was 666. Then, remember
that whenever anyone opened the briefcase, it glowed, and they were in
amazement at how beautiful it was; they were speechless. Now, bring in some
Bible knowledge, and remember that when the devil takes your soul, he takes it
from the back of your head.

Yep, you guessed it. What is the most beautiful thing about a person: his
soul. Marsellus Wallace had sold his soul to the devil, and was trying to buy
it back. The three kids in the beginning of the movie were the devil’s
helpers. And remember that when the kid at the end came out of the bathroom
with a 'hand cannon,' Jules and Vincent were not harmed by the bullets. 'God
came down and stopped the bullets' because they were saving a soul. It was
divine intervention."

[https://www.snopes.com/movies/films/pulpfiction.asp](https://www.snopes.com/movies/films/pulpfiction.asp)

~~~
logfromblammo
The briefcase held the actual, original MacGuffin _and_ the actual, original
Chekhov's gun--which was never fired in the movie. The former was the treasure
that had been used as a nonspecific plot device by Sophocles, Menander, and an
unbroken line of storytellers, through Shakespeare, and ending with Alfred
Hitchcock, George Lucas, and Quentin Tarantino. The latter had a more recent
origin, but somehow ended up in Tarantino's possession without him knowing of
its significance.

It is somewhat obvious that Tarantino lost the plot devices some time after
production, as they reappeared in fused form 6 years later in " _Dude, Where
's My Car?_"

------
macintux
"Spoiler warning for The Silmarillion" (but no corresponding spoiler warning
for "Pulp Fiction").

I've read The Silmarillion, but not seen Pulp Fiction, so thbbbbbt.

------
hyperion2010
Absolutely wonderful, now I want to hunt down all the alternative theories so
we can test them!

------
Wildgoose
This is great! A very amusing What If?

