What We Don't See

My first thought about something that was impactful to the audience while it was never fully revealed was the contents of Marcellus Wallace’s briefcase in Pulp Fiction.  We never really know what’s inside, but clearly the contents are intriguing to those who open the case.  People get killed over its contents.  To this day, people speculate over what was inside.   I found my own speculation fun, discussing with friends my idea which was that it was Wallace’s soul inside the case, and that the bandage on the back of his neck symbolized his soul having been removed. After the film’s release, a Canadian newspaper ran a contest for people to theorize what was inside.  Some of the guess were: the Oscar that Quentin Tarantino hopes to win, a human head, the ear from Reservoir Dogs, O.J.’s other glove, Michael Jackson’s other glove, Rudolph’s nose, and the diamonds from the robbery in Reservoir Dogs.  The winner of the contest claimed it was a homage to Robert Aldrich’s Kiss Me Deadly, which centers around another briefcase, glowing because it contained a small nuclear bomb. Tarantino maintains that the similarity was purely accidental, although he apparently liked the idea.  Actually, Tarantino and co-writer Roger Avery admitted that the idea of the diamonds from Reservoir Dogs being in the briefcase was one they had tossed around.  But they were worried that something like that would be too expected.  And then, a properties person installed a light bulb in the suitcase so it glowed when it opened.  Tarantino and Avery disliked this, but the producers thought it was nifty, so the shots stayed.  

Avery says, “Originally the briefcase contained diamonds. But that just seemed too boring and predictable. So it was decided that the contents of the briefcase were never to be seen. This way each audience member would fill in the blank with their own ultimate contents. All you were supposed to know was that it was “so beautiful.” No prop master can come up with something better than each individual’s imagination. At least that was the original idea. Then somebody had the bright idea (which I think was a mistake) of putting an orange light bulb in there. Suddenly what could have been anything became anything supernatural. Didn’t need to push the effect. People would have debated it for years anyway, and it would have been much more subtle. I can’t believe I’m actually talking about being subtle.”

Tarantino still maintains regarding the contents of the briefcase, “It’s whatever you want it to be.”  But I like the idea that the writers wanted it to be left to the audience’s imagination.  Would the guesses have been as wacky and plentiful if the wasn’t a light emitting from the case?  Interesting thought.  I wonder…

As for the second query- I’d like to confabulate on Gidion as dark matter was in Gideon’s Knot.  I think that not seeing Gidion was an incredibly effective choice, which did indeed, “help focus and audience’s theatrical experience.”  In doing my own research for this show, I heard there was a production where there were school pictures of the students on the wall, thusly the audience saw “Gidion”.  I think that was a poor production choice.  It’s much more interesting- to me anyway- to imagine what Gidion may have looked like.  We don’t have a face to put to this child who has tragically taken his life.  Which I think makes the show even more powerful when the culpability of both women is called into question.  By having only the idea of the deceased eleven-year-old, we become more invested in the morality struggle.  Who deserves the punishment in this situation?  The teacher who saw a troubled student and did nothing about it?  Or the busy single mother who failed to see that her own son was conflicted in feelings about his sexuality and potentially a bully himself? In a story where the playwright deftly places two women who absolutely do not want to be in the same room together (yet whom actually need to be in the room together), the dark matter can “alter others consciousness at will.”  Some people side with Heather, some with Corryn, but the trauma induced by the lack of Gidion’s presence is spoken through each of these characters.  Neither of the characters is rewarded, and we are uncertain as to what will happen to either of the women moving forward.  I think Adams’s work is brilliant, and I hope she resurfaces with some new work soon in which she again represents “personal and collective traumas” in a new light, by using the dark.