Aladdin: Tales of Time, or Tides?

Goooooood Morning, Fanaticaaaals!! For anyone who misses the reference, I will willingly guide you to Robin William's movie Good Morning, Vietnam!, which is based on a true story. Why start today's post with a line in the late Robin William's voice? Well, we are sliding into Aladdin today and I thought it a great way to tribute to the amazing, late actor who brought so many of our childhoods joy!

While we are technically diving into two theories today, they can also be combined into one single theory as they deal with the validity of Aladdin's existence. I stumbled across these theories one day and was completely blown away by the complete polar opposite, yet similar natures of them; at the same time, though, I also found the validity in both theories.

Was Aladdin set in the Extreme Future?

There is a lot of thoughts about this one, but there are some key comments that makes this theory completely believable. We all sort of gloss over and giggle when Genie makes the comment "Ten thousand years will give you such a crick in the neck!" Not only does this make you stop and wonder just HOW OLD Genie is (not to mention, he also even states that he's looked for love for ten thousand years, meaning he could be even older than we first think), but it also makes you wonder exactly WHEN the movie is set.

While the location setting is in Agrabah, it seemed to be in older times; proof of by the severe lack of any type of technology means that even the modern-day cities in the desert who still use caravans that was obviously the only way they had to travel at the time. Co-director John Musker also confirmed that they rearranged the letters of "Baghdad" from Iraq, and "Agra" from India to create the fictional city of "Agrabah". In the first few minutes, we also know that Agrabah is located by the Jordan River which is located in Israel and Syria.

The location of Agrabah is a huge factor, as is the fact that they seem to have no modern technology at all and is seemingly set during the Ottoman Empire. However, with Genie's comments of being in the lamp for ten thousand years, it makes it seem as though it is set at a much later date in time. The second form of "proof" for this comes in the form of Genie's references to popular 80s/90s things, such as his impersonation of Jack Nicholson and former Govenor Arnold Schwarzenegger. These references make it feel as though Genie was set in the lamp and buried in the very late 1900s.

Could it be that Genie just over exaggerated the time he was in the lamp and cave? Absolutely. But the references to the pop culture make it questionable considering the feeling of the 15th Century. This is also a huge wrench in what many people have come to know as the Pixar Theory, as it begs the question of the exact time that Aladdin took place.

Aladdin Never Happened

What if Aladdin didn't actually happen? Forget being confused as to when it happened, because it never did which explains why the movie itself was set in the 15th Century and contained a magic Genie. Let me explain how this theory is possible, in which I will be using both the original 1992 cartoon, AND the 2017 live action.

At the beginning of the original 1992 version, you meet a peddler who is trying to sell something, ANYTHING, from his stand. Then panning of the "camera" makes it feel as though YOU are the person that he is trying to sell the goods to. That being said, he brings out a lamp and does what? Starts telling a story. You have no proof that the story behind the lamp is true, how can you? Which makes it plausible that you are literally being told a story that is so fantasical that you would buy the item just to tell people you know that you have something of amazing value.

Isn't this what happens when people bring things into Pawn Shops? These people are told stories about what is in front of them that people want them to buy, and generally the ones that get away with their stories being true is when a specialist comes in to confirm the item using history, or if someone has a paper that confirms its authenticity. In the 15th Century, papers of authenticity didn't exist.

To support that thought, we look at the live action movie; a man is on the deck of a boat in the middle of the sea telling his children, what? A story. Why? I can tell you how easily my children get bored, and they are roughly the same age as those children on the deck. I can't imagine putting my own children on a boat for long periods and expecting them to not ever be bored. Plus, children love fairytales; they get a story about how their parents met, while also getting an amazing story filled with magic, heroes, and villains. He's not even selling anything; he's just giving his children a good story to keep them occupied.

While some may argue that the original Aladdin movie DID, in fact, have a few sequels and the tv show that this could be disproven I say this: you're not wrong. Think, though, if those were never created then how valid would these two theories become?

Come join our community, and let's discuss your thoughts on these two mind-blowing theories. Are they tales or time? Or tales for the tides? Join me tomorrow for the last Disney theory of the week, and a jump into mythological roots.