I finished reading Phantom of the Opera again, second time this year, and made it through the end without crying. But it may have been because I was reading it for soaking up ideas and not to really submerge myself in the content. It really did touch me again hearing Erik beg for marriage, though... "...But you'd have fun with me!" Oh, it gets me.

In fact, I feel so differently appreciative of this story right now, like I've never felt before. A few years ago I wouldn't be sold on the idea that I was going to find the book so capturing. For years, I didn't think the book was very good, but I know now it was because my stupid young self thought Gaston Leroux was too wordy and the gravity of the scenes was lost on me.

Now I feel like a book nut -- I know why a friend of mine loves it so much, even enough that it's her one true commitment (and she doesn't think the musical's that great.) I'm a little different from her because, even though the musical IS very much a straying interpretation, I feel like it captured a lot of the feelings from the book and did have music that I can hear while I read it. It's very close to me, and it's not ambiguous at all that my "Erik"'s mannerisms and outward show are musical-like, because he knows Lily likes that. He's There shows it's made by a musical lover, but that's not all that I am.

And neither am I a lover of just a couple of the movies. I know right now that I have closed the period of time in which I wrote He's There, inspired by Robert Englund and Charles Dance. I believe the rest of this book is going to have Leroux splashed all over it and that will pack the BIGGEST punch. It will unite phans who might be a little torn by their opinions of what's the best adaptation by bringing them back to the darkness, passion, and obsession that started it all -- what made this story cared about 100 years after it was written and retold so many times. I lament, however, that there isn't much said by Gaston Leroux about his own characters. He was alive during the shooting of the silent film, though he died two years later... did he have a hand in that? I don't know. I should probably look into it...


That said, I'm in a state of mind where, when I think of Erik, I see the man in the book instead of the man in the musical, which was my natural and preferred vision for a long time. (Please feel free to view my fanart by clicking on the thumb. :D)

While I was reading, I sometimes got carried away with my ideas for imitation of him. What I mean is, I would be so in that world that I would be so out of the He's There world, and it would become apparent to me later that not every way that Leroux Erik acts works with my "Erik". Despite how much inspiration I've had from all over the place, my "Erik" is his own person, so with my pages of notes, I had to put into the plot what was believable given what he's already like. On the other hand, not all that he does is what's natural to him because he feels kindred enough with this Erik -- this Erik he thinks existed, and all the others don't -- that he sometimes finds himself willingly hijacked by the impulse to do what that character he looks up to would do.

I thought about, also, how different he is from Leroux Erik, and yet he still thinks he shared his spirit. Where is his musical genius (even if he can play the piano quite well?) Where is his mastery of ventriloquism, of magic, of his own voice? I have to remember before I consider him a disappointing fraud that he IS technically a fraud and that is the point - that from the outside of his troubled mind, he is clearly not Erik to anyone but poor Lily whose treatment has been so tailored, she doesn't care if they're confused together about his identity. Also, Leroux Erik is 50 years old and lived that life - a life "Erik" has never lived. "Erik" is younger than Raoul! "Erik" is a depressed young man who was overwhelmed by the world and said "fuck it". I consider him, if anything, as a seedling of the real Erik, and I think he does too. He has just started on a journey he deems similar.

Even with all of Leroux Erik's experiences and growth, one big thing I think they have in common is neither has really grown up, or in a way they've grown up in so much emotional isolation that what they are now isn't agreeable with everyone else. Yet they know it and stubbornly maintain their own ideas about how they will live. Other people's rules are meaningless to them. It would be too overwhelming and painful to try and change, so they get by without changing. Thinking they need only their privacy, room to create as they please, and a woman who's supposed to endure that lifestyle so against the grain they must be isolated... He thinks he can make her drunk off love for him and she'll just be fine living like a beautiful thing put into a box.

It made me feel so uncomfortable that he didn't know the real way to be with and love someone else - that he had a fantasy about being loved and would kill everyone if he couldn't realize it.

Ah, but I'm going off on such a long tangent. The book is a trip to a dark place in all our hearts, where we've been before, whether in reality or imagination, when we loved someone so much it hurt; hurt even before it became clear they would never see us that way, so that afterward it felt like the world was ending. The part that makes me cry is Erik's fruitless fighting, every word dripping with realization that it isn't reaching inside the girl, who's become too terrified even to refuse him. It's almost worse than anger and an open desire to get away. Imagine someone you love afraid of you because they see you as a monster, who hurts rather than understands. Sometimes I worry my father feels that way.

Another tangent!

He's There chapter scripting starts today, hopefully. I'll write soon.

...I think everyone will be pleased. I think what comes out of him will be what we could suspect him hiding all this time.

One last thing -- I was very excited to learn that one of my favorite Phantom of the Opera songs, Let Me Love You Now, is from an entire album of music written by Vox Lumiere for the silent film. It's very clear they're inspired by the book as well as that film, and it gives me shivers thinking they are writing ABOUT the Phantom, and it isn't coincidental lyrics that I'm applying to the story.

I found this little gem while looking on the website... Oh, so simple but expressive!

http://audio.isg.si/audiox/?q=node/64500

Mine could be the name you long to say!

♥,
Jennifer

Jesus, this took a while. I didn't imagine I would be at it for as long as I was, but it got quite elaborate as I went on...

Weeks ago, I took out a piece of paper and was deciding what percentage of other phantoms did mine have in him. I thought it was an interesting subject to dive in since in the past run with writing HT I was often comparing him to Robert or Charles. The numbers altered a little but I came up with the following and hope to anyone who knows these phantoms well that it rings true. Phew!

So I guess I'll just get right to the list.
......................................................................................................................................


(10%) Julian Sands - 1998
You know, I really can't ignore my roots. So many people hate this version with a passion, or just plain make fun of it, but it was my introduction to The Phantom of the Opera and the past can't be re-written. I give it credit because it must have retained something significant in order for me to appreciate it through its faults and want to move on to bigger and better movies.

Julian was one of only two phantoms that influenced mine at the time that the story was created. I had been bought and disliked Robert Englund, was bored by Lon Chaney, and didn't find Charles Dance memorable (for some fucked up reason on all three accounts), so it was ultimately he and the musical's Michael Crawford that did most of the inspiration, luckily more on the surface than characteristically.

How are they alike?

1. Physical - On several accounts. They're similar in height and build, although I really did not think Julian was hot when he started taking off his clothes. lol Both have sharp profiles, and I feel absolutely certain that "Erik" inherited long hair from this guy. (cue cries of "WIG!") He's the only phantom with hair of this length and I myself loved long-haired guys when I was 14/15 so it all points in his direction.

2. Voice - I know Julian has some preposterous lines in this movie, but I do think he has a pretty smexy voice and it's the closest to sounding like "Erik"'s, both the sound and tones he uses. I love Robert's voice but I could never hear it coming out of my Phantom, and Charles sounds like Snape. You can't hear Lon for obvious reasons, Claude Rains is way off, and Gerard Butler is freaking Scottish.

3. Manipulation - They manipulate by entirely different means, but I still feel it should be acknowledged since it produces a unique ending to the Phantom story. Julian makes Christine believe she loves him and is committed to him by using, er, psychic powers, but I see the practical equivalent to that just being "Erik"'s ability to dig into her past, having been a stalker, and make her feel attached to him in various ways, like acting out dreams she had (we'll get to that soon) and making her feel like everyone else is suppressing her spiritually. Rather than just trying to "oo" and "ahh" her, like "I can give all of this to you", he sets aside material and really drills into her head that they should be together and so does Julian.

How are they different?

1. Origin - First and foremost, my phantom is not feral! It really didn't make a whole lot of sense that Julian had all that stuff down there and could speak fluently but was raised by rats. Really. XD But the fact that he was really made him strange in the wrong ways and took away from his appreciation for Christine. She had to share the lair with his ... companions, and I doubt he was willing to make a compromise. It was kind of like he had a family, lol. My Erik does not have companions, human or otherwise.

2. Aggression - Yeah yeah, it's easy to relate him to Robert Englund since they both come from horror interpretations, but I thought Julian's behavior was beyond the pale. He made it plenty easy for people to wander down to his lair but he still went out killing people, with brutal signature, just because he was in the mood, rather than because it met some end. My phantom is not reckless like that. If he has to hurt people, it's very strategic. He also would never rape Lily.

3. Aimlessness - I never got the impression Julian had plans for anything but to pluck Christine from the opera house and have ferocious sex. He seemed to operate like a cave man, really. Kill, eat, kidnap Christine, sex, wake up the next morning and do it again... My Phantom absolutely requires the use of his brain, and stimulation, and ideas. He likes romance and tons of foreplay, lol.

 

 

* * *


(20%) ALW/Michael Crawford - 1986 to present
At its beginning, HT was homage to the musical. It was one of two versions I knew/liked and the most spectacular, so a lot of my fantasies about having a phantom came from this. I pictured a phantom in this way, and often so has Lily. It was the version that captivated her as a child, and me, so "Erik" had to be very much connected with it if he wanted to win her heart.

That said, what went into "Erik" was more the feel of the musical rather than concepts or character traits. At least, I think.

How are they alike?

1. Physical - The most obvious similarity of all! He dresses like he should be on stage. The musical presented a very clean black and white Erik and so became "Erik", but maybe worse, as he not only wears the tux, but covers up more of his face and has died his hair black. (But that was something he did even beforehand.) He and ALW phantoms are very sharp.

2. Promise of Freedom - It seems to me like "Erik" is often preaching The Music of the Night in different ways. Both he and ALW Erik are very intent on proving to Christine that she isn't free: creatively, spiritually, intellectually... until she embraces the darkness and embraces him, the only one that knows her true potential and appreciates her in full.

3. Sexual Tension - There are hints of sexual tension in the musical as well, and it's mutual, which is kind of interesting because The Phantom of the Opera was not seen as that type of story beforehand. It was the musical that romanticized him, and instead of just making him dangerous, he became tempting. He became someone you wanted to follow rather than run away from. "Erik" is able to bring that feeling out of Lily even though he has kind of an odd appearance, and I think it's because he's a careful mover and has a... special touch. lol. Michael Crawford had that whole thing going on with his hands and being very aware of his body, and "Erik" is the same way.

4. Mystery-factor - Not only did they up the mysteriousness of Erik's character in the musical, but they designed a stage that made it much easier for him to be. He had a supernatural element to him, being able to disappear from the stage and reappear in different places. Sometimes you don't always know he's on stage (unless you're one of those that have seen it more times than you can count, and to that I would say HEY, GIVE ME A TICKET.) And definitely when you think of the stage production, which has been spoofed in many other things (Disney's Phantom of the Megaplex, Are you Afraid of the Dark? etc etc), you imagine his shape in dry-ice, a rustle of the curtains and a disembodied voice. The appeal is completely obvious. "Erik" was extremely f'ing lucky to have such an intimate connection to a theater (of that size, even) where he could use parkour and other neat tricks to screw with Lily's head.

5. Audience Appeal - This kind of ties in with mystery-factor, but I see it as a similarity because the musical and HT keep in mind that other people are experiencing it on the outside. HT aims to identify with all phans with the fantasy that would like to know a little more about what it could be like, and when you go to the musical they try to freak you out by making the chandelier fall right over your head and have Erik show up near the ceiling on the angel statue. It's not interactive, but it's exhilarating. It's why for a child (like Lily was), he seemed real. He seemed the way character actors do. When you go to Disneyland you don't know it's not the Mad Hatter... it just is... And on that night, there was a scary but fascinating man in the same room with her, that she thought she had lost afterward, little did she know. :)

6. Singing - Alright, I admit, "Erik" can carry a tune. ♥
   

How are they different?

1. The part where he's a musical genius - Yeah, um... Obviously being a musical, music was a big deal, and while "Erik" has a high appreciation for it, he in no way compares.

2. Onstage "Debut" - "Erik" would never... ever...ever confront Lily via joining her on stage in front of a whole audience of people! I mean like never. That is a level of boldness that he does not possess. Plus, no situation would even call for it. If it happened, Lily would walk offstage, not humor him, anyway.

3. Taking 'No' For an Answer - I commend ALW Erik for his humanity, but I think my phantom lacks it. As I said under Charles Dance, he would no longer have the will to live if circumstances made him realize Lily was really ready to say goodbye for good. He will reach a point when he thinks that is on its way to happening and then we will have our climax.

 

* * *


(20%) Charles Dance - 1990
Charles Dance... oh, witty pessimistic Snape-voiced Charles Dance. Although he was ignored for years, I'm more than grateful that later he turned the tables. There are a few big ways that he is nothing like my phantom, but other ways where it's through the roof, which'll make this analysis interesting.

 

How are they alike?

1. Projection - Charles is extremely good at acting like a gentleman even if inside he would like to be down on his knees, or otherwise, around Christine. Being unable to leave the Opera House, and unseen by most people, it was still his decision to wear an over-the-top suit, and talk to Christine like she is much higher status than a costume-girl. This has long been my phantom's strategy, but there is sincerity in it. "Erik" takes it steps further though, trying to pretend he can appear any time Lily needs him, even when the weather turns him numb or he has gotten no rest to speak of. Charles is good at appearing when she needs him to, or standing outside to hear her sing~, and I think he has the dedication to help her in any situation as well. I will never forget he waited for her all night in their singing lessons room. That was so sweet. :)
   
   Also, I feel it fit to mention here that when Christine breaks out of the formal and starts trying to convince him how important he is to her, he shrivels up inside with distant eyes, just like "Erik". Aghh. ♥
   

2. Mask - Both have very concealing masks! It really can make it difficult reading them if you don't know what to look for, but both can be told by their eyes, as long as they aren't being shadowed. Depending on their sharpness. Both of them lose focus when they feel uncomfortable.

3. Non-ghostly - Charles, along with Claude Rains and Julian Sands, never used the whole "I am an angel your father sent" ploy to gain trust from her, but... he alone maintained a really enigmatic omnipresent feel that I think "Erik" can do too, just from preparation and trap-doors, instead of claiming to be non-human. He did well that feel of "maestro, but I don't know what his name is or where the hell he lives," and it's basically the same thing in HT except they roleplay instead of have singing lessons, hahah.

4. Romantic - Self-explanatory! I can think of no other phantom that even tried to give Christine a good time, whereas to Charles and "Erik", this is a priority. They really see their life as bettering hers, it seems, compared to many Phantoms that kind of want to just keep her as a thing. I mean not that "Erik" and Charles don't want to keep her, and are desperate to do so, but I find it to be a deeper appreciation. Charles built an underground forest, had this world just waiting for them to share together, and had a picnic with her in said forest, for God's sake. XD This is why I would want to be kidnapped by Charles. We'd get tipsy and cuddle and he'd take me on a boat ride. ;) And "Erik", he wants to make that underground world too, with Lily.

5. Suicide Threat - The feeling I get from the other phantoms is that even though they may love Christine, they would move on with their lives, and in versions where they weren't killed by the public, they disappeared and left us in the dark from there. Charles, however, had run out of options. He stumbled upon Christine and suddenly that was everything that ever mattered, to the point where when he realized he had been exposed and couldn't have her, he essentially committed suicide, even if it was someone else he asked to shoot him. Similarly, I think that's the point "Erik" has gotten to. He's really just living and perfecting himself to fulfill what he sees as his purpose: to set Lily free and to live the delusion. He has said goodbye to who he was, because there was nothing to like and nothing worth keeping. Both seem to be suffering a mental issue, although it's hard to say with Charles since anyone so cut off from society would suffer effects, but either way it makes them a danger to themselves if they can't get what they want.

6. Wit - Besides Robert, and sometimes in ALW, I don't really find wit in the other phantoms. "Erik" and Charles use it around different people, "Erik" more with Lily, and Charles more with his father, but they both have somewhat dark... realist... self-deprecating humor. XD They would rather put it on the table that they're freaks and laugh at things. I like it. :)
   

How are they different?

1. Violence - Charles seems to be a rather moral guy when he's not threatening to blow up the Opera House. He doesn't like killing people and only does it if he absolutely has to. It's just not what he's into, in his spare time. "Erik" on the other hand, finds himself in situations where he has to be a little tougher, and doesn't feel nearly as much remorse if he has to slam his switch-blade into someone's back. He doesn't appreciate humanity the way Charles does, ultimately, even if he's made threats.

2. Outside Relationship - For some reason, in this movie, they decided they needed to implant Burt Lancaster as the Phantom's father and past Opera House owner, who knew where to find him and had conversations with him in the cellars. Overall, it worked out okay, even if it was far-fetched, but it took away from the feeling of solitude, and of having no one to depend on but Christine. Never in a million years would my phantom have a good relationship with either of his parents.

3. Exclusion of the Outside World - Charles planned on keeping Christine underground, alone, and seemed plenty content with that. I think "Erik" was a little more able to navigate society, and wanted to. He knows Lily can't just give all that up. It has its benefits.

 

 

* * *


(30%) Robert Englund - 1989
Here I have this touching chronicled story of a 17-year-old girl into acting falling in love with a man who takes her out to dinner and sleeps by her side, and I say inside he is so much of this?! -->

Men are interesting creatures, always holding back aggressive and sexual urges, and pretending to be more thoughtful than they actually are at times. I'm just stating the facts. But that does not mean that they can't suffer real love, or lust, over a woman.

"Erik" can hardly identify with Robert's real conditions in this movie, but I can't shake that they have a similar heart and perception.

How are they alike?

1. Misanthropists - Robert and "Erik" couldn't give a lesser shit about humanity. It's done them a lot of wrong, never gave them anything but negative attention, and most people are dumbasses, who are also not praising their beloved Christine enough for what a special snowflake she is. Despite all of this, they want the world to admire her, and for "Erik", to let her go. They are raining on her beauty and making her feel trapped.

2. Really Hot - (Subjective.) I know they do some shit-things, but something about them is still appealing. Perhaps it's physical, perhaps its how careful they can be with Christine, maybe it's their voices (purrrr), but you almost want to jump on top of them, bad guy or not!

3. Collaboration with Christine - For Robert, it's music. For "Erik", it's theatre. Both take a lot of pride in the skill of their Christines. Instead of just wanting to raise her up, they want it to be something a lot more intimate, so partnership is very important. Robert wants to write music, seemingly directed at her, and have her sing it, and "Erik" wants Lily to realize the strength she can put into living differently than herself and be his Christine constantly, and always. He feels that that will benefit the both of them, just as Robert thinks being with Christine will give them fame and fortune. For "Erik" it's more fortune spiritually, though.

4. Time Elements - This is a really interesting one that I only realized so long ago! In Robert's movie, the facts are that they are fated to live the same soul over and over, and meet each other in each life. He is chasing her through time, basically, hoping that she will eventually accept fate and fall in love with him. I don't know if or why he knows this is happening and Christine doesn't, but I found a large parallel between that and the fact that my phantom suffers some deep delusions about his identity. In his eyes, Erik and Christine were real people, as "stated" in Gaston Leroux's book; that the story has much truth in it even though people interpret it as fictional. He does not believe he is Erik, but that he inherited the remnants of him inside, and so has Lily for Christine. So, it's a bit like they are reincarnations, and he is a modern version who has found her again, ready to try again, which happened in Robert's movie. Christine had to kill him twice. lol

5. Slight Masochists - They might mess with their faces for different reasons... but they still do it. Repeatedly. When hardly anyone knows they are. Robert stitches on other people's skin to appear normal, and it looks like it freaking hurts, whereas "Erik" purposefully mutilates his face to feel more deformed. It's not near as bad as Robert, it's not like he has a plastic nose, but... I mean, he causes himself a great deal of pain, in front of the mirror, and enough for it to be normal nowadays. Both Christines oughta slap them and say "that could get you an infection!"

6. Gothic - Both have the gothic thing going on. They're just both so dark and angry. Seeing them next to flickering flames is like peanut butter and jelly, really.

7. Active - Neither are stuck underground with little human contact. They know how to live on the surface, they're socially intelligent, they can appear very normal, albeit reserved, if they want to.

8. Not a Virgin! - Phantom fans seem to make a huuuge deal about Erik being virginal, like if he's not then his love isn't pure or he really doesn't have 100% commitment to Christine, but I kind of think it's bullshit. This movie presented more of a practical Erik in my opinion. Yeah, he's had sex. What of it? My "Erik" is not perfect either; Lily wasn't the only girl he ever had feelings for. Does he have feelings for someone in the past or present beside her? Nope.

How are they different?

1. Aggression - I hate to be comparing Robert to Julian Sands, but both are cold-blooded killers, and though my phantom can be violent, he doesn't want murder on his record. It's hard enough running from the cops with the crimes he has already committed. If he could get away with it, he might, but I haven't put a lot of thought into who he runs into in the streets and what would call for that urge.

2. Interest in Fame - "Erik" has none whatsoever, even though Robert really has his hopes on being renowned for his music. In fact, "Erik" would really like it if everyone left him alone and let him be crazy.

3. Shamelessness - Robert can kill Christine's boyfriend right in front of her and still act like they can get married. If that isn't shameless, I don't know what is! I'd be lying if I said "Erik" was never shameless about anything he did, because he has been, but over things where his own right is concerned. It's his right to slit his wrists. Robert was really insane, though.

That leaves us with 20% Undefined, which I suppose could've been a larger number, but I want to make sure it's well known that these versions inspire me well and have done so for every year that I have worked on the story. But rightfully so, "Erik" is no replica or combination of replicas. He is his own character, and some things about him aren't seen in the others. For example, he's...

1. A Perfectionist - Not in the strictest sense of the word, because he has never been called perfect. Most people in his life have been disappointed by him, weirded out, angered, intimidated... But when he finally said "fuck them" he came to construct his own view of perfect, and has since striven to become it.

2. Schizophrenic - he has a defined diagnosed mental illness which effects his perceptions and judgments, which other phantoms never had, even though they pulled psychotic behavior. But all of them lived under the Paris Opera House, alone, and were legitimately deformed, whereas "Erik" came into a pretty normal world and was not deformed. It's hard to say if any of them had conditions or were driven by bad treatment and obsession alone.

3. Interested in the Smaller Picture - It's a little unfair to make a critique about other phantoms not having a whole lot of depth since movies need to cut to the chase, but it was not a presence like a goddess or angel that ever drew him to Lily. He loved her POV, her writing, her humor, her hidden creativity. Driving her acting, and on their own. Charles came close - he was the only one to have a really inane conversation with Christine just because they could. But it should happen more often because it's cute. ;3
   
   

......................................................................................................................................

If you read all of that, I owe you an applause. Next up, I will be analyzing Lily and the Christines. ;) Not tonight, though. Oh God, no.