#I didn't mean to bring up phantom of the opera so much it just happens to be very relevant to a lot of my talking points

[tearlessrain]

please help me- i used to be pretty smart but i’m having so much trouble grasping the concept of diegetic vs non-diegetic bdsm!

gfkjldghfd okay first of all I'm sorry for the confusion, if you're not finding anything on the phrase it's because I made it up and absolutely nobody but me ever uses it, but I haven't found a better way to express what I'm trying to say so I keep using it. but now you've given me an excuse to ramble on about some shit that is only relevant to me and my deeply inefficient way of talking and by god I'm going to take it.

SO. the way diegetic and non-diegetic are normally used is to talk about music and sound design in movies/tv shows. in case you aren't familiar with that concept, here's a rundown:

diegetic sound is sound that happens within the world of the movie/show and can be acknowledged by the characters, like a song playing on the stereo during a driving scene, or sung on stage in Phantom of the Opera. it's also most other sounds that happen in a movie, like the sounds of traffic in a city scene, or a thunderclap, or a marching band passing by. or one of the three stock horse sounds they use in every movie with a horse in it even though horses don't really vocalize much in real life, but that's beside the point, the horse is supposed to be actually making that noise within the movie's world and the characters can hear it whinnying.

non-diegetic sound is any sound that doesn't exist in the world of the movie/show and can't be perceived by the characters. this includes things like laugh tracks and most soundtrack music. when Duel of Fates plays in Star Wars during the lightsaber fight for dramatic effect, that's non-diegetic. it exists to the audience, but the characters don't know their fight is being backed by sick ass music and, sadly, can't hear it.

the lines can get blurry between the two, you've probably seen the film trope where the clearly non-diegetic music in the title sequence fades out to the same music, now diegetic and playing from the character's car stereo. and then there are things like Phantom of the Opera as mentioned above, where the soundtrack is also part of the plot, but Phantom of the Opera does also have segments of non-diegetic music: the Phantom probably does not have an entire orchestra and some guy with an electric guitar hiding down in his sewer just waiting for someone to break into song, but both of those show up in the songs they sing down there.

now, on to how I apply this to bdsm in fiction.

if I'm referring to diegetic bdsm what I mean is that the bdsm is acknowledged for what it is in-world. the characters themselves are roleplaying whatever scenarios their scenes involve and are operating with knowledge of real life rules/safety practices. if there's cnc depicted, it will be apparent at some point, usually right away, that both characters actually are fully consenting and it's all just a planned scene, and you'll often see on-screen negotiation and aftercare, and elements of the story may involve the kink community wherever the characters are. Love and Leashes is a great example of this, 50 Shades and Bonding are terrible examples of this, but they all feature characters that know they're doing bdsm and are intentional about it.

if I'm talking about non-diegetic bdsm, I'm referring to a story that portrays certain kinks without the direct acknowledgement that the characters are doing bdsm. this would be something like Captive Prince, or Phantom of the Opera again, or the vast majority of bodice ripper type stories where an innocent woman is kidnapped by a pirate king or something and totally doesn't want to be ravished but then it turns out he's so cool and sexy and good at ravishing that she decides she's into it and becomes his pirate consort or whatever it is that happens at the end of those books. the characters don't know they're playing out a cnc or D/s fantasy, and in-universe it's often straight up noncon or dubcon rather than cnc at all. the thing about entirely non-diegetic bdsm is that it's almost always Problematic™ in some way if you're not willing to meet the story where it's at, but as long as you're not judging it by the standards of diegetic bdsm, it's just providing the reader the same thing that a partner in a scene would: the illusion of whatever risk or taboo floats your boat, sometimes to extremes that can't be replicated in real life due to safety, practicality, physics, the law, vampires not being real, etc. it's consensual by default because it's already pretend; the characters are vehicles for the story and not actually people who can be hurt, and the reader chose to pick up the book and is aware that nothing in it is real, so it's all good.

this difference is where people tend to get hung up in the discourse, from what I've observed. which is why I started using this phrasing, because I think it's very crucial to be able to differentiate which one you're talking about if you try to have a conversation with someone about the portrayal of bdsm in media. it would also, frankly, be useful for tagging, because sometimes when you're in the mood for non-diegetic bodice ripper shit you'd call the police over in real life, it can get really annoying to read paragraphs of negotiation and check-ins that break the illusion of the scene and so on, and the opposite can be jarring too.

it's very possible to blur these together the same way Phantom of the Opera blurs its diegetic and non-diegetic music as well. this leaves you even more open to being misunderstood by people reading in bad faith, but it can also be really fun to play with. @not-poignant writes fantastic fanfic, novels, and original serials on ao3 that pull this off really well, if you're okay with some dark shit in your fiction I would highly recommend their work. some of it does get really fucking dark in places though, just like. be advised. read the tags and all that.

but yeah, spontaneous writer plug aside, that's what I mean.

[anhed-nia]

I'm sorry about this post. It's really long and I don't know if I had a point to make! But I didn't realize I was maybe just torturing myself and others until I was neck deep in it, and now I feel obligated to post it due to sunk cost fallacy. Sorry again. I guess this is how you find out who your real friends are.

In the pursuit of my masochistic project of understanding the enduring Phantom of the Opera phenomenon, last night I spontaneously went to a rep screening of Joel Schumacher's Oscar-nominated 2004 adaptation. This was a singalong audience participation type of thing, which I would usually avoid at all costs especially for something I have no emotional investment in, but it was just too strange that it was randomly happening while I'm in the middle of this assignment, so I went! We all got fake roses and Phantom masks and rubber bracelets that say OPERA GHOST and little artificial candles to light up during the big chandelier scenes, and there was a singing contest before the movie started and I almost had a panic attack, but I managed to maintain my sense of humor. Apparently the climate control was totally broken and it was oppressively hot in the house, to the point that I wound up sitting there in a painted-on Uniqlo undershirt for most of the movie, and I couldn't bring myself to get dressed again for about half an hour after it was over. I walked down to the bar attached to the theater where the queen running their drag bingo night and the bartender were laughing about how they should leave the heat blasting because everyone was buying a lot more drinks. The bartender quizzed us drinkers about which theaters were we in and were they hot; I said "This is not an outdoor shirt!" and everyone laughed. I'm so glad I wasn't wearing a weird bra.

Anyway.

It would be too much to say I had high hopes for the Schumacher PHANTOM, but I had a certain amount of optimism about it; he seemed like a really good choice for this irredeemably kitschy product, but the truth is that the movie is completely neutered. It really needed some of that BATMAN FOREVER juice, but the whole thing just has no energy. Apparently Andrew Lloyd Webber had "complete creative control" and I think it really shows, it's very limp and undistinguished, and simultaneously pretentious and stupid. Sometimes things can be described as "lavish" because they are so exquisitely realized, and sometimes they are "lavish" on account of the fact that they are just extremely busy, even though no single detail rises to the surface as memorable or remarkable. Even the chandelier, which is as much a staple of this story as the mask, is just not that impressive. There it is, a big old chandelier, it's round and it's shiny and you know exactly what's going to happen to it.

Any comparison with the 1925 Lon Chaney version is inevitably unflattering; the costumes are bad, the staging is boring--I mean there is just no excuse for a big Hollywood production to NOT go ham on the masquerade ball, WTF?!--and of course, the Phantom himself is really uninspiring. The most important part of any Phantom iteration is the unmasking, and this movie has TWO (2) whole unmasking scenes and both of them suck! We all know that no Phantom design has been remotely as good as Chaney's nearly 100-year old version, but still, Joel Schumacher has worked on movies with some really freaky makeup effects, he should have given us something better than this. The whole thing just feels like they were trying as hard as possible not to surprise or offend anyone. I blame ALW.

I see this image and I hear wind whistling through their ears.

The problem with the unmasking sceneS here (besides the lack of visual impact) is that they both feel really unmotivated. Actually, this is almost ALWAYS a problem. It's the biggest moment in the story and you shouldn't be asking yourself WHY it is happening. Plus, the reason why it is happening lies with the heroine Christine, and if your main character's motivations for doing something so outrageous are unclear or uncompelling, then your whole story is in trouble. As a viewer you can tell yourself that she does it because she is overwhelmed by curiosity, or overpowered by a compassionate urge to see the Phantom as he is, or that she sees the unmasking as a way of defanging her captor...but you shouldn't have to tell yourself all that stuff. The movie should tell you. And who the fuck is Christine anyway, shouldn't we know? In other versions Christine is so devoted to her career that she readily sacrifices her love life and embraces the absurdity of a sort of spirit of opera communicating with her and guiding her path. Some versions dramatize the conflict between her monastic commitment to opera and her desire for real relationships. In the AWL version, Christine is chiefly devoted to getting attention. She falls in love, from minute to minute, with anyone who looks at her long enough. She's in love with her dead dad, so she's just frantically in search of a living boyfriend and she seems pretty indiscriminate about it. It's kind of gross and pathetic and it makes it really hard to care about her or the burning question of which boyfriend will she choose.

I've never said this before in my entire life, but Minnie Driver is the best thing in this movie--followed by the old queens who take over the theater, followed by all of the bit players, followed by, at the very bottom, the main cast. None of the leads are really inspired casting choices, but it's hard to blame them for their output because there is nothing they could possibly do with such empty roles. Who is Christine? The girl who has to pick a boyfriend. Who is Raoul? The guy who wants to be Christine's boyfriend. Who is the Phantom? The other guy who wants to be Christine's boyfriend. I mean there's this brief, grotesque excuse made for what the Phantom's problem is, but it comes far too late and explains too little. It just boils down to ye olde "not getting laid drives you nuts, so we should be afraid of ugly people." There are no personalities to be found here, and casting generically pretty actors of no distinction really hurt things in the characterization department.

Full disclosure though: I'm very faceblind. I have a lot of trouble identifying actors, and sometimes I can't even tell people apart within one movie. So, because I didn't look up very much about this production going in, I was sitting there for at least 90 solid minutes constantly thinking:

Is that Patrick Wilson? That's Patrick Wilson. It is, right? Patrick? Wilson? Yeah no it definitely is. Like for sure. Right? PaTRICK? WILson??? Pa.........Wi........

At a certain point after I finally accepted that it was probably him I just started laughing every time I saw him. But to be totally fair to ME, this presentation barely resembles a real live person:

And that hair is unacceptable. I'm sorry, Patrick Wilson. It's not your fault. I really liked the INSIDIOUS sequel you directed even though no one else did, so I'm sure we can be special friends.

The main effect of the Schumacher/ALW PHANTOM was...making me really aware of how much I like the Menahem Golan one with Robert Englund. Really! I thought I didn't like it. I know I saw it when I was young, when I had major league Freddy Kreuger fever (worse than now, somehow), so it would seem like if it didn't get its hooks in me then, it never would. But now that I have sat through...many Phantom iterations, I have become aware that it is genuinely one of the better attempts on the story. It has a lot of personality! It's trashy and juicy and a lot of fun. It even looks pretty good sometimes! I fondly remember specific costume details, which I cannot say about the big expensive ALW one. I'm not here to tell you that it's a great example of cinema or something, but it is vastly more entertaining than much of what's been done with this story by more reputable people. You'd think it would be hampered by the lack of a proper mask, but the gory unmasking scene is spectacular, AND it gets around the question of why Christine unmasks the Phantom which has not been answered satisfactorily by almost any movie. I was pining for the Englund edition for all 2.5 hours of this ALW debacle. I was even pining for Jill Schoelen as Christine! Not that I have a problem with Jill Schoelen, she's very charming. It's just that I hate POPCORN, which she stars in and which is itself a kind of Phantom adaptation. I'm not watching it again, though, no matter what. My agita.

[finalthreshold]

phantom of the opera 1/27 notes that got a bit out of hand.

i tried to keep these short and failed utterly and completely. i just kept having more thoughts about it! trio was paul a schaefer phantom, emilie kouatchou christine and bronson norris murphy raoul, and my thoughts on this performance are mainly centered on them

act i

i'd heard both meh things about paul's phantom and great things about bronson's raoul so i went in with my r/c cap on and was prepared to just... not care as much about the phantom this time? i was braced for disappointment with him.

and then... i was NOT disappointed? i really enjoyed his phantom! he really was giving wet cat energy. and i love wet cats.

i found it a super e/c - r/c balanced show imo? one of the most balanced shows i've seen lately. both were compelling dynamics. emilie had great chemistry with both of them and her christine felt like she had real reasons to care for them both.

bronson's raoul is adorable. he's effortlessly confident, in the sort of natural self-assuredness of a rich guy, but he's so well meaning. little lotte was lovely. a little awkward at first as he began that segued into a sense of familiarity. it really felt like a reunion between two childhood sweethearts who aren't certain at first because it's been so long but quickly find themselves back to their old levels of comfort

paul's phantom had some nice gestures. there was a little bit of the thing where he seemed to lose track of his hands (it happens a lot with his raoul) but it happened infrequently, and it didn't feel as unintentional as it does with his raoul? it felt more like his phantom getting caught up in the moment, like he'd imagined this before and thought he was prepare but now that he's actually here with christine he finds himself at risk of getting overwhelmed by the reality of it? it didn't take me out of the moment when it happened and he overall had nice gestures and felt consistently intentional in his movements, both in how he walked around and his gestures.

he tried to catch her when he fainted! he ran to her with such a look of genuine concern and then was very sweet about putting the cape over her. and he brushed a stray curl away from her face after he did that it was sooooo tender. crying.

he was like, crying by the end of stdyi. such a sad, pitiful little "oh, christine." wet cat! wet cat! he also had a really great crawl towards her, it was so sudden and genuinely disconcerting and the desperation and pitifulness were so palpable.

bronson's raoul was having a great time during il muto. you really feel his adoration for christine, and even though she's got a silent role she seemed like she was really having fun as the page boy! god they were so adorable

oh my god nehal joshi is always funny when he brings forward the ballet but he was extra good tonight. as he ran onstage he was saying "dont make me do this" which i've never heard before? someone please help andre he's going through it.

ALL I ASK OF YOU WAS SO SWEET I THINK I HAVE CAVITIES. like i said i went into this show prepared for some good r/c and i was not disappointed whatsoever! he doesn't come across as dismissive of her at all, and why have you brought me here felt more like "i know you're scared but i don't understand and i don't know how to help me, so help me make this make sense so i can help you." it was really good.

THEIR KISS. AAAAAH. he was soo gentle and sweet and then she grabbed his face and pulled him down for a bigger kiss and oh it was adorable. it was such a wonderful aiaoy

AND A VERY SAD AIAOY REPRISE he was crying up there on his angel! he was so pitiable. wet cat in a cardboard box energy.

act 2

i noticed one of the ensemble characters trying to swipe a champagne glass but the tray was empty by that point and the server pulled the tray away almost disdainfully which was a funny little moment, but i was in rear mezz and wasnt using my binoculars at the time so i couldn't recognize who in the ensemble it was

emilie's twisted every way is so good. i feel like it's just so believable that she could be so truly terrified and lost and also not want to betray him or want him dead despite everything. emilie's christine has so much inner turmoil and it makes me feel so much every time.

raoul, your plan is bad but bronson's raoul is so likable and well meaning it's fine.

emilie's wishing was fantastic again (as always!). i love how she'll almost smile a little bit when she's thinking about her father. it's so bittersweet and fond and it makes the song even more painful to me?

she gave this little resolute smile as she was about to leave and seemed like she was at peace and then when she heard the phantom during wandering child her expression was so... longing but sort of crumpled at the same time like, despite everything she still wants to believe but on a logical level she knows she can't. it hurts :(

i was surprised at how still he was in ponr. there wasn't really any self-caressing when she's singing, like. at all?? that surprised me.

phantom.exe has stopped working. he seemed to get more and more tense during her verse, like he didn't know how to react.

idk. new ponr blocking., gestures vaguely. ponr blocking. yknow. shrugs. i never know what to say about ponr.

she smiled a little bit when she pulled his hood off, which was a sharp contrast to the day before where she almost gasped and looked shocked or horrified at seeing ben's phantom? i was trying not to compare phantoms too much but i saw ben twice in a row so it's sometimes easiest to just compare them especially when things are very different.

he was really sad and pleading when he proposed and she looked so shocked? iirc she shook her head a little at him. she looked very sad and a bit deer-in-headlights.

even in the final lair, he wasn't a particularly violent phantom. like i said, i'd just seen ben twice in a row and was used to his very rough way of putting the veil on her and giving her the bouquet, so maybe it was just the contrast between them haha but he was rather careful about adjusting her veil and smoothed out the ribbon of the bouquet before handing it to her and seemed genuinely surprised when she ripped it out of his hands angrily. (what... did u expect??)

paul's phantom was desperate in the sense of a dying man that is desperate for a salvation he knows deep down he won't get. like he needed to believe he could have christine's love, but at his core he also believed he never could have that, that all he could ever have was the darkness and his monstrosity, and he tries to tell himself that he chooses the darkness.

i think there came to be a certain sense of resignation to his phantom during final lair, where as christine gets increasingly more and more angry and upset with him he begins to realize that no matter what he wasn't going to win either, even if she did choose to save raoul by marrying him.

it felt to me like partway through the final lair it slowly began to dawn on paul's phantom that the reason he ever couldn't be happy now was because his actions had gone too far and the things he'd done had made her hate him more than his face ever could, and he doesn't want to do this anymore but he also can't do anything else. he can't just give up though, because he's come too far and what else can he do at this point but play this to the end?

the way she looked at him in "angel of music, you deceived me" she was so hurt but she also was... daring? there was such an intensity to her gaze.

his "you try my patience" was really good. it was so low, and measured and there was this extended pause between that and his "make your choice." it was both scary and simultaneously gave a feeling that he was on the verge of breaking before she even kissed him.

i also feel like... emilie's christine doesn't have this sudden revelation about him during that part. she doesn't realize all of a sudden that his life sucks because she's already known and she's already felt pity for him.

it's more like she's seen all of these different sides to him all along and never could fully understand him or have a full view of him until now? like she was conflicted because she saw both the angel and phantom sides of him, the monster and the man and wasn't ever certain which one was "real" and feared the monster but felt sympathy for the man and was at war within herself bc of these feelings.

and now she's able to see him all completely, and she doesn't just understand him in that moment but also understands her own feelings towards him and make a certain peace with those feelings. it's a moment i really love in emilie's christine.

bronson be making noises in that noose

THREE I LOVE YOUS AT THE RING RETURN

she tried to say something in return but said "i-i" and then got choked with sobs and the rest wasnt coherent but hmmmmm.

there was such a heartbreaking feeling of finality to his repeated i love yous though? he said "i love you" so mournfully after she left, and it wasn't an i love you she was meant to hear, i feel? his third i love you was when he went to pick up the veil, which he held to his face, and he stumbled on it, a choked, almost-sob "i-i love you" into the veil. i was not emotionally prepared for that let me tell you.

he gave one last long lingering look to the direction christine left before he went to the chair and it just felt so final when he did.

this is a phantom that dies at the end and he knows he's gonna die when he gets in that chair. when he says it's over now he really really means it.

this show was so good. it was my last time seeing it on broadway before it closes and it was so. so good. such a good way to say goodbye to this show it felt so final and bittersweet

[funkymbtifiction]

Good day! I'm pretty sure I'm an IXFJ type but still teasing out if I use Si/Ne or Ni/Se. Any advice you have is welcome! :)

I am very much in my own head constantly, observing situations and mulling over mental imagery that pops up randomly at times. Like, I will see an object in the world, such as a rose ornament on a shelf, which will bring to mind Beauty and the Beast "Enchanted Rose", then the mirror that is used in the story to see her family. Which will then then lead on to imagery of Phantom of the Opera (the link being a beautiful woman being drawn to a "beast" like character and the use of a mirror being used as a reveal). All imagery that I find positive and inspiring, giving me a sense of romanticism and that there's more to life than just the concrete.

I have felt that I had to be a Ni user because I dive deep into associative imagery and daydream A LOT. But then I read Jung's description of Si, notably this part "introverted Sensation is sense-perception that focuses more on the psychological reaction to objects, than on their objective qualities. This subjective part of Sensation is most easily demonstrated in art. Even a still-life scene will be painted differently from artist to artist, in terms of its treatment of colour, form, and mood. Si pours its personal, subjective attitude into its perception of the concrete world, so it’s as if it ends up seeing something quite unique and different from what’s actually there" which would perhaps explain why I could be an ISFJ AND live in a world of inter related imagery and impressions.

I would say I'm very much moved by what goes on in my mind's eye and become attached to places, objects, stories, narratives that become part of my everyday life. I did wonder if this was Fi instead although I believe I'm more likely a Fe user because my focus is more on what is appropriate/rude in social contexts, how to best get on with others and yes, unfortunately at times I minimise myself to not be at odds. I do have my own preferences and loves/hates but will not display these so much, especially if I know the person/people I'm with have contrary sentiments. Something I'm learning to get better at, self expression.

I like to have the outer world kept calm and pleasant as possible so that I can dive in deep within myself; I suppose that's why I'm so routine and probably a bit predictabe (read: boring). I have patterns I stick to each day such as when I have my lunch, downtimes activities after work (reading, bathing, watching tv, ASMR videos before sleep). Even when I'm on holiday I'll follow set behaviours like making sure I have a cup of tea before bed while reviewing pictures of the day.

I haven't truly considered ISFJ properly before because of my daydreams and vivid mental imagery. They're vital parts of me. That said, if Si is more to do with creating inner symbols then I can see a case for me having that over Ni. Jun says this also "The Si type’s perception of the concrete world is adapted to the “eternal truths” - archetypal or even mythological patterns of life.

Si, in a sense, sees the background of the physical world. The important thing isn’t the object, but its reflection in the Si type’s psyche. As a result, objects don’t only appear in their present instance, as Se sees them, but also with a vague sense of their past and future, “somewhat as a million-year-old-consciousness might see them”. Si covers the concrete world with a shroud of meaning, subjective experience and archetypal truths."

I also didn't believe I could be a Sensor because I'm not noticing much of the present moment details, at least not consciously, although I am detail orientated in my memory about people, events, objects etc. I'm quite clumsy too physically. I wouldn't say I'm good at Sensing and feel "out of the world" often. But then again I'm perhaps better than I think. I do see myself as a 9w1 in enneagram and a lot of characters I relate to I've noticed are ISFJ 9w1s who are more dreamy romantic archetypes (Beth March, Jane Bennet, Christine Daae). I know you shouldn’t really type by which characters you relate to though, but figured I’d mention too. If anything I probably over explain than under explain! I often doubt my instincts and insights, whereas I understand NJs especially INJs have faith in their insights. I am hesitant about the past too though, wondering if I’m remembering situations that have happened to me correctlyc or rather interpreted them in the right ways. That’s more to do with past trauma though (I was assaulted and bullied by classmates, which gaslighting was a part of).

Sorry I’ve gone on quite long. I understand if this is too long winded and makes no sense.

All of this is absolutely, beautifully, perfectly Si impressionism. :)

Si metaphorical images are easily shared and understood by people everywhere due to the influence of Ne “creating out of” what the Si user deems important. Si users form inner archetypes and impressions, built out of sensory experiences and what individually appeals to and ‘draws’ their interest -- so ISFJs, especially as 9s, can be very romantic, dreamy, interested in archetypes (mythology or fairy tales or knights and maidens fair, etc.) or in mulling over what they most love.

Ni is colder, more impressionistic, more far-fetched, higher concept, and less easy for other people to understand -- consider the movies of Darren Aronofsky or Christopher Nolan or even the television series Twin Peaks for reference.

[jackcinephile]

LO Fans: "I love Lore Olympus because it deals with serious themes, like sexual assault, abuse, gaslighting, trauma, and mental health issues!"

Me, who spent my life discovering and obsessing over masterpieces like this:

"You're gonna have to try a lot harder than that to impress me."

Yeah, I never understood that kind of praise. For one thing, people act like LO is groundbreaking for that reason, despite there being countless movies, books, tv shows, comics, and video games that also deal with the same themes. That isn't to say there can't be more stories like this, however. I, for one, am begging for another video game that comes close to the emotional resonance of Silent Hill 2, or for a faithful adaptation of Dracula and/or Phantom of the Opera, or for a horror movie as unsettling as The Howling! But to say any new story that deals with these themes is unique for doing so, is just simply not true. Lore Olympus is no more unique than any of these stories. Also, I don't understand the praise that Lore Olympus is great just by virtue of having these themes in the first place. Just because a story has serious themes, doesn't automatically make it good. Far too often does LO use its themes as a crutch for a plot that is standard issue among romances, as opposed to stories like The Howling, which has a very intriguing, outlandish plot that serves as a catalyst to explore themes of very real and relatable horror. Lore Olympus, without its intense themes, is just another story about the CEO falling in love with his intern. And don't get me wrong, I LOVE those kinds of stories, but Lore Olympus just doesn't really do it for me. And the poorly executed themes just hamper it even further for me.

If it wasn't already apparent, has anyone noticed a pattern between these titles? All but one are horror stories. In my opinion, that is one of the key differences between them and LO: Horror! The themes within, are ones that illicit terror, and the stories reflect that (even Phantom of the Opera--don't listen to anyone who says it's a romance). Starting with Dracula, one of the scenes that horrified me the most in the book was the one where Count Dracula sneaks into Mina's bedroom. The book describes him slitting open his own vein and forcing her to drink his blood. Mina then expresses feelings of violation, much akin to what rape survivors feel. It doesn't pull any punches in its shocking, horrific portrayal, but it never comes off as exploitative. That's because the best horror stories rely on the audience's empathy. In this case, nobody wants to feel violated, so we feel as horrified as the characters do when we read about this grotesque event. And because it is about illiciting fear through empathy, Dracula succeeds where Lore Olympus fails. Lore Olympus, before all else, is a romance. And rape should not be in a romantic story. Especially not when the narrative of LO uses this trauma to validate the relationship between the two leads. I'm not a fan of stories that use trauma to validate a relationship between romantic interests, and I think that partly stems from reading the Phantom of the Opera.

If you ask me, Phantom of the Opera is one if the best books to discuss abuse and gaslighting ever written! Despite misconceptions generated by the popularity of the musical, PotO is very much a horror story with hardly any romance at all. And it's one of the best examples about why using trauma to validate a romance is a very bad idea! You see, all the conflict of the story begins with The Phantom and his trauma. He was born with multiple physical deformities that cause him to look like a living corpse. Because of this, he is despised and rejected by the world in order to escape the hatred of the world, he commissions the construction of the Paris Opera House, complete with intricate catacombs where he can live out the rest of his miserable days. Then one day, a woman named Christine comes to work at the Opera as a chorus girl. She is sad and alone due to her being orphaned, without a friend in the world. She too is emotionally damaged and the Phantom thinks this means she'll understand him. The trouble begins instantly when he claims to be a character from a folktale that Christine's father used to tell her. This is when the manipulation and gaslighting begins. Part of what makes this so effective is how we see it from an outside perspective. The protagonist, Raoul, is in love with Christine and we get to see his confusion and growing concern when he starts realizing Christine is showing signs of an abusive relationship. What makes the relationship even worse is the fact that Christine actually does understand The Phantom. So she doesn't run away not only out of fear, but also compassion. She knows what it's like to feel isolated and dead to the world and The Phantom uses that against her. The more I describe this, the more parallels I begin to see to Hades' and Minthe's relationship. Yes, Minthe abused Hades in much of the same way as The Phantom abused Christine. Notice how Minthe keeps convincing Hades that they're the only people who understand each other, even going so far as to say, "We're the same." The funny thing is, that's exactly what the narrative uses to validate Hades' and Persephone's relationship! It tries to establish that Hades and Persephone relate to each other and they say, several times, "We're the same," to each other. But this is exactly how Hades got stuck in a toxic relationship with Minthe, so why is it suddenly okay now? Relationships that use shared trauma to validate themselves are almost always doomed to become toxic, in one way or another.

So what about the healthy relationship in Phantom of the Opera? Well, it's kinda interesting actually. You see, Christine eventually comes to realize that she needs help, so she turns to the protagonist, Raoul, to get her away from the Phantom. Raoul has an interesting character arc because he starts the novel being pretty immature and kinda selfish. He doesn't really take Christine's feelings into consideration. It's more like a boy chasing his childhood crush (actually that's exactly what happens). However, over the course of the story, as he becomes increasingly concerned with her well-being, he learns to care more about her feelings and her needs. This culminates in the climax, when he's willing to crawl through hell itself for her sake. I bring all this up because I wanted to compare Raoul with Hades as well. Hades is a very consistent character. He doesn't need an arc like Raoul because, from the very beginning, he's willing to put all of Persephone's needs before his, to a fault! That is his entire purpose within the narrative of LO. He exists to serve Persephone. Raoul didn't exist to serve Christine. He had his own journey of growing and maturing. And Christine didn't exist to serve Raoul either. It bothers me that a novel from 1910 has a more well-rounded relationship than a modern comic! Actually, now that I think about it, isn't Persephone's entire character arc supposed to be her learning that she shouldn't exist to serve others? Well, that totally contradicts Hades' role in the story, doesn't it? He exists to serve her! I guess, in the eyes of LO, it's only okay if men serve women, but not for women to serve men. Newsflash: neither is okay.

Now Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1931) remains, to this day, one of the most terrifying movies I've ever seen! That's all thanks to its brutal depictions of domestic abuse. So Dr. Henry Jekyll believes the solution to enlightening the human race is to separate the good and evil in our souls. He solves this problem by creating a drug to do just that, which transforms him into Edward Hyde, but he becomes addicted and starts terrorizing a woman who was once a former patient of his. I think what makes this so effective, when compared to LO, is one simple factor: Fear. I am terrified of Edward Hyde, but whenever Apollo shows up, I'm just annoyed. That's because Hyde isn't being used to sell an agenda, while Apoll is. Apollo is all about making a statement about toxic masculinity, which always bothered me from the very beginning! Being an abusive cunt who rapes women has nothing to do with masculinity! It doesn't matter if you're masculine or feminine, anyone can be a cunting abusive rapist. If you are a rapist, it's because you're a monster who lacks empathy, not because of masculinity. And if you think masculinity has something to do with a lack of empathy, fuck off! Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is not about toxic masculinity. It's about how drug addiction can often hurt other people around us just as much, if not moreso, than ourselves. It also doesn't use rape to validate a relationship between characters. I'm sorry, but that is just the laziest storytelling technique. When the antagonist is a rapist OF COURSE the male love interest is going to look better by comparison! But when you take Apollo out of the equation, Hades stops looking like a desirable love interest real fucking quick.

So yeah, I think Hades makes for a bad love interest. That's mostly because he's so much like Shinji Ikari from Neon Genesis Evangelion. Yeah, the one title from the list above that's not a horror, but is no less relevant. The thing is, both Hades and Shinji have a lot in common, such as hating themselves, having a bad relationship with their father, and not caring at all about their own wants and needs. Oh, also Asuka's a better written character than Minthe, but that's a whole other topic. What makes Evangelion work, in my opinion, is that Shinji's whole journey is about learning to love himself, while Hades is portrayed as being perfect the way he is. Hades in LO is like a flawless beacon of virtue, solely because he worships the ground Persephone walks on. But the guy just doesn't care about himself at all! Like I said earlier, Hades guilty of the same self-destructive behaviors as Persephone but he's praised for it, while Persephone is encouraged to look after herself more often. Compare this to Shinji, whose life only gets worse the more he neglects himself. The only time Hades does something beneficial for himself is when he breaks up with Minthe, but immediately after that, he starts devoting every ounce of energy to Persephone! All that matters is her! He doesn't give a single fuck about himself. Sorry, but that's not good qualities in a male love interest. In all fairness, this is a problem with the romance genre as a whole. Most romances give priority to the protagonist (in this case Persephone) while neglecting the love interest (Hades). It's why I have a serious problem with the entire genre.

Now what could Silent Hill 2 have that is in any way relevant to Lore Olympus? Two words: Nightmare Fuel. Personifying trauma as literal demons is one of the smartest ideas anyone's ever had, because speaking from personal experience, that's how it feels. I just don't feel like the trauma experienced by the characters in LO is a waking nightmare like it is in real life. For one, the characters' trauma only pops up when it's convenient for the plot. Like whenever Persephone starts experiencing ptsd, it happens when she's with Hades so we can get a scene with Hades cuddling her. After that, it shows up in a scene to make her look badass by confronting Apollo. No, just no. The Howling did it better too, by making the protagonist's trauma such an inconvenience in her life! I never felt that way in LO. When you uss traumatic encounters to make your character look like a badass, kindly fuck off.

[x-avantgarde-x]

You can have as many as you want.

(Because my Tumblr is a bad bitch it:

1. Sent the answer before I had finished writing it.

2. Deleted the ask.

Tumblr, why do you hate me so much?? Any way. I'mma post this, and I give 0 fucks if you do or do not want me to.)

aAaAaAAAAHHHH. Thank you v much, gosh you are so sweet!

Touch starved Erik is the best Erik! Prompts used where "I don't deserve you." And "Don't leave me." From some list I had saved. This turned out a little angsty at some point, but our Erik is just a complex boy who needs his time to work things out, so the fluff is still in there. Hope you enjoy it!

Couple: Erik (The Phantom of the Opera) x reader. Mainly Lerik and Kerik ksks.

Summary: Erik it's just too edgy to admit to himself that he's longing for for being touched gently and when the reader does so for the first time things go kinda wild.

————————————————————

You sat at the couch at Erik's house, you still weren't so sure if his underground den in the middle of a lake fitted the concept of a (common) house, but the longer you spent down there the less you cared. By now it all had already acquired a sense of familiarity and homely feeling.

You had met Erik a year ago. A few days after what happened with Christine Dae you heard the sceneshifters talking about how they believed to have heard someone wondering down the basements of the Opera the same night The Dae had been abducted and that the whole Opera went crazy. Usually you were a really quiet person, and prefered to stay out of trouble but that day curiosity took the best of you. And by the sunset you were already under the fifth basement of the Opera Populaire.

You got lost many times, and many others you almost got killed by a trap, but at some point you came across an underground lake with a jetty where a small boat was tied. Without much thinking you got inside the boat and started rowing, not really knowing where you planned to get to. To your surprises after what seemed like a few hours of rowing aimlessly you could get a glimpse of some faint lights in the middle of a cave. Suddenly your strength came back to your already numb arms and you got to land in less that ten minutes.

You glanced around curiously. A voice inside your head was wondering what were so many candles doing down there, and most importantly, how they had gotten there but another voice onside you, the curious one who seemed to had just awakened today, told you to follow the path they seemed to mark.

As if in a dream you started walking, not really aware of what your body was doing. You felt like floating. It seemed as if you were in between a dream and reality,and that the glimmering candles told your body to follow them to wherever they lead to.

Eventually you got to what seemed to be a door and opening it, still not being completely responsible of your actions, you walked into what seemed to be a living room. You snapped out of your slumber because of the state of the room. Furniture had been flipped and pushed to the ground, the floor had vanished under a layer of what seemed to be shattered scores and glasses. Every room you walked into looked exactly the same.

Your heart almost escaped your chest when you found what seemed to be a room with a coffin laying at the floor. With fearful steps you finally made it to the casket where a beautiful cat laued inside. You kneeled in front of it and tried to pet it, but the animal simply held your glance for a few seconds before storming out of the room. Fearing for it to get hurt you chased it to one of the rooms that you hadn't already looked at. The first thing that you noticed was that next to the doorframe there was a switch, and you cursed yourself for not looking for them sooner. When the light turned on you couldn't believe your eyes.

There was what seemed to be a corpse laying at the floor. By how it looked you would have given it for dead, if it wasn't because the closer you got the more noticeable it became that the "corpse" was breathing, with some difficulty, but breathing.

It all hit you in a second. The Corpse Like Man that everyone had believed to be the Opera ghost, the spectrum that had hunted the Opera Garnier for years. It was alive, even if it did look dead. It was a living man who lived under the Opera and who had played with you all this whole time. A man who coughed violently and seemed to be bleeding out of a wound at his body, who wouldn't make it much farther if you didn't help him out at that moment.

When you finally came out of your thoughts you went to assist him. Despite the seriousness of his injuries and the apprehension that you felt about touching him the first times eventually you got him patched up. You also carried him to the bed you had found in one of the rooms without much of a trouble once you figured out that whatever it was the reason behind his looks, it wasn't contagious.

It took you some weeks to get him to be fully conscious and for him to have enough strengths to stand up for himself. The moment that happened he was furious with you. He shouted and yelled, cursing you for saving his life and making you leave the lake house, threatening you with your death if you ever came down to find him again.

But that didn't stop you. And eventually you didn't just come to make sure that he was okay and that he hadn't killed himself but because you enjoyed his company. At the same time the man, who responded to the name Erik had began to open up to you, allowing you two to become closer.

It all felt so far away in time now. As if it had taken place years ago. Erik and you became friends eventually and you felt like the two of you had developed some kind of unspoken relationship. But you never dared to speak with him about it, not after knowing what had happened with Christine. You didn't want to bring back any painful memories to Erik, and he had many.

Talking about Erik, you hadn't heard him nor seen him in the whole evening. You thought as you started to pack your things in your bag. You wished you had been able to spend more time together today, but he must have been busy to ignore your presence so abruptly.

As you got ready to leave you heard one of the many doors behind you opening up and turned around to see the man you had been thinking about walking out of a room, who was priming the sleeves of his suit. Erik looked up to you and his face seemed to have lightened up under the mask that he stubbornly kept wearing around you, even after you had told him several times that his face didn't disgust you any longer.

-My beloved- he spoke, opening his arms in a welcoming expression -what brings you down here at this lovely evening? Have you come to visit your poor Erik?

You shook your head when you heard how he addressed himself, it pained you at your heart. Holding your bag in your hands you swung slightly on your tiptoes in a playful way before answering him.

-Truth is I've been here the whole evening. But you seemed to be busy and I didn't want to disturb you. Actually, I was getting ready to make my way out.

The smile on Erik's lips faded away and a pout took it place. Erik did not let his disappointment go unnoticed and looked straight at your eyes before speaking in the saddest voice he could find -Oh, but why must you go? Don't leave me this early, my dear.

You chuckled at his manners, even when upset he was extremely theatrical. It may be the same with every men that advocated their life to their Opera's and music, you thought. The theatrical manners were a part of them.

-I'm coming back tomorrow, and you know it. No need to throw a tantrum over my departure.

You joked. Erik played along and placing a hand to his chest, as if he had been incredibly offended he went on.

-You insult me, miss. A man like me, throwing a tantrum as a mer infant?

-It wouldn't be the first time, would it darling?- you pointed out with a giggle.

-Touché- the masked man answered, accepting his defeatment with composure and dignity.

Your cheeks turned a soft red because of the playful flirting, which took place whenever you spoke to eachother. You placed one of your locks behind your ear nervously. The butterflies inside your stomach making you feel once more as if you were back to being that young teen who would snick out with all the other ballerinas to watch the handsome actors getting changed for the shows.

Without thinking twice you walked closer to Erik, who's look of surprise you didn't seem to catch, and placed a soft peck at the corner of his lips leaning on his shoulders to get to his face. You left Erik startled by your actions and it wasn't till you were back in front of him, looking straight at his eyes, that you realized what you had done.

-Oh! Erik I- you tried to excuse yourself, but the damage was already done, and you felt his anger rising and increasing as seconds passed by.

-Damn you!- he screamed- DAMN YOU, YOU LITTLE VIPER! Oh how funny of you. Haven't I've been hurt enough for you to play such tricks on me!?!- he said, pacing around you like a hunger lion over his prey.

-Erik, darling, I didn't mean to- you attempts of calming him down fell on deaf ears because Erik headed against you with all the rage he had locked inside.

-How cruel of you! Playing with a broken man's poor heart! You know fully well that poor unhappy Erik doesn't deserve you! But still you choose to play with my feelings. Only to end up leaving me behind, just as that Swedish girl did!

Tears had formed at your eyes as he spoke his hateful words. It was not till he stormed out of the room and locked himself that you allowed yourself to cry. Collapsing at the sofa where you had been sitting not so long ago and crying your heart out.

Hours had passed by when you heard a door opening. You did not need to open your eyes nor to stand up from the sofa to face the door in order to know that it was Erik the one who had come out of it. You heard his slowed down steps as he came closer and closer to you, like a frightened child about to confront his mother after having misbehaved. When he was finally standing in front of you, head down to the floor, he dropped to his knees, tugging at the hem of your dress while crying over your lap. You hands found their way to his head, where you started playing with the few strands of his hair in an attempt to calm him down.

When Erik had finally stopped sobbing and you two were now laying together, him on top of you, at the sofa. Erik's masked face was hidden at the croock of your neck as he clinged to your body with all his strengths, as if he was scared that you would disappear if he loosened his hold on you.

Whe Erik dared to cautiously look up at your face, in case that you were still mad at him.

-(Y/N)...- he asked, almost in a whisper. You looked back at him

-Yes?

Erik swallowed, he swallowed hard, doubting if he should go on with what he had thought.

-I- I wanted to ask you for something...

It was the first time since you had ever met that Erik was asking for something for himself. So you stood up slightly, making sure that Erik was still laying over you, wearing the softest smile you could to encourage him to keep going. Oh, you were so eager to get him whatever he asked for.

-What is it, dear?

Erik let out a shaky breath, and bitting his misshapen lip he found the courage enough to speak.

-Can you give me two kisses?- he asked a child like ring at his voice -one for now and one to save?

Tears made their way to your eyes once more. The fact that all he was asking for so fearfully was nothing more but a kiss tore your heart open.

With watery eyes you knelt on the stomach and pulled Erik up with you to later throw yourself at your poor man, taking his lips between yours without hesitation. The kiss took Erik by surprise, but even if he was a little astonished at the beginning he ended up melting down in your touch, kissing you back with the same fervour.

When you had to pull apart because of the air loss you took Erik's face between your hands, his blissful eyes looking at you in pure adoration. -You can have as many kisses as you want, my love. Now and ever. No need to ask for them.

Erik's mouth formed a big o, and his eyes looked watery behind his mask. A soft smile spread across his features before he pushed you against his chest, were you buried yourself, hugging eachother lovingly.

[roadtophantom]

Down Once More - RTP Does a Double Show

(or as they say, a two doe shay - so in that light, this review is hella long)

March 16, 2019

It wasn't planned but to take advantage of a discount, I got a second ticket targeting a Saturday matinee show so I could catch Clara. This plan backfired as I already inadvertently caught her the previous week. Being that the Theatre at Solaire is hours away where I am and I don't want to shell out over a grand for Grab, I decided to see the evening show too.

The fun part about matinees is it's not a rush hour so the travel time is cut significantly. We got to the theatre early enough to take all the photos we want without queueing plus some decent drive thru food. We got balc right seats this time, second row. I certainly missed the prime visibility of orch seats but liked being able to see the whole set.

Clara was on as Christine and I'm delighted to say that as early as a week-gap she's able to put different touches to her Christine so you see a somewhat different interpretation. This one was less afraid and was drawn more to MOTN, that she was able to show a dilemma between the Phantom and Raoul. What I gathered from my first viewing of her was that she's obviously Team Raoul all the way. I mean, sure that is a very valid interpretation but I guess I also like a Christine who is able to show a conflict, some sort of loyalty to her 'teacher' who she didn't just happen to meet yesterday. So there's some joy when she sings AOM.

A notable scene is how she took a while to unmask the Phantom (Jonathan) The instrumentation has already changed and she was still peeling the mask. Jonathan took that extended lull as fuel for anger that Clara cowered in a fetal position as Jonathan, imposing figure that he is, hovered over her. He then punches the floor with his fist and kicked the mandarin hat (which he never got to wore) away. Pretty intense. By STYDI he becomes remorseful as he lamented 'Oh Christine'.

One thing I love about Matt's Raoul is we don't just know he is well to borrow from the Kingsmen: manners maketh man. He isn't only a gentleman at Christine but also to the managers when he makes it a point to excuse himself with a hand gesture when he is switching his attention to Carlotta, Piangi and Girys. And I think one takeaway I got from his Raoul is how he regarded the angel with dismissal and arrogance but slowly come to horror to know that this is a real thing plaguing Christine and that leads him to do what it takes even risk his life. Idk, he's just very real to me. When he does the disaster will be yours, he mounts all his  fiery passion to threaten what he knows is larger than him.

Also the travelator worked and he does jump so whee.

Again I adored the ballerinas during the rehearsals because they're just playful girlfriends, when they get excited at the introduction of the Vicomte, when one of them yawns tiredly and someone gets instruction from the slave master, love love these cute dynamics. Plus they are so nice and supportive of Christine. Meg is just a dear, and I love how Kiruna-Lind nods sheepishly with a “I’ll be a good girl cross my heart” smile at her mom before stomping right off. 

I finally looked up that lyric change in Notes, it's now using Broadway's: "Mystified baffled Surete say,we are mystified -"

After the show I accompanied my cousin and sister to stage door, whereupon Meghan came in looking like a rockstar, black ensemble, hat on. She's still somewhat ill but she's going on and it's to be appreciated because that means my evening ticket will finally see the other Christine.

My seats these time are way up because I got the cheapest tier. So it was going to be interesting to see Meghan who is probably one of the most petite ladies (she's probably 5 foot and a couple inches). But I immediately see how she compensates for the height with her hands. In Hannibal she grabs on to the nearest ballerina or Meg to seek comfort or to show excitement when the announcement of Vicomte came on, she holds Reyer's hands as he congratulates her. Later in the show she uses them in more heartbreaking ways (to plea for help at Madame Giry at Notes II and the managers after the PONR unmasking but all for naught).

I have to mention this, Meghan does not dance the slave girls track (and later most of the Masquerade track) but this may be because of an injury. Do not take my word for it, but it would make sense why Clara was on instead during the media call. I don't begrudge Meghan too in going off stage especially to protect her health.

BUT when she came on for Think of Me? Holy. Smokes. THAT GLORIOUS VOICE. Where did that come from such a tiny frame? It's so big and whole and powerful and she sings and extends the cadenza effortlessly. You'll know this is opera-trained.

My take with her Christine is that she takes on  Meghan's personality, especially in Act I where she is bubbly and friendly with the ballerinas and when she tries to explain to Raoul that the angel of music is very strict (she does it sheepishly). Listening to her radio interviews it makes sense how it sometimes blurs who Meghan is and who Christine is.

She also mentioned how she and the character are utterly consumed by music, and she shows it not just as a trance state but also in a Sarah Brightmanesque possessed state. I want to take a closer look at this because from afar there's a danger of looking like she's doing nothing when she's been doing big gestures with her hands earlier. So it looks like on and off. But maybe up close it's possible she communicates more.

Her strength and her strongest weapon is undoubtedly that voice, because with it she isn't afraid to make the songs her own, to manipulate them as the scene demands for it and as she needs it. Her vocal control is incredible. She is able to communicate fear, panic and passion effortlessly because of that malleable voice that she need not stay the course of the song but give it her interpretation ("in that, <i>strange</i>. sweet. sound.") She could cry and scream in song if that makes sense? I just looooooove listening to her sing and there are just so much dimensions in her interpretation that way. And there's even more to it when she performs with her cast mates.

Okay this brings me to the next part of the review. I saw Jonathan earlier with Clara and it went without a hitch so to speak. In figure-skating speak he landed those lutz. The evening, told a different story. When he couldn't extend his BE in MOTN I started to get worried.

The figure-skating analogy will become very clear towards the rest of the performance as I waited in bated anticipation how he'll try to land his jumps. This was me the whole time basically.

He started stumbling losing breath and ending in rasps towards the end of Act I. Obviously this is not his norm, I've seen him 4 times after all, including the earlier matinee. There was something wrong. But the question now is what he'll do in the vocally demanding AND fast-paced Act II full of quadruple jumps?

Well Jonathan had to do a series of quick decisions, there were words he had to speak more softly, keys that he had to changed and lyrics recited so he can reserve his strength and give them to the money makers. But all in all? Led to a beautiful heart-wrenching performance as he took the show in One Emotional Ride I've never witnessed before. And I believe the person sustaining him, receiving this acting and spinning it to gold? Meghan. There was teamwork happening during the Final Lair as both characters were giving one fiery performance and receiving it, enhancing it, supporting another by giving so much to work with. Meghan comes at you at Final Lair with such fervor. There was a part where she rips the veil so angrily the hair mic went POOF but this is the kind of energy she comes at Jonathan. I don't know if I've seen a Final Lair come like a frenzied hurricane of adrenaline, distress and fury. There were a lot of tears on that stage. Jonathan’s limitations worked for him in the end especially in conveying the anguish of the character. In this way, the show finished in a heart-wrenching note AND thunderous applause.

Oh when Meghan returned the ring, the Phantom clung to her hand and they remained that way for a bit, until Meghan regretably retracted the outstretched arm and left.

So. Um, wow. It was a hell of a ride, and I have to say, guiltily, that I liked how unpredictable it was. That was just pure raw stage energy and thespians are olympians too.

I definitely need to see more of these two before the show closes in close to 2 weeks (cue weeps). 

If you got as far as this um, thank you. You are very patient. I have no reward but here's me wearing the PHwhdjfis hoodie

[rndyounghowze]

An Interview with John D. Smitherman Part 2/2

By Ricky Young-Howze

Welcome back to part two of our interview with Broadway Theatre of Pitman Artistic Director John D. Smitherman. In this installment he talks about a key difference between the audiences of today and the dinner theater crowds of yesteryear and why his relationship with his team is the most important.

“Everything has become quick. Movies used to be three hours long now a movie is just under two hours long if that. And I really don't think people want to be in one place for that length of time. Because if you think about it in dinner theater it's not just an hour you're there for an hour and a half with dinner the way it's all set up and then you have a show that could be two and a half hours long when you add the intermission and so you've been in someplace for four hours. It's almost too much. I've found that people would actually prefer, like say using this theatre as an example, they would rather go to a restaurant across the street or down the street or whatever and then coming over because they have at least gotten up and changed location.”

He’s very quick to offer up examples.

“I’ll give you two things with one show. We did Camelot, our audiences were looking forward to Camelot. But our audiences also did not remember that Camelot when done as is is over three hours long. You add the intermission then suddenly it's four hours long. So that was my first quest, to cut down this classic, and I was able to so that when we were done with intermission we were done in two and a half hours.

John uses a very simple philosophy when it comes to creating a season.

“You also have to do what the people want. I'm sorry that's my thought. you can have shows, and I know that there are plenty of shows out there, that they pound a message to you and those audiences will go to those. But if you know your audience is not that type of an audience and that they just like theatre and they want to go home humming tunes and be happy or whatever then that's what you give them. This is my seventh year and when I got here we had about 4,000 subscribers and now we have 8,000 and so it's doubled in that amount of time. I think it's because of the shows. We’re giving them what they want and they tell a friend. Also the quality of the production.”

But sometimes giving an audience what they wanted is a double edged sword. Sometimes they like a song or a soundtrack more than the musical themselves. When we said that we loved John Stephan's production of Evita Smitherman was ready with yet another story.

“Now it's interesting that it happened to be Evita because Evita was one of those mixed shows for us. It didn't do as well as we thought it would. Our audiences said they wanted to see Evita but then once we presented it to them I think our audiences knew the one song (“Don't Cry For Me Argentina”) and then they see the concept of how the show actually is they were confused by some of it and and it just wasn't really their cup of tea. So we really didn't do well. It wasn't horrendous but didn't do well with Evita and that's one of the few examples I can give.”

But how does he get the info from the audience? We were imagining a call center or a survey manned by a huge team but Mr. Smitherman is just really in tune with his audience.

We don’t do surveys but I have an open door policy. I’m always very accessible so people come up to me and they’ll give me their suggestions on what should be done and what they’ve liked and that’s the main thing. I see what works.

He emphasizes heavily the role the owner, his general manager, staff, and tech team have in keeping the theater running. He doesn’t want it to seem like it was a one person job and he descended on the scene like some kind of demagogue to turn things around. The theatre was very strong when he got there and he leaned heavily on his team when he first got in.

“When I got here the general manager was my only source of input. He would say what has worked and what has not worked and I’ve worked from that.. When I can because it’s not always one hundred percent my [call] I do have the owner of the place, the general manager, and board people that we have to go through before we can actually have a finalized season and such.”

It takes a village to make a season and a lot of his stories start with the group supporting him and trusting him to take the theatre in new directions. Over the years they got in a rhythm together. During the interview his director is texting him to ask if he wants coffee while he’s out. He stops the interview when his interview walks in to make sure everything is alright with the upcoming matinee. You can tell that he has an army of staff behind him and he trusts them greatly.

“We wouldn’t do it if we were one hundred percent sure it was not going to work but there were some that we were nervous about. It’s funny one of the first years I was here I suggested Jekyll and Hyde so that we could start bringing in some of the younger audience but it would still be appealing to our older audience. I literally had to fight to get that show. I was confident that when they saw this production, because I really love Jekyll and Hyde because it was my favorite role, I knew that they would like it. But then of course as time got close to performing it, the production, I was like ‘Oh man they're not going to like it.’ So that one I was like nervous about but it ended up being one of the most successful shows in the history of this theater.”

“So it’s these things you have to take the chances on but then there’s been things I’ve been surprised. 39 Steps is basically a comedy version of all of [Alfred Hitchcock's] movies with a clear storyline played by four characters who all played multiple roles. I thought that they would all get it and find the humor. But they hated it. The audience hated it. So that was a rough one. If the people hung through to the end it was fine but there were so many of them that they were leaving in droves.”

Those are the breaks right? He takes it all in stride. Since he's done a lot of theatre he knows how to pick a show based on what he's seen work before.

“Not all shows translate to different theaters. When I was first given the information of what the age group our audiences are and this is what they’ve liked in the past and so forth there were certain things. I've done South Pacific a hundred thousand times, that to me is a no brainer, we’re going to do South Pacific. They hadn't done it yet so let's do it. And it did really well. I also know there are shows I’ve done before that will never work here. Prom Queens Unchained? It’s not going to work here.”

We couldn't believe that we had been sitting there for fifty minutes without really asking about his upcoming show. He had us entranced for the whole time. We finally got to ask him the all important question: What does the title mean?

“It's My Broadway in general because if we just did what I did in Manhattan it would just be a ten minute concert so it's spanning all of the stuff that I’ve done here and there. It's encompassing all of the leading roles that I've done both internationally, and Broadway, and here, the United States and so forth.

This isn't the first kind of show that he's done before.

“I've done “Music of the Night” that one was more of a variety of things because I love so many different types of music. Like I like Tom Jones, some of the Frank Sinatra, Tony Bennett, Mario Lanza, those type of things, but then feature the Phantom stuff because everyone loves Phantom of the Opera.

Alas the director and hopeful auditionees for The Pajama Game were waiting to use the space so we had to call it a day. But it wasn't over yet. John invited us to enjoy Aida, their show that just closed. We decided this was a good chance to explore John's city that he loves so much and eat at Stage Right, the wine bar attached to the theater. John magically appeared onstage before the show even after a busy day to greet the audience. We have no idea how he does it all. You can see him do a lot of it on June 8 when his one man show My Broadway hits the stage for one night only. This is a man most beloved by the staff and subscribers of this theatre. You had better get your tickets now on their website.