#leroux erik >>>>

[esvvel]

Duality of the man

[luneemeritus]

Here we go.

• The chandelier was a warning to the managers. I thought I mentioned it in my OP, sorry that I didn't. He didn't intentionally killed her. It was absolutely wrong regardless.

• Did you read my post? I literally mentioned Philippe's death. "It was a horrible one by drowing" ok? He was tresspassing Erik's house. Erik built that house precisely to hide from the world, what did you expect him to do when an aristocrat, a member of the same society and class that opressed him during his whole life, almost tresspassed his house? "He was searching for Raoul" oh I'm afraid Erik's magical crystal ball was not working that day. It was self defense, end of story.

• Buquet killed himself. Erik didn't kill him. "B-but Erik's built the torture chamber" he did not kill Buquet. Simple. Personally I consider the "torture chamber" part lazy writing and not really making sense because it's kinda useless, but feel free to disagree on that. But I will repeat: Erik didn't kill Buquet. And even he had killed Buquet, lol he had it coming, I would also be mad seeing someone spread horrible shit about my physical appearance. If that bothers you lol good.

• I love how you think I'm "ignoring" things that I literally already mentioned. But let me answer this by adressing your other "callout": "he doesn't think before he acts?" Bro literally kidnapped Christine out of an outburst and threatened to blow the Opera House, only to regret everything later. You refuted yourself. No, Erik doesn't think before he acts. He *is* impulsive. He acts purely on emotional, this is why he lies so much to the Daroga, he doesn't think before he acts and regrets when the shit he did goes wrong. That's like. The most basic character trait for him. And about the gunpower and scorpion/grasshopper: aside from Classical Gothic Literature exageration, Erik had always suicidal tendencies, but he doesn't really express this before his crysis at the end.

"the deaths were not created by the musical" jesus FUCKING christ. Literally the whole point of my original post was that the context and tone of Erik's behaviour was changed to make him more antagonistic. He didn't kill anyone on purpose or out of pure spite/sadism like he did with Piangi in the musical (and he didn't kill Buquet), literally the only person he killed on purpose was Philippe who was tresspassing his house but even still you refuse to understand my point because "bad outcast killed aristocrat uwu". And the "murder for nothing" wasn't the only thing the 2004 movie specifically changed that made Erik unlikable, but I won't repeat myself because this was my original post.

And your last paragraph, again, proved you missed my point and probably didn't even try to understand it. The 2004 movie (what I was comparing the novel to, and not the stage musical even though I have my own criticism to it) made him more manipulative than he was in the novel and wrote crimes he wasn't responsible for originally (aka grooming a child and the murders I already mentioned). My point was that Leroux Erik is less villanous and more sympathetic than 2004 Erik, but people often dismiss it because Leroux Erik is described as "uglier" and more tragic/complex than in the musical. I'm not the one denying him complexity or humanity, you are by refusing to analyse his character traits and the reason and context behind his crimes. You're the one making poor excuses to not understand his character. The worst crimes Erik committed in the novel were not manipulative evil genius plans that took 6 months like in the movie, but out of a psychosis attack after hearing the woman he loved and believed that loved him back planning to run away and, again, displaying cruel comments about the very appearance that caused him the trauma he has to deal with. Leroux Erik regreted pretending to be an Angel much earlier and apologized to Christine, while 2004 Erik pretended to be her fucking dad until the very end. Leroux Erik is much more impulsive whole 2004 (and ALW in general) Erik is more cold minded. And I already commented about the murders. Leroux Erik's outburst was definitely worse and scarier than in the musical, but it makes more sense considering he's older and had to deal with worse shit and the context of the novel. Erik doesn't even do anything outright "evil" until the very end, he was much more Raoul's mysterious rival begging for Christine's love than the big scary villain.

But then again you don't believe Erik actually loved Chrstine, even though this is the most important part of the story and the reason why the ending is so emotional in the first place, he DID LOVE HER and yet that didn't make his outrageous toxic behaviour any better. Love doesn't make you immune to hurting the ones you love, specially in Erik's situation (+40 years of untreated trauma and systematic neglect that caused severe mental illness and instability). The final chapter is literally called "the end of the ghost's love story"; Christine herself has long ass monologues about how much he loved her, would do anything for her and was completely submissive (also, Leroux Erik is both manipulative and easily manipulated, people can be both *gasp!*) and her monologues themselfs (when properly translated) refute any anti-E/C rhetoric. Erik loved Chrstine and if you're denying that, you're already starting your whole argumentation wrong.

People saying that 2004 Erik is "more likable" and "less horrific" than Leroux Erik is hilarious to me. No seriously, it genuinely baffles me. Are you serious that a version of Erik (the only one as far as I'm aware, thankfully) that grooms Christine when she was a child, kills Buquet and Piangi for absolutely no reason, aside from being much more manipulative and cold-minded, is "more likable" than the OG Erik that didn't do any of those?

Leroux Erik is always impulsive, doesn't think before he acts, ends up fucking shit up and feels guilty for it but continues fucking shit up because it's the only way he knows how to survive. Leroux Erik apologizes for the "Angel facade" much earlier instead of holding it until the end. Leroux Erik didn't run out there killing random people because yes, the only person he actually and directly killed was Philippe, a Count that was tresspassing his house. Leroux Erik's love for Christine isn't shown only in the end after the kiss. What is it about Leroux Erik that makes people despise him and prefer creepier, worse versions? Oh, sure.

🙄

Hey just passing by to say that disfigured people existing and being represented in fiction isn't "Horror" or "Body Horror". Just saying.

(this isn't a hate post against gerard butler! unfortunately i've seen a lot of phans being rude and terrible to him just because they dislike the 2004 movie, i'm not doing this, he is an awesome guy and a great actor, i'm criticizing the 2004 portrayal of Erik and media takes)

[ablatheringblatherskite]

You ever notice how, at least in the Phantom of the Opera book, Raoul, Christine and Erik all see the story in completely different genres??

For Raoul, it's obviously Horror and Investigative Drama.

For Christine, it's like... a dark Fairy Tale.

And for Erik, it's a Tragedy.

And idk I feel like that actually also explains a LOT about their behaviours and actions in the book??? D'you see what I mean?!?

[les-gnossiennes-fantomatiques]

Everything I see reminds me of ~*him*~

[lonlonranching]

so no one was gonna mention the shanghai phantom ballet based on the leroux novel……..

[dross-the-fish]

There is no Angel of Music. "I'm a handsome fellow, eh, Christine?"

[wowyzowy3]

doodles

[thatsbelievable]

[ruvyn29]

I'm in the torture chamber

[humblegeniusinboxfive]

In celebration of the birthday of this most-beautiful building (a few days late, I know), I upload these photos I took on my recent visit to its majestic halls. Nowhere else have I seen such beauty nor felt such awe; it is a sanctuary for divine art and a fitting home for the Angel of Music.

Words cannot express my love for it, so I won’t even try.

Let me only say: Gaston Leroux NAILED its description in that book, both visually and atmospherically. That building IS Erik.

[esvvel]

my version of book Erik

without the mask

He's a depressed mess here 😊

At first I wanted him to look as close to the book as possible, but then I just couldn't resist giving him this haircut and changing a few other things because why not.

I plan on drawing other characters and more of Erik too, so hopefully I'll have enough time lol.

[kachinga12]

Erik the phantom of the opera! :D

[ineffablekink]

The Phantom: Oh I am so ugly and repulsive. This deformed, distorted, monstrous face-

Literally every girl in the theatre: Words cannot begin to express how much I would love to sit on that face right now.

[les-gnossiennes-fantomatiques]

Felt like drawing something Edward Gorey-esque for Halloween.

[dylansheep]

How imprudent you are!

[kimwexlers-brownhair]

Probably people more coherent than I am have talked about this before, but I feel like the biggest difference between Leroux Erik and ALW Erik besides the deformity and the fact I think ALW Erik is supposed to be a little bit younger than Leroux's, is that Leroux Erik does everything he can to try appearing "normal" to Christine (the decor and fake flowers in the lair) while ALW Erik does everything he can to make Christine think of him as some supernatural force even after revealing himself as a Phantom instead of an Angel.

So while Leroux Erik desperately wants a normal life with a normal house and a normal wife he can take out on Sundays, ALW Erik wants to convince Christine that it's so much sexier and cooler to acutally hang out in the darkness with him as Hades to her Persephone. It's a contrast I appreciate.