#still reading phantom by susan kay

[emiliosandozsequence]

this book is killing meeee and i know it's only going to get worse 😭

[plaguery]

i found a couple of old zines from the phantom appreciation society in the UK on the internet archive (link to masquerade here) (link to beneath the mask here)

the editor goes by the name christine daae which is cute and theres small illustrations mostly in the first issue

but the beneath the mask issue has this classifieds gag which i really liked

theres also multiple incensed letters written in response to something from the fifth issue (unfortunately i cannot find any other than the first and sixth) which i assume praised raoul and denounced erik. all i can say is time is a flat circle

AND how TERRIBLE that i cant find the other issues, theres an index of them and they got an interview with miss susan going straight to hell kay herself. i know im mean about her but i still want to read it.

but ive had a lot of fun reading these, its amazing to get this look into the phandom past. its like a delightful shock of nostalgia for a past that my 1999 born ass was not there for. i recommend taking at least a skim of them (especially the longer of the two, beneath the mask)!

[harrowscore]

to take your mind of the foreboding WH movie adaptation disaster: Are there actually some non-English gothic titles you would like to recommend?

ohhhhh, what a good ask!

now, i'm actually not that well-versed in the gothic genre as i'd like to be, and if anyone has more recs they're welcome to add them to my list. but still, let's begin with:

gaston leroux, le fantôme de l'opéra (+ andrew lloyd webber's musical - which is hugely popular, as it should be! - and i'd also recommend the 1925 silent movie with lon chaney. it's probably the most faithful film adaptation of poto... too bad for that ending tho. there's also a prequel/retelling book by susan kay called phantom, which is very good - but not flawless - except i heavily dislike christine's characterization in this one; you can always read until the counterpoint section and call it a day)

victor hugo, notre dame de paris + the musical adaptation by riccardo cocciante. it's in french, but i also enthusiastically rec the italian version - you can find both of them on yt!

so, besides these two super famous classics, there's the poem the demon by mikhail yuryevich lermontov. you can find an opera rendition of it by anton rubinstein.

speaking of opera, béla bartók's bluebeard's castle - aka a gorgeous adaptation of the fairy tale by the same name. this version is particularly excellent, and there are also a lot of good album recordings on spotify. musically-wise, tho, it's maybe not easily accessible to people who aren't already familiar with opera...?

charles gounod's faust (again, an opera!) and various non-english versions of the story, like goethe's. by goethe there's also the poem der erlkönig. here a beautiful musical rendition by franz schubert.

panna a netvor aka "the maiden and the monster", my favorite beauty&thebeast movie adaptation. it's a 1978 czechoslovak film, you can find it here on yt with eng subs. and idk if i would say it's gothic but there's also the jean cocteau 1946 film + another french one filmed in 2014 starring léa seydoux and vincent cassel.

fyodor dostoevesky, the double

carlos ruiz zafon, the shadow of the wind (which i enjoyed, but i wasn't personally crazy about, though)

it's not gothic - it's magical realism, actually - but fans of the genre would possibly like gabriel garcia marquez's one hundred years of solitude for its themes

again, not gothic (i've seen it labeled as "dark academia" but. for some people anything is ~dark academia, including dostoevesky and the picture of dorian gray, for some unfathomable reason), but i'd rec vita nostra + its sequel, assassin of reality, by ukrainian authors marina and sergey dyachenko. there's an english translation and an italian one for my mutualiani, plus a third and final book coming out in, maybe, 2025.

the cabinet of dr. caligari + the man who laughs starring conrad veidt (😳😍) - the latter is an adaptation of the victor hugo's novel by the same name

for other movie recs, the original nosferatu + dario argento's suspiria (which has also a more recent remake by luca guadagnino of challengers fame)

fosca by igino ugo tarchetti. didn't read the novel, but i watched the musical adaptation by stephen sondheim, passion, here (and that's in english). again, idt if it's gothic or even gothic-adjacent but fosca's character has been compared and contrasted as a female version of the phantom of the opera by musical theatre fans, so. here it is.

now, for things i didn't personally watch/read so i can't vouch for them, but they seem all well-written/made nonetheless and belong to my unending list(s) of books to read/films to watch:

vampire hunter d. (anime)

john ajvide lindqvist, let the right one in (novel + movie adaptation)

marina enriquez, our share of the night + things we lost in fire (novel + short stories collection)

(mind you that these recs conflate a lot with the horror department. but i still think they could be interesting for gothic fans)

two book series that are written by english authors but i think they deserve more attention:

mervyn peake, gormenghast

jonathan l. howard, johannes cabal (which contains huge references to faust, dracula, and works by poe and lovecraft. the protagonist has also become one of my favorite characters of all time, i've fallen in love with him at first... page, i guess lol)

and that's it! again, if anyone has any other good rec, please feel free to add them!

[alchemistc]

get to know me

tagged by @beefcakekinard and @liminalmemories21!

favourite colour — light cyan. i know this seems stupid specific but i cannot tell you the number of times i have bought some trinket or mug or office supply, taken it home, and only realized THEN that it matches all the other trinkets and office supplies and water bottles etc i already own. idek if it's actually my favorite color or if my brain is just TRYING to create some line of continuity in the madness

last song — Not Like Us - Kendrick Lamar, which they are now apparently playing on the radio? Drake is fucking cooked, man

currently reading — rereading Phantom by Susan Kay

currently watching — i'm in between shows but i binged Rings of Power last night to prepare for season two, and wishing i was brave enough to dive into the scary depths of ao3 to find a good, dirty nasty fucked up galadriel/sauron fic where she takes him up on his offer

currently craving — a release from this fucking heat. also a Ding Dong

coffee or tea - used to be a coffee FIEND but then my family medical history caught up to me. i can't even REMEMBER the last time i had coffee, damn. so tea. always liked tea but it didn't have the edge until i physically couldn't handle coffee anymore.

hobby to try — english paper piecing. i've BEEN doing this for a while but really want to design and execute a quilted jacket with the alt/division rivalry logo

current au — hockey au!!

Spicy/sweet/savory - i refuse to choose, actually, all three of these are bangers and i will not limit myself

Current obsession — (that 500k word, slow burn villain origin story galadriel/sauron au that i am still absolutely not going to go searching for and probably doesn't exist. i'm gonna be thinking about it tho)

Relationship status - been with my man for a little over five years

no pressure tags: @kirkaut @rcmclachlan @devirnis

[fdelopera]

What parts of Kay’s novel do you consider “canon”?For example, what do you think about Erik’s past with luciana? How do you view the “relationship” they had? Also what do you think about his addiction with drugs?

I mean, I don't consider any of Susan Kay's Phantom to be "canon" to anything other than her own story, in the way that I don't consider any phanfic to be "canon." Kay is "canon" to herself.

Kay uses elements that are canon to Leroux's backstory of Erik's life, such as him meeting the Daroga when Erik was working for the Shah of Persia, back when the Daroga was still the chief of police. But she invents a name and backstory for her Daroga, Nadir Khan, which isn't the backstory of Leroux's character.

Of course, Kay didn't know that Leroux based the Daroga on an actual Persian expat and exile, who frequented the Paris Opera during the Salle Le Peletier days (he died seven years before the Palais Garnier was constructed). There was likely no way for her to know that his name wasn't Nadir, but rather was Mohammed Ismaël Khan, and that he went by Ismaël.

Perhaps if she'd had access to Les célébrités de la rue and Revue encyclopédique (that's where I found Ismaël's portrait and biography), she would have given him his name and incorporated some of his history into her character. She did conduct a fair amount of research in writing her novel, and in her defense, this information about Mohammed Ismaël Khan was probably only available on microfiche at the Bibliothèque nationale de France in Paris when she was writing her novel back in the late 1980s.

As for Kay's description of Erik's time in Rome with Giovanni and Luciana, as well her description of Erik's morphine use, that was Kay's invention alone. It's certainly not "canon" outside of her novel. The morphine use specifically was possibly due to her borrowing tropes from the Sherlock Holmes canon and fanon. She certainly leaned into many of the "tortured genius" tropes that were popular in the Sherlock Holmes fandom when she was writing.

All of that said, Kay's novel has stood the test of time. It's kind of extraordinary, if you think about it, that a published phanfic (the first in the post-ALW phandom) is still being read in the Phantom fandom today.

[night-unfurls-its-splendour]

Susan Kay's 'Phantom' Read: Part VI (Erik-Christine Counterpoint)

Dear God.

I can now unequivocally say I hate this book. Some of you may have caught my vent post from earlier which I wrote in one of the many moments I had to put the book down and walk away for the good of my own health and sanity.

The badness of this book has now ceased to be amusing and is now just... bad. So bad in fact that I think it triggered my bronchial asthma and I had to get out of the bathtub and find my inhaler before I could finish this portion.

To sum up it really seems like Kay lost any and all interest in exploring Leroux's characters once she finished Erik’s back-story. Yes there were differences from Canon even there, but the story was still following Leroux's timeline and was by-and-large canon compliant.

This section, barring a few superficially similar details is virtually unrecognizable from the source material.

Yes Erik begins to teach Christine under the guise of the Angel of Music, and yes he takes her down under the Opera house for two weeks. And yes they go up for the masquerade and yes Christine and Raoul plan to run away on the rooftop, leading to Erik planning to blow up the Opera house out of desperation.

Carlotta croaks like a toad and the chandelier does indeed crash.

Yet all of these details seem like perfunctory afterthoughts. The intervening material is so wholly divorced from Leroux's story that when events from the canon are included, it felt almost jarring to me.

I hate the way Kay characterizes Christine, and Erik is just as bad if not worse.

Christine’s descent into the lair is clearly modeled off of the Musical/1925 movie, with Erik drawing her down into the tunnels in a trance. And Christine asks for the Angel to take her away! How convenient for Erik!

I would have been far more interested in seeing the abduction from the book as told from Erik's perspective.

This launches a self-indulgent two weeks of Christine essentially worshipping at Erik's feet, which is shattered only by a frankly ineffective unmasking scene (again based on the musical/1925 movie and less affecting than either).

This is no torrid, passionate, innately horrifying yet also emotionally heart-wrenching unmasking of Leroux. Christine simply snatches the mask and Erik has a heart attack(?) before he can fully choke her out.

Christine’s shock at discovering that her Angel is actually a man, and then her horror of his face is lacklustre, and completely insufficient to convince me that this is really a big enough stumbling block to prevent her from marrying him. She puts him on such a high pedestal and Erik does absolutely nothing to contradict her. He says he worships her, but in action, she is always deferential to him. He never prostrates himself before her, never treats her like a queen, like a goddess. He never follows her around like a faithful dog, as he does in Leroux. On the contrary, she follows him.

She's so obviously in love with Erik that her claims of confusion regarding her feelings for him come off as flaccid and disingenuous, and her obvious preference for Erik and her complacency with her situation sap any tension from the love story.

Don't misunderstand me, I like when a Christine has a preference for Erik. My problem is that Kay has completely lain all her cards on the table. Christine speaks freely and almost easily of Erik to Raoul who is basically a cardboard cut out. Kay's attempt at "exploring" whether Raoul's doubts in Christine's love for him are really founded in Christine secretly holding a candle for Erik is ultimately pointless because the READER already knows that she finds Raoul's love a pale comparison to what she feels with Erik! There's no mystery here!

(Its unfortunate that Kay wrote this before having access to Lowell Bair's translation, which provided us for the first time with Leroux's own answer to that Question: Why tempt fate, Raoul! Why ask me about things which I keep hidden in the back of my heart like a sin?"

It makes it feel even more incomprehensibly perfunctory when Christine decides to run away with Raoul when she knows that she could simply marry Erik for however long he has left (he's apparently not long for this world anyway) and then go on with her life. Gah!!

And then there's how Kay infantilizes Christine. While Leroux's Christine is eccentric and dreamy and credulous, she is not ignorant or "unstable". She's aware of the ways of the world

You would say that to me, Raoul? You, an old playfellow of my own! A friend of my father! You have changed since those days, Raoul. What can you be thinking of? I am an honest girl, M. le Vicomte de Chagny, and I don't lock myself in my dressing room with mens voices!"

Christine very clearly understands the implications here, and she's outraged and offended that Raoul would even imply that she would conduct herself with impropriety.

And it's not only Kay who infantilizes Christine, but Erik as well:

I'm beginning to realize just how much of a child she really is, how terrifyingly immature and vulnerable--even unstable. There's a fatal flaw running through her, like a hairline crack in a Ming dynasty vase, but that imperfection makes me love her with even greater tenderness. I don't suppose for one moment that that boy is aware of the never-ending care she'll need. Whoever marries Christine is going to have to play the father as well as the lover; if she lives to be eighty she may never be more than a child at heart, a lost and frightened little girl, bewildered by the demands of reality.

This is infuriating to me, because, as M. Grant Kellermeyer so astutely points out in his footnotes of the 2018 Old Style Tales Edition of the book:

"He confesses his cheat. He loves me! He lays an immense and tragic love at my feet... he has carried me off for love! He has imprisoned me with him underground, for love! But he respects me!*"

* - This, indeed, seems to be a unique experience in Christine's life: she is surrounded by people who despise her (Carlotta), dismiss her (the managers), idolize her (Raoul), infantilize her (Mama Valerius), and pity her (the opera workers)--Erik alone respects her. Erik alone sees in her the power and artistry that becomes increasingly obvious as her character grows in confidence and assertiveness. Erik fears her to an extent, and [...] it is likely that Christine is simply touched by Erik's belief in her, his confidence in her, and his devotion to her success.

And Kellermeyer's point about Christine growing in assertiveness is very very important. She wields power over both Erik and Raoul.

But Kay's Christine doesn't. Erik's treatment of her, both his actual treatment and his internal monologue is absolutely horrible, so again NOT AT ALL how Leroux's Erik treats her.

Let's start with the stretch where he's playing the Angel (Alexa play album "Playing the Angel" by Depeche Mode)

Christine says:

He's so stern and exacting in his demand for perfection; he never praises me, even when I know I have done well. He remains aloof and cold in his timeless imperishable wisdom, and I know that the worship of a mortal heart can mean nothing to him.

Kayrik said he wanted to be her angel who would make her feel confidence in herself at last, and yet none of his behaviour exhibits any desire to do that. I hate interpretations of Erik that take "stern" to mean cold or outright verbally abusive. That is terrible teaching method and never produces good results. Furthermore, in Leroux, Christine never mentions the Angel withholding praise, and when he is aloof following Raoul's reappearance in Christine's life, it even seems as though this is a departure from the norm.

Arguably one of the most iconic moments of the original novel is the scene where Christine is left alone in her dressing room after recovering from a fainting spell that saw her carried off the stage immediately after her triumph. Raoul, outside her room, hears Christine and Man's voice conversing and we are given some of the most iconic lines in the novel:

He had heard a man's voice in the dressing room, saying, in a curiously masterful tone:

"Christine, you must love me!"

And Christine's voice, infinitely sad and trembling as though accompanied by tears, replied:

"How can you say that to me? To me, when I sing only for you!"

[...]

The man's voice spoke again: "Are you very tired?"

"Oh, tonight I gave you my soul, and I am dead!"

"Your soul is a very beautiful thing, child," replied the grave man's voice, "and I thank you. No emperor ever recieved so fair a gift. The angels wept tonight."

Raoul heard nothing after that.

This important scene, deeply layered with romantic and sexual subtext, is completely absent from Phantom. Not only that Kay explicitly says that when Christine returned to her dressing room after her triumph, the voice wasn't there at all. He never congratulates her, never praises her. He's simply. Not. There. For her.

It's not just this that I hate though.

It's the number of times Erik calls her a "stupid child".

Funnily enough, Erik treats Christine with the exact same supercilious condescension that makes me hate Raoul in the musical.

Both Kayrik and Musical Raoul look at Christine and regard her as potentially mentally unstable, unable to trust her own senses or handle reality. To both of them she is a "scared little girl" and will never be anything more. Both of them look at that and say "No matter, let me wife that."

Interesting thing: Leroux Erik only calls Christine "Child" when he is in his guise as the Angel. Never does Erik, as Erik, refer to her that way.

Now I'll pause to say, there is one part of this episode I enjoyed and that is when Christine masturbates to Don Juan Triumphant.

And yet even this I have a problem with.

I've already covered the fact that though Leroux's Christine is innocent, she is not ignorant. She is very aware of the potential sexual danger Erik poses to her when he abducts her (though this, again was not a portion of the book available in English when Kay was writing). Nevertheless I still find it hateful and irritating that Kay's Christine is so ignorant that when Erik's music arouses her, she says she touched herself in a place "I had never known existed."

And the fact that Christine has remained insensible to her sexuality this far into her relationship with Erik is another thing that chaps my hide.

Both Leroux's Christine and Andrew Lloyd Webber's admit to fearing the effect that the Angel of Music and his tutelage have had on her. Leroux's Christine says "I hardly knew myself when I sang. I was even frightened." And Andrew Lloyd Webbers also says "He's with me even now, all around me--it frightens me" and in a short-lived alternative lyric used on the West End "I'm changing, Meg!"

And indeed, Erik's tutelage has changed Christine. Her singing under Erik's influence is not simply that of innocent euphoria. It referred to in deliberately orgasmic terms such as "Ecstasy" and "Rapture". And this so frightens her, because she is aware of what exactly these ecstasies are awakening in her. But Kay's Christine doesn't seem to be undergoing the same change. Instead of Erik's voice awakening her, Kay rather describes him as shrouding her in the fantastic, even shielding her from the very awareness and maturity that Leroux's Erik seems to be drawing out in her. Her final step into adult awareness is Erik revealing himself to her as a man, which seems to be something of a non-event here, not even of importance independent of the Unmasking. To Kay's Christine it simply is, while that simple fact is reacted to by ALW's Christine with undisguised attraction and by Leroux's with indignation.

Further sullying what is otherwise a very engaging (if somewhat short) scene of... self... discovery(?) Is Erik's perspective on the proceedings, an excerpt which prejudiced me against this book long before I undertook to read it:

I dared not think how near I had been to losing control, how terrifyingly easy it would have been in that moment to rape her. I'd raped her with music instead, and perhaps that crime was almost as bad as the one it had so narrowly prevented. Either way I'd violated her trust and destroyed a rare and precious innocence--soiled the delicate ambience that had lain between us all these weeks.

When I first ran afoul of this quote I had still been under the impression that this section of the book would be following Leroux's story and took this to be Kay's interpretation of the moment after the Unmasking when Erik, having lashed out in horrific fashion at Christine for exposing him, retreats to his room to express his anguish through music, and that music actually prevents Christine from taking her own life. In another travesty of censorship, though, the salient details of this moment (Christine's description of Erik's music) is yet another portion of the book Kay would have had no knowledge of or access to, yet is one of the most heart-wrenchingly beautiful pieces of prose ever put to print:

Troubled at the idea of the fate now awaiting me, and terrified of seeing the monster's uncovered face peering from the doorway to the room with the coffin, I had run to my own room and snatched up the scissors that could bring me freedom from this loathsome fate when I heard the sound of the organ.

At that instant I began to comprehend to Erik's strange rejection of what he termed "opera music". What I was now hearing was completely different from the music that had thrilled me up to that point. His "Don Juan Triumphant" (for I had no doubt that he was now losing himself in his Masterpiece to forget the horror of the moment) at first struck me as one long, dreadful, glorious lament into which he was pouring all of his bitter misery.

I visualized the manuscript with the blood red notes and easily imagined that they had been written in blood. His music carried me on a gut-wrenching journey through martyrdom and into the most hidden recesses of the pit which this hideous monster called home; it showed me Erik banging his poor, ugly head against the dreary walls of the hell where he took refuge from those whom he would otherwise frighten. I, listening, gulping for breath, besieged and pathetically broken by the Titanic cords which turned suffering divine: rising from the pit they suddenly rallied into a remarkable, menacing swarms, soaring up to heaven circling ever higher Like an Eagle toward the Sun. Listening to that Triumphant Symphony as it as it set the world of fire, I now understood that the work had achieved its apotheosis, and that the Beast soaring on the wings of love had dared to countenance Beauty.

Yet another iconic moment which Kay saw fit to axe from her work is Christine's visit to her father's grave at Perro-Guirec, where Erik plays for Christine unseen in the snowy graveyard at midnight, and after which Raoul comes face to face with Erik for the first time.

Kay weaves a frankly incoherent and disjointed tale that confounds in the original scenes and rushes through the ones that touch on canon.

But by far the most unforgivable omission

She cut out César, the White Horse from The Profeta.

See I was all set, back in part III to praise Kay's foreshadowing, because CLEARLY she put so much focus on Erik's affinity with his horses, having him tell Giovanni that he has no need to train them--they follow him because they want to, etc CLEARLY that was set-up for him carrying César off to transport Christine. RIGHT?

RIGHT?

RIGHT?

RIGHT?

Wrong.

As lovely as Erik's description of Christine's kiss is, by this point its so overshadowed by a cloud of shit, I couldn't really enjoy it.

Nearly finished now. I can't wait for this to be over...

Masterpost

[livebloggingmydescentintomadness]

Wait…

I have just had my eyes opened; I’ve never really looked at Phantom with my shipping goggles on.

Please, PLEASE tell me about your rarepair otp.

(answering this a few days late, sorry!)

(in reference to my tags on this post)

haha, i'm glad to infect another person! xD now, i admit that it's been years since i read susan kay's phantom book, which is the version that does the most exploring of erik and nadir's relationship (nadir being the man referred to as 'the persian' and 'the daroga' in leroux's book), so i'm sure there's a LOT i've forgotten or that i may be misremembering.

but i think it's really interesting, as nadir is literally erik's only real friend, the only person who truly knows him and has known him for actual decades. nadir saw erik at, arguably, his worst in mazandaran, when his entire job was to creatively kill people, but he also saw erik's compassion and humanity in how erik loved nadir's son and helped to ease his passing when he was terminally ill.

then, when nadir's wife has died, he moves from persia to paris just to install himself as erik's conscience, to bitch at him about his bad choices and try to badger him into making better choices... which sounds something like a marriage to me, lmao.

i can't remember whether nadir ever saw erik without his mask - i want to say yes, but i can't recall - but he's certainly the last person alive who knows the most of erik's dark past, who's seen the worst of him, and he still cares. maybe erik is the only real friend he has too, the only person left who understands him after he lost his family.

don't get me wrong, i like erik and christine and the sweeping gothic romance of it, but i also like the idea of, in the aftermath of christine leaving, erik picking up the pieces with nadir's help and realizing that this person has been there all along, this person who sees him and genuinely cares for him. and maybe it's not grand opera arias or any other dramatic gestures, but it's real and it's steady and it's good. they're old and exhausted and deeply damaged by life, but they have each other, and personally, i think that's just as romantic.

it also doesn't hurt that i like to headcanon nadir as oded fehr (ardeth bay from the mummy). 😉

[darklinaforever]

Sing me forgotten by jessica s. olson is a rewrite of a phantom of the opera that I hesitate to read, even if the context seems interesting, simply because I know that the ending is also a tragedy and that the characters do not end up together... (Damn, memory wiping is something that annoys me) So, I don't know about you, but when we rewrite something, is it a bit so that the ending is also different ? No ? Because just transposing this into fantasy mode and swapping the sexes isn't enough for me. But the book still looks really good, so I'll read it.

I'm going to end up rewriting The Phantom of the Opera myself with a happy ending... (Because no rewrites seem to do it ?) Between my own story ideas, rewrites of classic tales / novels, and fanfictions... My list of things to write is only growing lie down...

After a rewrite that I recommend is Phantom by Susan Kay which is good, and even if Christine ends up with Raoul and Erik die, it is clear that she loved Erik more and even had a child with (only) him, in addition to have recover his cat back, which Raoul fully accepted. (Even if he was not at all a fan of the cat with whom the hatred seemed mutual) But in any case, Phantom by Susan Kay is another variation on Erikstine's tragic love story.

[cdaae]

Hi, I know this is long but I wanted to talk about this, cause I don't think I can on my personal account. Reading everything about the POTO author is very disappointing to me. I read the first book and looked forward to the sequel. I did have some qualms about the two characters of color and I was concerned in how one of them perpetuates the "Woc is only there as support for their white friend" trope, but I was hoping this would get improved with the sequel. As I've been going through the sequel though, more of my concerns are being validated. There's frequent use of slurs regarding mixed-race people and said character is still only used as character development for Christine. Also, despite the author claiming they created Christine to be relatable to all people, its very hard to imagine her as anything but white/white passing when confirmed characters of color in the series are constantly degraded and dismissed for being Brown and Black. Now reading all the history regarding the author, I'm not surprised the characters of color are being treated this way. As a Black phan that loves Phantom immensely, it's sometimes hard being in this space and even being an e/c shipper when a lot of the aesthetics in this franchise are focused on whiteness and associating it with purity and good. While this series alone has its issue, I do think its important to note that a lot of Phantom work has issues regarding race whether its stereotyping (Kay) or erasure (ALW) so its a little unfair to single out this one creator. However, maybe this could be a good opportunity in analyzing the racial issues regarding this franchise as a whole! I'm genuinely thinking of writing my own version of POTO with e/c being poc because it's a perspective not explored yet

Thanks for listening! Love your account!

I don't necessarily feel it's unfair but she's also not being singled out for her racism in a phantom work but rather the fact that she's not only racist but a serious bully and is continuing both of these behaviors using her work and her platform. Race is definitely a phandom issue, but it's not the only issue with this particular author. Not to take away from anything you said though- you're absolutely valid in your assessment of the phandom.

The fascination with Kay has always bothered me- I could never get into it because of the problematic elements, but it's still something you have to be aware of when navigating the phandom because it's so popular. I actually think it's quite funny because this author dislikes Susan Kay but they're extremely similar- Older women clearly horny for the phantom and clearly writing with ALW in mind claiming to be adding on to Leroux but just making a mediocre book that doesn't fit in his canon at all with some added racism for good measure.

And yeah, her Christine sounds lifted out of ALW, and honestly, so does the phantom, since she still gave him a white mask. She also seemed to argue that Christine should be a brunette in the show because it looks better on women of color over blonde and that didn't sit right with me. Women of color with dark hair keep the "Christine look" according to her.

I'm disappointed but not surprised that the second book has the same issues. It's such an unnecessary thing to add to a phantom story. Meanwhile she had a video a while back essentially bragging about adding pocs and queer characters to her story like she's making strides for representation.

I do hope you write your poc phantom. Our phandom does need more representation, but it needs to come from the right place. You might also enjoy Music of the Night by Angela Ford. I haven't read it(yet), but I was told that Christine is black and the cover art supports this. But I don't think I've seen one where Erik and Christine both are poc.

Thank you for voicing your thoughts and please let me know if you write that story <3

[pianomanblaine]

13 books

Thanks for tagging me @wheel-of-fish !

Answer these 13 questions, tag 13 people and, if desired, add a shelfie!

1) The last book I read:

I just finished rereading Phantom by Susan Kay. I got a physical copy from my brother at Christmas.

2) A book I recommend:

Circe by Madeline Miller. Everyone talks about The Song of Achilles, which is also a fantastic book, but if I had to choose between the two, I think I love Circe just that little bit more.

3) A book that I couldn’t put down:

The Shadow of the Wind by Carlos Ruiz Zafon. I love historical fiction, especially if there's a bit of mystery involved.

4) A book I’ve read twice (or more):

I read books more than once quite often, so I'll just pick one: Jane Eyre.

5) A book on my TBR:

I'm about to start Alcestis by Katharine Beutner.

6) A book I’ve put down:

When I start a book, I almost always read it until the end. 50 Shades of Gray was an exception. In my defense, I only started reading it to see just how bad it was.

7) A book on my wish list:

The Starless Sea by Erin Morgenstern. It's one of my favourites, but I don't own a copy yet.

8) A favorite book from childhood:

I remember a book I loved reading as a kid, which was called Een Beetje Indiaan by Anton van der Kolk.

9) A book you would give to a friend:

Once Upon a River by Diane Setterfield. I strongly recommend it, if you haven't read it already.

[There is no No. 10 I guess?]

11) A nonfiction book you own:

I don't read a lot of nonfiction, but I still have some of my textbooks from college and high school if that counts?

12) What are you currently reading:

Nothing, since I've only just finished Phantom.

13) What are you planning on reading next?

I'll start Alcestis before I go to bed tonight.

And a shelfie!

I'm tagging @from-aldebaran @shinyfire-0 @keepcalmandbrewtea @flora-gray @nerdywriter36 @ashadeintheshade and anyone else who wants to!

[estrellaphantom]

I'm in Phantom of the Opera mode!

I had seen a lot in the month of May the 2004 movie and the 1990 movie (beautiful)

While I'm working I'm listening to Gaston Lerux's audio book and I'm reading Phantom by Susan Kay. IT'S PRECIOUS, IT'S WHAT HAS MADE ME CRY LATELY.

I've even thought about writing and making an Oc of this but I still don't know whether to do it sjdjsj.

Anyway, I know of my absence but I can't help it I've lost the desire or rather the motivation to draw something. But this book has snapped me out of Mayo's creative block.

They are some sketches about the first 3 chapters of Phantom.

I drew how I think she is Erik's mother, To the beautiful Mademoiselle Perrault and ps obvi del Erik veda.

Also, the scene of her birthday marked me, poor thing, wey, that chapter did hurt me.

Right away it's about the chapter where he enters the gypsy fair, Javart's piche wey or whatever his name is, it disgusted me so much that I didn't even want to draw him, instead I drew Erik, I don't know if it counts as a spoiler but equiosmoschavos

and part three, God I liked that a lot too, I don't know why but as soon as I read about Giovanni I imagined him as Giepetto ajsjsjs.

And there I also drew his crazy girl, Luciana. The net in this chapter if I felt ugly for Erik and for Giovanni. I don't know whether to say more because I don't want them to start telling me that spoilers or something like that.

But anyway, I want to draw the Persian, but I fell in love with him and I feel like I'm forcing myself to draw and it doesn't come out ajsjsj (help)

but I made a picture of the Ghost all qlero.

If I get to draw something else, I'll show it to you.

come out bye~⭐️

[emiliosandozsequence]

robyn is starting reading the phantom of the opera tonight you guys!! i'm excited for her to read it <3

[period-dramallama]

Review: Legacy by Susan Kay, Prologue-2.1

So Legacy is a big book so rather than keep y’all waiting while I drown in notes, I’m going to read a third of the book, review it, then read the next third and review that, and so on.

Let’s go girls.

If I were to theorise, I would say that I think Susan Kay is a perfectionist. She has written 2 novels, both award winning, and the second one was 32 years ago. I don’t think it’s the case that she had only one novel in her and never had ideas again. I imagine that she’s had ideas since Phantom but they’re not brilliant enough in her eyes to be worthy of penning. I could be completely wrong. There is something alluringly mysterious about dropping 2 award winning books in 6 years and then vanishing from the public eye. Not even twitter. Well done, Ms Kay. Well done. What a legend.

I wonder if she knew she would only write one Tudor novel, because there’s so many ideas squashed in here. It’s like a compilation of Every Idea About The Tudor Period I Have Ever Had. Lots of ideas here that would make for interesting novellas or novelettes, like Henry’s relationship with Elizabeth.

There’s an exchange when Elizabeth says Mary had freedom of conscience under Edward and Mary is like “yeah because I’m right and I would have died for it” SOMEBODY was watching Elizabeth R episode 1 lmao.

Characterisation

The relationship between Henry and Elizabeth is slightly mesmerising. He hates and fears her, she’s defiant, but he also wishes she were his son- that his son and heir had her personality. No evidence that Henry was ever disappointed with Edward- why would he be? He’s an impressive kid!

John Dudley’s lack of sentiment regarding his father’s fate and his own career makes an interesting contrast with Robin and Elizabeth who really can’t escape the shadows of their parents. There’s emphasis on the trauma of Katherine Howard’s execution and the necessity of Ashley at her side.

Tom Seymour is well-characterised. He’s a snob. There’s an element of punishment in his harassment of Elizabeth: the desire to essentially ‘take her down a peg’. There’s jealousy and anger fuelling his actions: anger at Elizabeth for rejecting him and thereby revealing him as an old has-been, not as his ego image. He’s jealous of her charming younger people, but he’s also hypocritical in his jealousy. He claims women are possessive, but he’s angry at her flirting with others. Elizabeth beats him with a pillow and tries to kick him- an excuse for a release of the repressed anger and helplessness she feels- ‘socially unacceptable emotions’ as well as resentment of him. Her pent up rage is better captured than in BE. The narrative keeps calling him her lover (SHUT UP ABOUT THE LORD ADMIRAL! SHUT UP ABOUT THE LORD ADMIRAL!) but it’s obvious there’s no love for her at all. He blames her for tempting him, slaps her, calls her a bitch: “the girl’s a natural guttersnipe at heart.” He describes his past girlfriends as “an enchanting but decidedly inferior breed.” He can’t handle how Elizabeth makes him feel emasculated.

I like Ned Seymour’s haunting scene with Elizabeth even if ‘remember me when you are queen” is a bit unrealistic. More useful to Elizabeth’s arc than whatever their relationship was in BE, which was similar, but not as punchy. Here we get a clear lesson that she can take from Eddie S. Cecil’s bond with Elizabeth is also pretty neat.

Justice for Amy! They’re such dicks to her. At least Kay acknowledges Elizabeth’s bitchier side, and she and Robert are still interesting characters, so I wouldn’t say it detracts from the overall story. We get a sense of Elizabeth’s magnetism. I like her compulsive need to lie to Mary out of mental one up-manship.

A little bit too much credit to Simon Renard as Mary’s evil genius. Like he’s the one that suggests bringing back burning…girl, you KNOW as queen you can change the law back. I do like the very very dark comedy of “murdering  Elizabeth wouldn’t be murder, it would be exorcism.”

Tone

Elizabeth vomiting on Mary’s litter out of SPITE. I live for this kind of thing. A good depiction of Elizabeth’s anguish upon entering the Tower. Proof that you don’t need first person POV to get close to the characters if you can write emotion well. (And showing her fear rather than saying “I was terrified” is much more effective.)

Endlessly cynical Elizabeth + children= fun combination. She calls a child ‘a nasty little turd’ which made me laugh even though I shouldn’t. Very dark comedy with the boy (He’s 5!) asked what’s in the flowers (meaning smuggled letters) and he answers “mostly bluebells”. A good moment to establish how paranoid the world is at this point. A literal toddler is being interrogated. It’s nice when the narrative takes a segue into other characters’ perspectives. I like Bridges too, and how Elizabeth’s life is literally saved by his own personal priorities, even though he himself is just a regular official. It gives a sense of mutability and insecurity without spelling it out.

Pacing

The opening can be a little finger-tapping. At times it feels both rushed and slow. Nevertheless we get set up for the court politics. The pacing improves over the course of the first part. She has a challenge on her hands: cover Elizabeth’s whole story in 650 pages. I think she can pull it off, just. Interested to see what she chooses to focus on in the next parts.  

History

C’mon Susan. Susie baby. Charles V is Mary’s COUSIN not her UNCLE. Anne portrayed as a malign influence on Henry, which is unfair IMHO, but I think it works with the theme of haunting.

Anne of Cleves is ugly, Katherine Howard is wanton, Edward is delicate, Catherine Parr is a nurse, Anne Stanhope is evil incarnate. Also Edward is messed-up as evidenced by his chronicle. Also there’s torches on the walls? I’m not sure that’s an effective way to light a hall.

John Dudley proposed to divorce his wife and marry Elizabeth (page 132) “together we will take the throne” WHAT is happening I am SO confused. Is this made up??? Is it an old myth?? It feels like a big deal? And it’s mention off-hand by Susan? I’m getting soo much whiplash. You can’t drop that bombshell on me and then run away into the sunset Susan! Explain yourself!

“Who in this largely Protestant land would support a catholic claimant?” BECAUSE THEY AREN’T PROTESTANT YET THAT WAS WHY THEY RIOTED OVER THE PRAYER BOOK.

There is a sweet friendship between Elizabeth and her servant Isabelle Markham. We have at least moved away from Elizabeth the hater of other girls.

Good use of historical events woven into narrative, and some good points made. Anne fears divorce not death, her marriage is annulled so she can’t even be guilty of adultery. Seymour brothers quarrelling in front of Elizabeth: good detail. The kitchen crashing by the Countess of Lennox is deftly weaved into the story: not just to annoy Elizabeth but deliberately to agitate her until she makes a mistake. A weapon of psychological warfare. I also like how Robert’s relationship with Elizabeth is woven into the greater story: Dudley fails BECAUSE he sent Robert to capture Mary and Robert is too young and inexperienced to pull it off. But he has to send Robert BECAUSE he can’t send Robert to capture Elizabeth instead. And he can’t send Robert to capture Elizabeth BECAUSE he knows Robert won’t stand for harming her.

Again Elizabeth hates Cranmer but Remnarc the Coward was quite a clever dig and a nice way to weave in Robert being in the Tower and their burgeoning relationship.

Prose

“That look of hers would see through lead”

Henry is “afraid of a shadow in the sun” I saw what you did there, Susan. “Eyes that see inside your head” or you could say…make a window into your soul…

“The dreadful trusting smile of a little girl” “and when you were paid to take care of a child, the worst thing you could do was to give your heart- you never got it back intact.” Susan Kay was a teacher IIRC, I wonder if that line has significance to her career. Anne Stanhope “like a crocodile sinking beneath the surface of a lake”. The word ‘crybaby’ felt out of place, but the prose is generally competent, with moments of flair. There’s very little scene- setting, but honestly given how much story we have to get through, I get it.

Time to read the second third of the book!

[nebylitsa]

5 and 22 for the book ask!

5: What's a scene you read this year that sticks with you? the part in fun home by alison bechdel where she's in the car with her father and they have an awkward, stilted conversation about them both being queer

22: What are some books you discovered this year that you added to your tbr? my want to read list on goodreads is extremely long but some books i got especially curious about this year were no modernism without lesbians by diana souhami, phantom by susan kay, and a new biography of etty hillesum by judith koelemeijer which unfortunately is still only available in dutch (this spring i genuinely started learning dutch just to read this book but i didnt get very far u_u)

[marybeatriceofmodena]

❤️ Christine Daaé

Honestly I would have added more but I had to stop at some point lmao

Rebecca Caine: She has a voice that can actually rival Carlotta's, and her Christine was every inch the romanesque, passionate heroine and you could totally see why the Phantom and Raoul were both in love with her. And she is PISSED in the Final Lair, and it's glorious.

Patti Cohenour: AN ACTUAL ANGEL. Graceful, kind, compassionate, airy, without ever coming off as a deer in the headlights, and with a golden voice to boot and a Think of Me cadenza of her own.

Julie Hanson: Look, I don't like Susan Kay's take on Christine for a variety of reasons. Julie Hanson took one look, removed everything about Kay!Christine that was annoying, gave her a nice little spine of her own while keeping the childlike quality which all culminates in a haunting finale where you can tell she'll be traumatized for life, and it takes the tragedy to another level.

Rachel Barrell: She felt very Victorian to me? Could be the looks since she has a very "Victorian" face, if that makes any sense. And if anything, I know people will disagree with me but I remember my first impression of Christine reading the Leroux novel was pretty much like how she portrayed her in the musical - yeah, Leroux!Christine was scared shitless, both at the situation and what she could end up doing or being forced to do, but she also had a backbone of steel, she had anger about the whole situation and wasn't afraid to show it, and she didn't take any shit from anyone. Rachel embodied that perfectly.

Kristi Holden: A dreamy but nervous Christine, who's still able to overcome her fear of the Phantom to give him the scrap of love he needed so badly in order for the good to overcome the bad, and who was somehow even better in the World Tour than in Las Vegas (and she was already quite good there).

Anna O'Byrne: Her voice can be a little all over the place, but she basically took the tormented side of Christine and upped it to eleven. And she's absolutely gorgeous to boot.

Samantha Hill: Not the strongest vocal-wise, but she basically thought every single gesture up to the last without ever over-acting, all the while being an adorable little ball of charm.

Elizabeth Welch: If I had to sum up her Christine, all the odds are against her, and she decides to be even kinder as a result. I wouldn't say her Christine is in love with the Phantom (granted, I haven't seen her with Jeremy Stolle yet and Hugh Panaro doesn't really lend to a more romantic take on the story), but it makes her kindness for Panaro's little asshole of a Phantom (affectionate) all the more poignant.

Valerie Link: Her Christine is an adorable puppy person who likes everyone and can be genuinely shocked and hurt when people are, say, mean to her (which makes Nicky Wuchinger pushing around people who are rude to her all the more satisfying, because, really, HOW DARE YOU)

Lauri Brons: Imagine if Anne Shirley was in Phantom of the Opera. That's it, that's Lauri Brons's Christine.

Lisa-Anne Wood: Another nervous Christine, who gets frightened pretty easily, is the shy side, but push her around, and she will let you know how much she DOES NOT LIKE IT, which gives for a nice little character arc.

Mary Michael Patterson: Subdued but with lovely facial expressions, she plays a Christine that seems humble, calm and shy at first but who has a backbone of steel if you poke her too much.

Tamara Kotova: Gorgeous voice, lovely facial expressions - she's basically the Russian Rebecca Caine in some regards, because you could totally see why the Phantom and Raoul would be as besotted as they are with her.

Emmi Christensson: She improved SO MUCH from the West End to Stockholm, intelligent and mature but with a nice arc of her own.

Meghan Picerno: I personally liked her better on Broadway than in the World Tour, where I was kind of meh about her, but her take-no-shit Christine worked pretty well with Ben Crawford's crazy ball Phantom (who I'll admit can be a bit of an acquired taste) and John Riddle's serious but loving Raoul. Plus, opera voice!

Sybille Glosted: I made no secret of how great the Copenhagen revival cast was, and she was no exception. Beautiful voice, detailed, thought-out performance that just tells a narrative with gestures, responded to her fellow actors instead of just going through the motions.

Holly-Anne Hull: So many interesting details I've never seen with Christine before, plus, she's adorable.

Kanisha Marie Feliciano: Beautiful, beautiful voice, and such lovely facial expressions that give her a bit of a cinematic quality - I could easily see her transfer well from stage to screen.

Send me ❤️ and a role in a musical and I’ll give you my favorite performers in the role.

[idridian]

listen when i was approximately fifteen (scratch that "approximately", i can actually carbon date this because i found a bookmark with a date written on it in the book lmao. thanks, past me!) i got really into phantom of the opera and, like any impressionable teen with a musical obsession, bought and read susan kay's bestseller (i assume) novel "phantom." a book which contains many, many normal things, such as

"his voice is a sin. a mortal sin. no woman who hears it will ever die in a state of grace"

the Scene with javert. you know the one. the one when he catches erik about to run away

literally what do you think is happening in persia, mrs kay

something is very wrong with the way this book describes sexual desire but i honestly don't even fuckin know

opium addiction my beloved

sorry the erik/christine in this is so problematic and i love it SO much

raoul my beloved i'm so sorry this happened to you but HSDGJFSHGH

and that's just the english version. because here's by far the FUNNIEST thing about susan kay's "phantom":

inexplicably, the german translation has been edited in certain sections. like, entire paragraphs or pages worth of text are just. gone. which let me tell you, reading it in german first was a very strange experience because the editing had left the text slightly incoherent in places. like, you'd read a sentence and there was something mentioned off-handedly that just didn't quite make sense. a phrasing that sounded odd. and it was only when i bought the english version that i realised there were parts missing from the gd book

it's weird, too. like... i really have no idea why they did any of that - the unhinged sexual energy hasn't been toned down, none of the brushes with rape or the drugs or what have you. the orientalism is still there, problematic as ever (though nadir's section was hit the hardest by the edits iirc. don't quote me on that tho, i haven't read it in a while). it's like they just went at the book with scissors and trimmed wherever, from what i can tell

anyway, this book shaped my writing style back when i was just getting started and i don't even know whether to be mad or grateful because what in the fuck was any of that