Nadir: Hi Erik! Nice to meet you. I'm here to offer you a wonderful job as Court Jester at The Court of Mazenderan. It comes with full benefits, a retirement plan, and free lodging. Monday through Friday, nine to five, no weekends, no holidays.
Erik: This sounds a little too good to be true. You aren't hiding anything about this job from me, are you?
Nadir: Of course not!
Erik:
Nadir:
Erik: I guess I accept --
Nadir: Wonderful! And BY THE WAY torture and assassinations are part of the job and you WILL suffer chronic life altering trauma as a result of it. Also I lied about basically everything to do with this job. We do offer dental though
107 notes
·
View notes
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.
42 notes
·
View notes
Listing my fave Eriks (Phantomverse Of Madness).
This is a post i was suppose to make a long time ago, but i only got the time to write it now. I will probably make a part 2 with the "Worse/Less Favorite Eriks".
Remember everyone, this is ✨MY OPINION✨. No adaptation is free from flaws, these 6 Eriks are my favorite but they won't escape from my critics. And if you disagree, feel free to comment about.
6. MazM!Erik (2018)
We start with a polemic one. Mazm!Erik has an unique beauty and amazing hairstyle, his PTSD, the pain, the crying little boy inside of the man, the despair to be loved are still ON POINT. But let's not forget they turned him into a generic anime sociopath who does bad things because yes, and abuses Christine, and keeps Melek aprisioned, and other nonsense things of this mediocre script. However, MazM!Erik is still redeamable at some point and he has good stuffs.
5. Chaney's Erik (1925)
Our first adaptation, the 1925s silent movie! In my opinion, NO ONE played Erik better than Lon Chaney. No one. Like, this man, he's just fantastic. Chaney's hands, movements, the PHANTASTIC make-up, the expressions of pain, madness, anger and tenderness, OH MY GOD THIS IS HEAVEN!!!
ok but let's not forget the ending sucks and the movie tried at best to villainize Erik, this is unforgivable.
4. Merik (1986-2004)
Probably the most known version among us. Andrew Loyd Webber delivered us an amazing, outbreathing and beautiful musical that saved Broadway's story in the 1980s and brought Phantom back to popular tastes since then. Musical Erik has its questions, many people fan of the novel think Webber tried somehow to make him more manipulative and less redeeming. After all, even though people he killed weren't innocent at all, Erik isn't a man who runs out judging people and killing the ones he consider to be unworthy. He killed in EXTREMELY ocasional times in the novel. By the way, the way he constantely manipulates Christine and try to keep control as "the Angel" is just... no.
The original Erik wouldn't do this. He hates lying to Christine, he avoids at his best hurting her. Merik has more childish and toxic behaviour, even though he still ends up redeemed and changed out of his own will and kindness. We cannot deny Merik is one of a kind, one of the most iconic versions of the story. There are many actors who played Merik: Gerard Butler, Ramin Karimloo, Hugh Panaro, Norm Lewis, Ben Lewis, Michael Crawford, i could make a whole blog about my favorites and less favorites Meriks. And i'll probably do it.
3. Cherik (1990)
Look what we have here ❤️
"MY GOD, THIS PLACE REALLY IS HAUNTED" -- this and other funny lines are a gift of Charles Dance's version of Erik. The minisseries isn't very loyal to the novel, however, it's not a bad adaptation at all. This Erik is funny, shy, awkard and more healthy than most of the other versions. I disaprove anything about his version? Yep. First, he wears too colored clothes and is less "dark and goth" like other Eriks. Second, his mother actually loved Erik in this version... I think this was an unnecessary changing. Because the horrible abuse committed by Erik's mother is something EXTREMELY important that can't be changed. Mommy issue is an essence of this character. Should I talk about the "Christine looking like his mom" problem?
Well...
2. Kerik (1990)
Our favorite Susan Kay monologue! Yes, here it is. Kerik (or Serik as some people say) is funny, jerky and tragic, it's almost the same as Leroux's version, as it is supposed to be because "Phantom" isn't exactly an adaptation, but an explanation/expansion of what we've seen originally. Phantom is so good that we phans consider it as canon!
I can't help but say his relationship with Christine in this monologue is weird and a bit disappointing, though. Susan Kay actually started this "Christine looked like Erik's mom" shit, and it's not only weird, it literally confirms Erik's love for Christine was not real, that he only wanted to have a normal relantionship with his mother and Christine was a link to escape his pain. Ok, it makes sense Erik having mommy issues, but i disagree with Kay's vision about his love.
1. Lerik, The Original (1910).
Claps to our king, sis and bros. Gaston Leroux wrote this character with passion. This is my favorite deformity and vision about the character, the lines and the emotions are all just perfect for me. No one ever surprassed the original novel. Erik is a symbol, and a figure to many people. A broken, tortured, emotionally unstable man, who wants to fix everything his way, who doesn't have anyone to trust, who searches for love, pity and compassion, who searches for inclusion and tenderness from the society... but had everything despised and wasted. Erik, originally, is not a villain or a romantic hero. He is an anti-hero. He's the representation of frustrated people and abuse survivors who are able to LOVE, even after everything they had to pass throught. People who are able to recognize and fix their mistakes, people who won't sacrifice their beloved ones happiness for their own problems and fears. Erik is all of us.
Thank you.
235 notes
·
View notes
I've begun Susan Kay's 'Phantom'.
I am not going into this without bias. Quite the contrary, though I'll do my best to give good-faith commentary. I can't make many promises though--I have found the few excerpts I have read to be both compelling and disturbing.
Many of my objections (and there will be hefty objections, I'm sure) will likely be a result of Kay's canon (or "Kaynon", as I like to call it) clashing with my own reading of the source material and my impressions of the characters.
And I'm not going to make any bones about the fact that I'm glad I waited to read this until after I formed my own thoughts on Leroux Canon. I did this intentionally, because I know that Phantom was hugely influential on the Phandom in the 90's and early 00's. I didn't want it to shape my wider understanding of the poto ether without first having my own strong foundations of opinion.
I've noticed that there are certain widely common perceptions and ideas in the Phandom that don't find much basis for in the source material. I wonder how many of these stem from this book, and part of my hope for this practice is to clear up for myself what aspects of Kaynon may have leaked into the general understanding of true Leroux Canon and discover what apocryphae are rooted in Phantom's influence and what is simply naturally occurring fanon.
But I'm curious as to what the general feeling on this novel is in the Phandom at present
24 notes
·
View notes