If a masked man appears in your dressing room mirror, he’s probably your dead father so you should follow him into his lair.
Buy here (x)
I needed this in my life ok.
Little Meg (Future Baroness de Barbazac) - Leroux version.
Perfect Leroux!Meg is perfect! Friendly reminder that Meg Giry probably had Romani, or African, or Middle Eastern heritage. But she wasn’t white.
What? Are you *serious*? I LOVE Erik, he’s one of my favourite characters from anything, let alone PotO. Who on *earth* said that liking a character means that you have to condone their actions? That’s just flat-out ridiculous. Just because I don’t condone his actions (nor should anyone) doesn’t mean I dislike him as a character. I would even argue that people who are willing to acknowledge and examine his flaws like him *more* than those who have to pretend that he’s something he isn’t in order to care about him. :/
Wow, that sure is an argument that makes no sense though. You could exchange Erik for anyone in that argument. How do you like Hannibal Lector if you don’t condone his actions? How do you like the Joker if you don’t condone his actions? How do you like any antagonist or villain if you don’t condone their actions?
”A well-constructed tragedy shows individuals better than ourselves, but not so different that we cannot identify with them in the unmerited afflictions which overcome them. We experience sympathetic pity for their suffering, and a kind of terror arising from the thought or recognition that such suffering could befall us”
Exactly. Phantom is a *tragedy*. That is a huge part of its impact, and is one of the main reasons why it has lasted as long as it has. If Erik is given a happy ending, and/or if Erik is woobified and turned into a poor victim of other people’s misdeeds, the story loses a tremendous amount of its power.
Think about it. What if at the end of Oedipus Tyrannus, Apollo had come down in a Deus Ex Machina and made everything okay:
"Oedipus, I know you thought the prophecy was true, but it wasn’t. That wasn’t really your father you killed, it was just a random stranger. This isn’t really your mother, she is just a woman old enough to be. Oh, and you know that plague I sent, that didn’t have anything to do with you; I’ll go ahead and cure it now. You are blameless of any misdeeds, and you and your wife and children can go about your lives in peace."
Do you think that people would have cared enough about *that* play to have preserved it from antiquity? Of course not. We watch tragedies to see the tragic hero’s flaws writ large, to see them suffer for their misdeeds, and to witness them undergo their catharsis. For in experiencing their downfall and bearing witness to their suffering, we ourselves are able to feel their grand emotions without having to be subjected to their punishment ourselves.
If Oedipus had not blinded himself and cast himself into the wilderness, finally acknowledging and taking responsibility for his hubris, and delivering his people from the plague, we wouldn’t have a play. Oedipus would not have completed his character arc, but would have remained the same violent, angry, prideful, selfish bastard that got himself into his mess in the first place.
Similarly, in Phantom, if Erik had “gotten the girl,” so to speak; if he hadn’t finally been able to put another person’s needs above his own, even though it would mean his own death, he would not have made the transformation from monster to man. He would have ended the story a Beast, cutting short his character arc, and not undergoing his catharsis and reaching closure.
Tl;dr trust Leroux — he knew what he was doing.