The Phantom Project Forum

Reading Anne's reviews (coupled with viewing The Phantom Reviewer's hilarious YouTube commentaries on the various Philm versions) have encouraged me to go back over my own Phantom collection.

I've just recently finished re-reading Susan Kay's "Phantom" novel.

My first impression of the book had been that it would've been a brilliant prequel had Kay simply chopped the last two chapters (the "Erik/Christine: Counterpoint" and "Raoul" sections) off completely... but instead she decides to make "Phantom" a retelling, and Leroux's story is rushed through and given a fan-fiction denouement.
Fortunately, I had enjoyed the previous chapters so much, I felt I could forgive Kay for a very weak wrap-up.

Reading it now, seven years later, my opinion of the novel as a whole is much the same... I still feel that this could've been a brilliant novel if only Kay had chopped off the last two chapters... although I don't have quite as high an opinion of the previous chapters as I did when I read it the first time.

The dialogue is over the top (I feel that Kay was aiming for "larger than life" by design, but it doesn't change how melodramatic it is) and Kay does explain virtually every nuance of the characterisation exhaustively (not enough that I felt my intelligence was being insulted, but enough that I realised certain descriptive passages could've been cut completely without effecting my understanding of things in any way whatsoever).

But still, the historical detail is meticulously well researched and it adheres quite closely to Leroux's original outline of Erik's earlier life. The way she puts more dramatic meat on the bones of "The Persian" is wonderful (the Persian court segments are the highlight of the novel for me) and I love the way she doesn't tone down the violence and ruthlessness of The Phantom's character.

But then comes the final two chapters and Kay, previously so disciplined, succumbs to her inner fangirl and the whole exercise goes off the deep end into the realms of fan fiction.

And yet...

There is something odd about the way Kay has gone about this.

Most fanfic which tries to cast the relationship between Erik and Christine in a more romantic light does so by softening the Phantom's character in order to make a match between them seem more credible to the reader.

Kay does the opposite, she tries to make it palatable by portraying Christine as being just as mentally disturbed, in her own way, as The Phantom.

Really, Christine came across as a complete basket case to me most of the time. Even the Christine of Meyer's "The Canary Trainer" wasn't this crazy... the only Christine I can think of who was more off her rocker was Argento's incarnation.

I've got to read Leroux's book again, if only to see if he portrayed the character as being such a loony tune (I'm sure he didn't but I want to see if there's room for that kind of interpretation).

But does anyone else here find that odd? That Kay took this route to enabling a consummated relationship between Erik and Christine?

Also... I must say that I find it odd that Kay doesn't vilify Raoul all that much. Most fan fiction I've read ends up portraying him as a wife-beating, alcaholic retard...

In this one he reminded me more of the typical "fallback guy" from Hollywood rom-coms. You know, the kind that Bill Pullman used to be typecast in, the ones who "just want to see her happy". This was really rammed home to me in the final chapter where Raoul talks of how he is just Christine's custodian, watching over her until she can be reunited with her one true love (Erik, natch) in the afterlife.

Does anyone else find this odd and somewhat atypical of fan fic portrayals of this character?

Because, make no mistake, that's exactly what Kay's book is - extraordinarily well written fan fiction.

The final two chapters drag the rest of the book down for me and stop me from taking it seriously as anything else. Again, if only they had been cut off and Kay had contented herself with letting her book be a prequel...

I have a sneaking suspicion that the main reason so many fans embrace Kay's book and insist it is canon is because it depicts something that they wish had happened with the original story.
(personally I'm one of the minority who thinks that Christine was right in choosing Raoul over Erik - but that's a whole other can of worms that can be debated elsewhere)

It might also be to do with what Anne refers to in her reviews as "the entitlement of the underdog" - the very modern notion that Erik deserves compensation for having such a miserable life up till this point... or the idea that his miserable life somehow excuses his immoral actions (what Alan Dershowitz facetiously refers to as "The Abuse Excuse")

Ben wrote:My first impression of the book had been that it would've been a brilliant prequel had Kay simply chopped the last two chapters (the "Erik/Christine: Counterpoint" and "Raoul" sections) off completely...

That's actually one of the most common things I've heard in reviews of this novel (at least, the ones that aren't full of mad, squealing bliss). I, too, would have preferred a more thorough treatment of the events of Leroux's novel if she insisted on including them, or just a full stop at the end of the prequel part of the novel. However, I would theorize that Kay felt--and I'm not sure I can disagree with her--that readers would feel gypped if they didn't have the opportunity to see her characterization of Erik continue on through the familiar storyline that, for so many of them, was likely what interested them in her book in the first place.

Ben wrote:Most fanfic which tries to cast the relationship between Erik and Christine in a more romantic light does so by softening the Phantom's character in order to make a match between them seem more credible to the reader. Kay does the opposite, she tries to make it palatable by portraying Christine as being just as mentally disturbed, in her own way, as The Phantom.

Hmm... that idea really hadn't occurred to me, actually. I'd thought that Kay's portrayal of Christine was pretty exceptionally fragile--she makes a big deal, as I recall, of how innocent and delicate Christine is in both mind and body, which is part of her attraction for Erik--but it seemed more like she was trying to make sure that Christine was so innocent that none of the blame for the events that were about to occur could really be laid at her feet. Additionally, I thought Kay was playing up Erik's semi-mystical influence over her (much the same way he had an almost mystical influence over Madeleine with his voice). However, I can see how her behavior could be seen as almost dissociative or regressive, what with her sometimes totally flat acceptance of events and then her wild swings into hysteria and fear. The idea that Christine might be just as insane as Erik is one that I haven't seen explored thoroughly yet, but now that you mention it, I think I'd dearly love to see that.

Ben wrote:Also... I must say that I find it odd that Kay doesn't vilify Raoul all that much. Most fan fiction I've read ends up portraying him as a wife-beating, alcaholic retard... In this one he reminded me more of the typical "fallback guy" from Hollywood rom-coms. You know, the kind that Bill Pullman used to be typecast in, the ones who "just want to see her happy". This was really rammed home to me in the final chapter where Raoul talks of how he is just Christine's custodian, watching over her until she can be reunited with her one true love (Erik, natch) in the afterlife.

I think that Kay is exactly making Raoul a "fallback" kind of archetype; while so many fanfic authors prefer to make him a villain, I think that phenomenon is also usually accompanied by the softening of Erik's character that you were talking about earlier. Most fanfic authors that soften Erik and through various excuses or devices make him more of a "hero" figure then usually discover that the story is lacking a villain, and since Raoul is in opposition to the Phantom, he is naturally plunked into that role. Kay here, however, didn't soften Erik too much; she made no bones about the fact that he has an almost psychopathic detachment from the rest of humankind, and that he kills people and doesn't really feel bad about it at all. Since Erik is still the villain--just a very sympathetic villain--she doesn't need to vilify Raoul in order for there to be a conflict.

Additionally, I think that Raoul, to modern sensibilities, neatly fits the role of the "fallback" guy as we see it. The novel was written in a different time period, and (I've talked about this before ad nauseum, I know) I think that what was a desirable, safe hero figure in the early twentieth century seems like a boring, vanilla love interest in the early twenty-first. Since Raoul typifies the kind of "passionless" Victorian hero, it doesn't seem like too much of a stretch that Kay would allow him to keep that status; again, he's no competition for Erik's passionate and alluring mystery for a modern reader, so there's no need to change him.

There's a decently entertaining little rom-com out there called The Baxter that does a pretty good job of making fun of the idea of the "fallback guy".

Ben wrote:I have a sneaking suspicion that the main reason so many fans embrace Kay's book and insist it is canon is because it depicts something that they wish had happened with the original story.

Couldn't agree more. The majority of fanfiction for this story exists for that same reason--people wish the story had ended another way, so they take it upon themselves to "correct" it.

In the end, Kay is, as you noted, very meticulous about her research and about not deviating from Leroux's original text; I think that it would have been as much anathema to her to vilify Raoul as it would have been for her to change Erik's deformity to something more palatable. The novel falls short of perfection, but I'd say that Kay gave it her very best shot in terms of remaining faithful to the source material and still telling her own story.