Sun Aug 04, 2013 8:18 am by PhantomoftheOperafan80
[color=red]Here's a thread in which to discuss Frederick Forsythe's "sequel" to the ALW POTO musial, The Phantom of Manhattan.
Although I did enjoy the way that the book was written, I am not a phan of the overall tone of the work. It was written as a series of diary entries, newspaper excerpts, etc. It is a much darker story than Susan Kay's Phantom.
I strongly dislike how, in the introduction, Forsythe explains how Gaston Leroux wrote his book and said the events were all true. Forsythe explains that it is dangerous to claim this, because it can decrease credulity. However, Forsythe claims that his own book is all true, and represents the facts that Leroux left out in his novel. Forsythe even corrects Leroux, saying things such as:
-The Persian was a minor character, whose accounts are false and lead the reader to believe Erik to be a monster, rather than a pitiable human soul. Instead, he believes that Mme Giry was more than a box attendant, but a ballet mistress who played a vital part in the story.
-That the Phantom had no name, and, even if he did, that he never gave it out. Even so, Forsythe, calls the Phantom Erik (and even uses the last name 'Mulheim', though he does not explain how he discovered this)!
-That Erik had a different history from what the conclusion of Leroux's novel explained. Forsythe believes that Erik was always in a circus, until Mme Giry rescued him. This of course refutes the Persian's narrative once again! Naturally, this also ruins the idea of Erik being an assassin in Persia, and makes one wonder about the origin of the Punjab Lasso. It also destroys the part in Mme Giry's tale of the musical where she says "they boasted that he had once built for the Shah of Persia... a maze of mirrors!" How could Erik have, if he was in a cage in a circus from early childhood?
-Other errors, mainly in the time period. One thing that I do agree with Forsythe upon is that, though Leroux hints at the novel taking place in 1881, he never comes forward and says so. He writes of the chandelier conveniently falling on the woman organized to take Mme Giry's place and says that the chandelier was 200,000 kilograms--this would have pulled the entire ceiling down (the real chandelier weighs, and always has, 7 tons). Another error is the idea of the lights going out and turning back on within seconds. In 1881, the lights would use gas globes, and creating darkness and reinstating light so fast would be impossible to do so quickly, unless the story did occur later in the 1800s.
Using Forsythe's logic, stating a fictional work is true if it is not is foolish. However, Forsythe claims that, while Leroux's work was based in truth, he was confused and erred in his writing. This does not sound like the work of the journalist which Leroux says he was! Even worse is Forsythe trying to rip apart Leroux's original novel! Leroux created the story! Without his novel, there would be no POTO! It enraged me to read Forsyth claim Leroux was a bad writer, and exalt himself and his work!
True, Leroux's novel was confusing, but it was still better than Forsyth's, which is a sequel to the ALW musical more than the original novel. Here are some spoilers from the novel.
Lloyd Webber and Forsyth are friends, and Webber plans on making this book into a musical, rather than his older project Master and Margarita. It was confirmed in July that ALW had finished the score but, his cat had stepped on his keyboard and erased it all! However, in a recent video blog, ALW claimed that he is through with the new score and it is being read over by his companions who are working with him to produce this new musical...which will most likely be a dismal failure...
[color:877b=#ff0000:877b]Opinions?
Although I did enjoy the way that the book was written, I am not a phan of the overall tone of the work. It was written as a series of diary entries, newspaper excerpts, etc. It is a much darker story than Susan Kay's Phantom.
I strongly dislike how, in the introduction, Forsythe explains how Gaston Leroux wrote his book and said the events were all true. Forsythe explains that it is dangerous to claim this, because it can decrease credulity. However, Forsythe claims that his own book is all true, and represents the facts that Leroux left out in his novel. Forsythe even corrects Leroux, saying things such as:
-The Persian was a minor character, whose accounts are false and lead the reader to believe Erik to be a monster, rather than a pitiable human soul. Instead, he believes that Mme Giry was more than a box attendant, but a ballet mistress who played a vital part in the story.
-That the Phantom had no name, and, even if he did, that he never gave it out. Even so, Forsythe, calls the Phantom Erik (and even uses the last name 'Mulheim', though he does not explain how he discovered this)!
-That Erik had a different history from what the conclusion of Leroux's novel explained. Forsythe believes that Erik was always in a circus, until Mme Giry rescued him. This of course refutes the Persian's narrative once again! Naturally, this also ruins the idea of Erik being an assassin in Persia, and makes one wonder about the origin of the Punjab Lasso. It also destroys the part in Mme Giry's tale of the musical where she says "they boasted that he had once built for the Shah of Persia... a maze of mirrors!" How could Erik have, if he was in a cage in a circus from early childhood?
-Other errors, mainly in the time period. One thing that I do agree with Forsythe upon is that, though Leroux hints at the novel taking place in 1881, he never comes forward and says so. He writes of the chandelier conveniently falling on the woman organized to take Mme Giry's place and says that the chandelier was 200,000 kilograms--this would have pulled the entire ceiling down (the real chandelier weighs, and always has, 7 tons). Another error is the idea of the lights going out and turning back on within seconds. In 1881, the lights would use gas globes, and creating darkness and reinstating light so fast would be impossible to do so quickly, unless the story did occur later in the 1800s.
Using Forsythe's logic, stating a fictional work is true if it is not is foolish. However, Forsythe claims that, while Leroux's work was based in truth, he was confused and erred in his writing. This does not sound like the work of the journalist which Leroux says he was! Even worse is Forsythe trying to rip apart Leroux's original novel! Leroux created the story! Without his novel, there would be no POTO! It enraged me to read Forsyth claim Leroux was a bad writer, and exalt himself and his work!
True, Leroux's novel was confusing, but it was still better than Forsyth's, which is a sequel to the ALW musical more than the original novel. Here are some spoilers from the novel.
- Spoiler:
- -It is explained that Chritine and Raoul have married, and remained in Paris, with Christine becoming a great singer and Raoul remaining an wealthy count. Erik, after escaping from the Opera House, has ran away to New York (Manhattan) with the help of Mme Giry. Once there, he employs himself as a clown at Coney Island freak shows, and, somehow, becomes the wealthiest man in the city! A tycoon! He assists in the creation of the Hammerstein Opera House, and manages to persuade Christine to come to NY to sing. She does, along with her son and husband. Once there, she is sucked in to Erik's insane games. It is discovered that her son, Pierre, is Erik's child, in a note sent to Erik by Mme Giry (apparently Raoul was shot in the groin in a duel and Mme Giry nursed him back to health). After several confusing incidents in which Erik tries to win back Christine (he sends her his music box, traps her in a new maze of mirrors where he talks to her), Erik gives Pierre an choice to make- stay with Raoul, his adopted father, or live with Erik, his true father. In a confused fight in a park at night, Christine is shot and killed, and Pierre decides to leave Raoul to go with Erik, simply because he is his real father! Erik and Pierre live out their lives, basking in their wealth. Pierre has several children, all of which become prominent characters in history. The novel mentions important historical figures, too-- important boxers, Teddy Roosevelt, the Hammersteins. I am just upset because Christine dies by Erik's own gun-- and Pierre goes with Erik, simply because he is his true father... And luring Christine back to him totally destroys the musical's ending, and Erik's redemption!
Lloyd Webber and Forsyth are friends, and Webber plans on making this book into a musical, rather than his older project Master and Margarita. It was confirmed in July that ALW had finished the score but, his cat had stepped on his keyboard and erased it all! However, in a recent video blog, ALW claimed that he is through with the new score and it is being read over by his companions who are working with him to produce this new musical...which will most likely be a dismal failure...
[color:877b=#ff0000:877b]Opinions?
)
I would kill ALW with my own claws if i had them (lol i am not a cat though )