Review: He was guilty of not a few horrors
Rating: 3 out of 5
Date: 02 12, 2013
I really struggled with this book in a lot of ways. The hero and heroine are both such ninnies that I really couldn't root for either of them. Christine is meant to be angelic, but the way she leads on the phantom seems quite contemptible. She does it to save her life, of course, but it still seems heartless and cruel (which reaction, I suppose, proves that Erik, the phantom, is the most sympathetic character in the story). Raoul, often described as a lad or boy or child, was hard to like also. His mercurial shifts from belief in Christine's innocence to accusing her of every possible betrayal were exhausting to read. And I have a hard time with a hero who, within the same scene, bursts into a "mad laugh" only to follow it by bursting into tears. Not that he's the only one who bursts into laughter or tears at every turn. All the characters did it. I was really hoping someone would just react by nodding occasionally, but alas, every scene involved extremes of some sort.The structure of the book was not something I enjoyed either. The conceit--that the narrator is reconstructing these events from diaries, reports, journals, etc.--made for a very uneven reading experience. Just when I would become caught up in the storyline, there would be another authorial intrusion as the narrator jumped in and mentioned where this particular information came from. Aside from interrupting the flow of the story, it also called into question whatever scene had just taken place. For instance, when Christine and Raoul are on the roof of the opera house having a private conversation, who recorded it for posterity? How, if the narrator is really reconstructing from existing documents, did he know what they said to each other on the roof? The device often made no sense, and every time the narrator interrupted the story, it reminded me that the device often made no sense.What I did like about the book was mostly the second half, when the Persian's narrative takes over and the real action begins. So much of the first part of the story happens off-page, that it was nice to have actual movement as Raoul and the Persian chase Erik. The second half is when the story begins fleshing out--so to speak!--the character of the phantom. We find out who and what he is, and understand how his "horrible, unparalleled and repulsive ugliness put him without the pale of humanity." It's easy to sympathize with the ghost, but it's hard to match the Erik of the story with the romanticized phantom of the stage production (or the egregious Gerard Butler movie version). That Erik wants to be loved for himself makes him human, but most of his actions are those of a monster. It's a heart-breaking contradiction, especially when contrasted with the vapid Christine and Raoul.The poor quality of the translation could be partly to blame for my struggles with this book. I don't think phrases like "the viscount put his head under his hands and wept" or "the old lady's tempestuous chignon" are well-translated, nor do they make for a smooth reading experience. Nevertheless, I'm glad I read this and found out what the original version of this much-reproduced story is.