The Phantom of the Opera: Spectacular Musical Or Archetypal Story?

The Phantom of the Opera: Spectacular Musical or Archetypal Story? By Patricia Drumright Adjunct Assistant Professor Department of English and Philosophy Monroe Community College Rochester, New York [email protected] The Phantom of the Opera: Spectacular Musical or Archetypal Story? Many Americans are familiar with the title The Phantom of the Opera, and most of them probably think of the musical when they hear the phrase—and with good reason. The musical adaptation of The Phantom of the Opera has been making headlines for more than twenty-five years. The collaboration of Andrew Lloyd Webber and Cameron Mackintosh and the opening of their West End musical made the news in the mid-1980s. Popular reception, positive reviews, and critical acclaim quickly followed—as did a Broadway version that warranted its own headlines in 1987-88. The shows have become well respected for their longevity and their profitability and have inspired an elite franchise of musical properties for Lloyd Webber. At their silver anniversaries, both shows are still going strong—as are a number of subsequent derivations. In contrast, there is a centennial that most people missed: The original Fantôme de l’Opéra recently reached its 100th anniversary with little fanfare. The story, by the French writer Gaston Leroux, was first serialized in newspapers in France, Britain, and the United States, and then it was published in novel form in 1911 (Perry 28, 30). One hundred years later, a first-round Internet search revealed that one of the few ways the novel’s milestone anniversary was recognized was with a Signet Classics “Centennial Edition” mass market paperback that was released in October 2010. The stage shows, however, really know how to celebrate in style. As many learned from traditional media outlets and from various websites, in the fall of 2011, the West End show’s 25th anniversary was cause for a sparkling re-creation of the original Patricia Drumright - 1 - The Phantom of the Opera: Spectacular Musical or Archetypal Story? Lloyd Webber show and a two-day engagement at the Royal Albert Hall. In addition, in America alone, the unique London performance was broadcast in movie theaters, rented through Redbox kiosks, shown on PBS, and available on DVD. Now, in January 2013, American theatergoers are expecting their own celebration: The Broadway show will reach its 25th anniversary and is having its own commemoration. In between these celebratory spectacles—and after the 100th anniversary of the original novel and the creation of countless adaptations of the story—questions, which have previously been posed by others, arise again: Why is The Phantom of the Opera so immensely popular? Why have so many adaptations of the story been created, and which “phantom” is popular: the novel, the earlier cinematic depictions, the stage musicals, or the title character himself? The overwhelming popularity of the musical and its 25th anniversary production were the inspirations for this exploratory inquiry, which should still be considered a work in progress. At this point though, it appears that many audience members identify with the title character and share his loneliness, desperation, and heartache. Many more enjoy the sheer theatricality of the Lloyd Webber stage shows. Others, however, prefer the 2004 film version of the musical, while others still favor an earlier film with Lon Chaney or Claude Rains, and a few even value the original novel with its blend of mystery, romance, and horror. But is there more to the Phantom’s continued popularity than the enjoyment of something entertaining—some shocks, some thrills, some tears? Is the Phantom so popular because the Lloyd Webber show is so spectacular, or is the Phantom still popular because there is something in the story itself that engenders that continued popularity? Patricia Drumright - 2 - The Phantom of the Opera: Spectacular Musical or Archetypal Story? These are the primary questions that were initially answered in a presentation at the 2012 NEPCA conference. This paper intends to further address these questions and offer some more detailed, but still preliminary, explanations. Although these inquiries are still ongoing, this paper offers several assertions. First, the story was popular in the decades before Lloyd Webber opened his musical; second, the Lloyd Webber stage version is indeed a phenomenally successful show and is largely responsible for our awareness of the story today; and, finally, the story itself has fundamental qualities that would have warranted its continued popularity without Lloyd Webber’s participation in its reincarnations. Specifically, this paper puts forth the idea that the story of Erik, the Phantom of the Opera, in at least its original telling and in several of its more available and more familiar guises, has enjoyed repeated popularity because the story features archetypal characters who follow archetypal plots. In addition, the archetypal characters are more significant than is immediately apparent. Obvious archetypes are at work in the story, yet more important ones inform our appreciation of the tale. The Original Novel For those who haven’t read Gaston Leroux’s novel Le Fantôme de l’Opéra or seen the classic Lon Chaney Phantom, the Lloyd Webber stage version, or the 2004 film, be assured that Leroux told quite a tale—one that contrasts ugliness with elegance, genius with madness, and ruthlessness with compassion. Although subsequent adaptations all differ, to one degree or another, from the original narrative, the basic plot is as follows: Set in the Paris Opera House in the late 1800s, the story revolves around three main figures. Erik, the title character, is often described as a “disfigured musical genius” Patricia Drumright - 3 - The Phantom of the Opera: Spectacular Musical or Archetypal Story? who makes his home in the dank, dark cellars under the glamorous opera house. His face, deformed since birth (or scarred later in life, depending on the version of the story), makes him an outcast who hides behind a mask whenever he ventures outside his lair, but his talent is magnificent, and he eventually comes to secretly tutor Christine Daae, a young member of the opera company. Christine, the protagonist of the story, had been told years earlier by her dying father that he would send her the Angel of Music, so when she begins to hear Erik’s singing and then receive his coaching, she assumes he is the angel sent from Heaven. Under his tutelage as “her angel” and through his machinations as the Phantom or Opera Ghost (as he is known to others in the company), Christine gains the lead role in a special performance, and she sings brilliantly. Her success is noticed by everyone, including Raoul, the handsome young Vicomte de Chagny, who had been a childhood friend of hers. Now that they are adults, Raoul, the third and least of the main characters, takes a romantic interest in Christine, who is equally attracted to him. The arrival of Raoul threatens Erik’s claim on Christine, and the Phantom’s jealousy and anger drive him to a “descent into madness” (as his increasingly dangerous behavior is often described). His criminal acts include threats, assaults, kidnapping, and murder in his desperate attempts to win Christine’s love. One noteworthy thing about this fantastic story is that Leroux’s writing style reads like a non-fiction account of actual events. Furthering this sense of verisimilitude, Leroux actually names himself as the narrator of Le Fantôme de l’Opéra (xxiii), uses the first person pronoun (I) in quite a few expository passages, and repeatedly asserts that Erik’s story is true. Of course, it is not. The story that was first serialized in 1909-1910 Patricia Drumright - 4 - The Phantom of the Opera: Spectacular Musical or Archetypal Story? was the product of Leroux’s writing skills, innate creativity, and love of the theater, for he was an aficionado of the opera who knew the stories and the trappings of the Paris Opera and how to immortalize them in his work of fiction (Perry 22, 24). Therefore, the realistic journalistic tone and detailed (but fictional) accounts are understandable since Leroux had been a successful newspaperman before beginning to write mysteries and horror. Originally a lawyer, the eventual-novelist first had a considerable career as a court reporter, theater critic, and foreign correspondent before pursuing fiction writing full time. As a skilled mystery writer, Leroux’s talents have been compared to those of Arthur Conan Doyle and Edgar Allan Poe (Perry 22, 24, 26). Consequently, Gaston Leroux’s talent for bringing to life the fictional story of a fantastic character appears to be one reason why audiences are so accepting of this improbable yet extraordinary tale. The Story’s Early Popularity: The First Wave of Adaptations Leroux’s fictional story was originally popular enough to be serialized abroad, translated into English, and published in book form. Within several years, the story attracted the attention of European filmmakers, and one of the first adaptations of Erik’s story was made. Although this particular film no longer exists, there is evidence that it was made around 1916, which is within only five or six years of the original story’s publication (“Adaptations”). The most familiar early cinematic version appeared less than ten years later, which is about fifteen years after the story’s novelization. In 1924-25, a silent film adaption was made that remained quite faithful to the original narrative. The horror film, which featured Lon Chaney as the title character, was an expensive project at Universal Patricia Drumright - 5 - The Phantom of the Opera: Spectacular Musical or Archetypal Story? Studios. It had a large budget to cover an elaborate production that included a replica of the Paris Opera House (Laemmle).

Load more