Phantom of the Opera
Jun. 4th, 2009 10:15 amSo, since Patty's mother was in town last night, we went to see Phantom of the Opera. Despite the fact that I live here and actually like musical theater a good deal, I'd never seen this.
I have, necessarily, an affection for backstage plots; the time period is of particular interest; the costumes were quite pleasing (oh, the inverted box-pleats on the romantic lead's greatcoat!); the voices were excellent; the show is a technical marvel (stage manager, I salute you); the voices were exceptional; the spoof of Baroque opera almost killed me; other than the two very famous melodies everyone knows from the show I thought it was surprisingly complex musically (and made me want to see some real opera again) and all in all the show had much more energy than I generally expect from a Wednesday night performance of anything so long-running. I had a very good time.
But now that I've said that, OMG, WHUT?
Of course, to call it a two-and-a-half-hour musical about rape vastly understates the bizarreo-world factor of this musical, although it's hardly an inaccurate statement.
At first, I was merely staggered by what this show must do to thirteen-year-old girls. I mean, it's just utterly designed to be seductive to anyone who doesn't want to own their sexuality and is drawn to any sort of narrative of submission, ordeal or apprenticeship. I should have, in fact, been all over this shit. At thirteen, I surely would have been. And the gaggle of girls that age we saw in the bathroom surely were.
But honestly, it's much, much weirder than that. Because is it about Christine's latent desire for the Phantom? or just her latent pity? And she doesn't seem that into her boyfriend other than as someone to rescue her from her own desire for the ordeal. It all seemed a bit Snape/Hermione too, of course, and that was amusing to me, at least until the daddy issues showed up. Snape/Hermione never had daddy issues, at least the Snape/Hermione I read.
And wow, that's a lot of play and a lot of sex and a lot of heaving bosoms (I'm more of a total package sort of person, but I could not stop staring at Christine's chest in this. Oh My God) to not even obliquely mention the opera girl/titilation/whore factor (now sure, part of that is because hi, huge Baz Luhrmann fan here, and also historically aware, but really, the ridiculously uptight ballet mistress that I should totally be cast as? The sexually-repressed conduit of the show's sexuality? What the hell is that about?).
What a completely bizarre and vaguely intellectually offensive show. Man, when this first came out, gender and sexuality scholars must have been like "happy birthday to me" -- what a goldmine of crazy!
I have, necessarily, an affection for backstage plots; the time period is of particular interest; the costumes were quite pleasing (oh, the inverted box-pleats on the romantic lead's greatcoat!); the voices were excellent; the show is a technical marvel (stage manager, I salute you); the voices were exceptional; the spoof of Baroque opera almost killed me; other than the two very famous melodies everyone knows from the show I thought it was surprisingly complex musically (and made me want to see some real opera again) and all in all the show had much more energy than I generally expect from a Wednesday night performance of anything so long-running. I had a very good time.
But now that I've said that, OMG, WHUT?
Of course, to call it a two-and-a-half-hour musical about rape vastly understates the bizarreo-world factor of this musical, although it's hardly an inaccurate statement.
At first, I was merely staggered by what this show must do to thirteen-year-old girls. I mean, it's just utterly designed to be seductive to anyone who doesn't want to own their sexuality and is drawn to any sort of narrative of submission, ordeal or apprenticeship. I should have, in fact, been all over this shit. At thirteen, I surely would have been. And the gaggle of girls that age we saw in the bathroom surely were.
But honestly, it's much, much weirder than that. Because is it about Christine's latent desire for the Phantom? or just her latent pity? And she doesn't seem that into her boyfriend other than as someone to rescue her from her own desire for the ordeal. It all seemed a bit Snape/Hermione too, of course, and that was amusing to me, at least until the daddy issues showed up. Snape/Hermione never had daddy issues, at least the Snape/Hermione I read.
And wow, that's a lot of play and a lot of sex and a lot of heaving bosoms (I'm more of a total package sort of person, but I could not stop staring at Christine's chest in this. Oh My God) to not even obliquely mention the opera girl/titilation/whore factor (now sure, part of that is because hi, huge Baz Luhrmann fan here, and also historically aware, but really, the ridiculously uptight ballet mistress that I should totally be cast as? The sexually-repressed conduit of the show's sexuality? What the hell is that about?).
What a completely bizarre and vaguely intellectually offensive show. Man, when this first came out, gender and sexuality scholars must have been like "happy birthday to me" -- what a goldmine of crazy!
no subject
Date: 2009-06-04 02:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-04 02:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-04 02:47 pm (UTC)My only contact with Phantom was singing the main song from it in school - at which I discovered that long practice with a church choir had given me a better vocal range than most...
Heaving bosoms! Now 100% agency-free!
Date: 2009-06-04 02:50 pm (UTC)'I mean, it's just utterly designed to be seductive to anyone who doesn't want to own their sexuality and is drawn to any sort of narrative of submission, ordeal or apprenticeship.'
Say hello to my high school circle of friends. Because seriously, the original cast recording of Phantom was a must-own among that group and all of us were a little warped in that regard. Then again, you know, queers and women between 14-18 in a conservative Midwestern town? There is a reason we hid out in the drama department. I swear, we were a boarding program and a Robert Sean Leonard shy of being Dead Poets Society.
Honestly, though, this may be one of the best quick breakdowns of Phantom I've seen in ages.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-04 02:55 pm (UTC)The show's a technical masterpiece, though. Andrew Lloyd Weber before he became the uninspired Stephen King of musical theatre. I suspect I was doing it wrong as a thirteen-year old girl, as I was always more interested in Meg, Madame Giry, and the opera within the opera than any of the sweeping
raperomance.no subject
Date: 2009-06-04 03:01 pm (UTC)This, exactly! It is a stunning show - and much better on stage than on film - but good lord, it wears on you after awhile. I find Christine to be so very much the Fainting, Screaming, Please-Save-Me, Infantile "Heroine" cliche that I want to smack her, and then smack the idiot that WROTE the part.
But oh, music. And oh, costumes. And oh, set design. And oh, creepy deformed man that lives in the sewers. LOVE IT.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-04 03:01 pm (UTC)I found it incredibly seductive and felt for Christine, in a way I hadn't reading the novel or just hearing the music. I always thought her a little useless and flaky.
Any younger and less confident/feminist? I'd be a puddle. Point of No Return left me wanting a cigarette anyway. It wasn't Lecter mindfucking Starling, but it was damn close.
So yeah, what you said.
Not something I'm encouraging my girls toward seeing. Frankly, I'd rather they watch Resident Evil.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-04 03:09 pm (UTC)There is an ambiguity to the musical that's quite compelling. You can read its text several ways, and while rape/noncon is certainly a prominent interpretation, there is also the idea of the outcast/other/misunderstood genius in the face of prejudice which I found particularly compelling. And the potential of Christine's ambiguous desire is also intriguing, and I worried at that angle a number of times in phanfiction, trying to resolve it without having named it to myself, as you named it here.
I confess I was disappointed when I saw the actual musical; it paled beside the world I'd built in my head. But Erik has never left me; to this day I sympathize with his rejection, need, and bafflement, if I don't enact his violent responses to it.
Maybe this was my adolescent version of Twilight, doing many of the same things to me that I fear Twilight is doing to young women today?
no subject
Date: 2009-06-04 03:11 pm (UTC)Wait, I smell an essay. Especially reading the comments here.
I can't believe you'd never seen it!
no subject
Date: 2009-06-04 03:11 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-04 03:12 pm (UTC)I saw the show at 17 and again in my 20s, and it's a very different show from those different viewpoints, as you detail above.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-04 03:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-04 03:13 pm (UTC)Gender analysis aside, I would break down Phantom to this -- the characters don't make sense. What they do from one scene to the next doesn't make sense. One moment the Phantom is declaring war on Christine. The next he's proposing to her in front of everybody. Yes, he's supposed to be a sensitive, passionate artist in conflict with his monstrous side, but he basically swings between one mood to the next whenever the producers need something dramatic. And then there's Christine who has extreme changes of heart literally within the same song.
But, yes, Andrew Lloyd-Webber. I scratch my head when I consider my youthful enthusiasm for him.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-04 03:21 pm (UTC)But you could've figured that out, no? *g*
no subject
Date: 2009-06-04 03:33 pm (UTC)What the hell is that about?).
Date: 2009-06-04 03:54 pm (UTC)Not!
no subject
Date: 2009-06-04 03:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-04 04:07 pm (UTC)Re: Heaving bosoms! Now 100% agency-free!
Date: 2009-06-04 04:24 pm (UTC)submission, ordeal, apprenticeship... thanks for these words, RM. Someone of my aquaintance, on first reading my writing, did me the high honor of saying "You do honor porn almost as well as Bujold." Since then I've called it honor porn, and was glad to have any handle for it at all.
Submission, ordeal, apprenticeship. I'll keep those around for when I need words for this thing in my head again.
The book, by the way, is even more so. My favorite bit that got cut is where the Phantom is SO BROKEN-HEARTED over losing Christine that he goes and lies around in his underground lake, trying to give himself pneumonia as the world's most protracted suicide attempt. I am not making this up. Leroux actually said this was his motivation.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-04 04:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-04 04:49 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-04 04:51 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-04 04:51 pm (UTC)Jesus christ, yes, THIS. I can't stand the movie, but the stage version of JUST THIS SONG makes me "guh."
no subject
Date: 2009-06-04 04:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-04 05:02 pm (UTC)Thirded.