You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.77 AVERAGE
3.77 AVERAGE
This book fits well with the fall atmosphere, and I fairly enjoyed it. I figured since I loved the movies of this book, then I'd love the book equally.
dark
mysterious
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I lowkey am biased because I love the musical so maybe just disregard everything I say.
Content Warnings
Something that could possibly be triggering is the noose that the phantom uses as his main weapon
dark
emotional
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
It's not a secret that I'm obsessed with Phantom, but it's been way too long since I last read the book and this reread cemented for me why I loved it so much to begin with.
Firstly, I had forgotten how *funny* this book is—it really has a great sense of humor about itself despite it also being highly dramatic. I had never read Coward's translation before, and I think his crisp style really heightens the comedic elements too. I know the jumbly epistolary style is not to everyone's tastes, but I enjoy it and I think it too contributes to the humor.
Secondly, omg book Christine is such a wonderful character. She is so spirited and often—rightfully—*pissed*. In most adaptations the conflict between her, Erik, & Raoul is presented as a love triangle—but it really isn't one at all. Rather, she just kind of ends up sandwiched between these two desperate, weepy, clinging men who shove themselves into her life and is forced to endure so much suffering because of it. She has so much character and shows such compassion snd bravery even as she endures truly harrowing events, but she also asserts her agency whenever she can. I honestly don't understand how anyone can read this book and call her boring, or an airhead, as I've seen so many snarky reviews do—did we even read the same book?
Anyway, turns out I still love this book as much as I remember (if not more). I'll probably reread another translation soon lol. I would also love to one day see a faithful—really faithful—movie adaptation of it one day! It has such potential to be a fun, tragic, black comedy.
Firstly, I had forgotten how *funny* this book is—it really has a great sense of humor about itself despite it also being highly dramatic. I had never read Coward's translation before, and I think his crisp style really heightens the comedic elements too. I know the jumbly epistolary style is not to everyone's tastes, but I enjoy it and I think it too contributes to the humor.
Secondly, omg book Christine is such a wonderful character. She is so spirited and often—rightfully—*pissed*. In most adaptations the conflict between her, Erik, & Raoul is presented as a love triangle—but it really isn't one at all. Rather, she just kind of ends up sandwiched between these two desperate, weepy, clinging men who shove themselves into her life and is forced to endure so much suffering because of it. She has so much character and shows such compassion snd bravery even as she endures truly harrowing events, but she also asserts her agency whenever she can. I honestly don't understand how anyone can read this book and call her boring, or an airhead, as I've seen so many snarky reviews do—did we even read the same book?
Anyway, turns out I still love this book as much as I remember (if not more). I'll probably reread another translation soon lol. I would also love to one day see a faithful—really faithful—movie adaptation of it one day! It has such potential to be a fun, tragic, black comedy.
I'm obsessed with Phantom, but it's been way too long since I last read the book and this reread cemented for me why I loved it so much to begin with.
First, I had forgotten how *funny* this book is—it really has a great sense of humor about itself despite (or perhaps because of?) it also being highly dramatic. I know the jumbly epistolary format is not to everyone's tastes, but I enjoy it and I think it contributes to the humor and unique charm of the story. Also, I had never read Coward's translation before, and I think his crisp style really heightens the comedic elements too.
Secondly, omg book Christine is such a wonderful character. She is so spirited and often—rightfully—*pissed*. In most adaptations the conflict between her, Erik, and Raoul is presented as a love triangle—but it really isn't one at all. Rather, she just kind of ends up sandwiched between these two desperate, weepy, clinging men who shove themselves into her life and she suffers so much because of it. She has so much character and shows such compassion snd bravery even as she endures truly harrowing events, but she also asserts her agency whenever she can. I honestly don't understand how anyone can read this book and call her boring, or an airhead, as I've seen so many snarky reviews do—did we even read the same book?
Anyway, turns out I still love this book as much as I remember (if not more). I'll probably reread another translation soon lol. I would also love to one day see a faithful—really faithful—movie adaptation of it one day! It has such potential to be a fun, tragic, black comedy.
First, I had forgotten how *funny* this book is—it really has a great sense of humor about itself despite (or perhaps because of?) it also being highly dramatic. I know the jumbly epistolary format is not to everyone's tastes, but I enjoy it and I think it contributes to the humor and unique charm of the story. Also, I had never read Coward's translation before, and I think his crisp style really heightens the comedic elements too.
Secondly, omg book Christine is such a wonderful character. She is so spirited and often—rightfully—*pissed*. In most adaptations the conflict between her, Erik, and Raoul is presented as a love triangle—but it really isn't one at all. Rather, she just kind of ends up sandwiched between these two desperate, weepy, clinging men who shove themselves into her life and she suffers so much because of it. She has so much character and shows such compassion snd bravery even as she endures truly harrowing events, but she also asserts her agency whenever she can. I honestly don't understand how anyone can read this book and call her boring, or an airhead, as I've seen so many snarky reviews do—did we even read the same book?
Anyway, turns out I still love this book as much as I remember (if not more). I'll probably reread another translation soon lol. I would also love to one day see a faithful—really faithful—movie adaptation of it one day! It has such potential to be a fun, tragic, black comedy.
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
N/A
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
N/A
Flaws of characters a main focus:
N/A
Das war keine gute Leseerfahrung! Ich weiß nicht, ob ich irgendwas nicht verstanden habe (beziehungsweise bin ich ziemlich sicher, dass ich so einiges nicht verstanden habe), aber ich fand’s einfach nur schlecht. Ich war gelangweilt, verwirrt und genervt und hätte das definitiv nicht fertig gelesen, wenn es nicht das Buch des Buchclubs gewesen wäre. Sorry, aber einfach nein! 😅😂
adventurous
challenging
dark
emotional
mysterious
sad
tense
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
fast-paced
Loveable characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
The character of Erik, the Phantom, is captivating and both horrifying and sympathetic.
This book was surprisingly easy to read. It was published in the 20s (which, fair enough, wasn't quite the 19th century) but the language is quite modern and down-to-earth. I guess it is the journalistic style of the author. The voice doesn't change despite different characters narrating. It feels like Dracula in that way, an author of average talent stumbles upon a winning concept--the classic vampire, the perfect tragedy--which solidifies it in pop culture.
The story is really food for thought what with all the adaptations and the little differences in portrayal. In particular Christine and Erik's relationship. I haven't quite tangled out my thoughts yet. I just find it so interesting the sheer difference between Christine and Erik's different experiences of the same events. And then each person's ability through love to feel humility and empathy before the other, that recognition and acceptance of something inherently imperfect, the tragic culmination of the story. I think that nuance is what makes this story so captivating and unique.
I'm gonna read and watch some adaptations, and of course again watch the musical by Lloyd Webber.
This book was surprisingly easy to read. It was published in the 20s (which, fair enough, wasn't quite the 19th century) but the language is quite modern and down-to-earth. I guess it is the journalistic style of the author. The voice doesn't change despite different characters narrating. It feels like Dracula in that way, an author of average talent stumbles upon a winning concept--the classic vampire, the perfect tragedy--which solidifies it in pop culture.
The story is really food for thought what with all the adaptations and the little differences in portrayal. In particular Christine and Erik's relationship. I haven't quite tangled out my thoughts yet. I just find it so interesting the sheer difference between Christine and Erik's different experiences of the same events. And then each person's ability through love to feel humility and empathy before the other, that recognition and acceptance of something inherently imperfect, the tragic culmination of the story. I think that nuance is what makes this story so captivating and unique.
I'm gonna read and watch some adaptations, and of course again watch the musical by Lloyd Webber.
dark
mysterious
fast-paced
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
This was an intense and exciting read. The Opera Ghost really did seem to be a ghost throughout much of the book, despite the author's assurances that he was a man after all. He had an uncanny ability to be everywhere, but only seen and heard when and where he wanted to be. I did find myself unable to keep up with the opera map; it was hard to picture all the different scenes the characters passed through and to imagine a building large enough to house them all.
3.5 STARS**
I'm so conflicted about this, because I absolutely loved the movie and would definitely love the stage performance. I just felt like the book was a bit of chore to get through in some parts, and maybe it's because I watched the movie first. There's a lot that's similar and a lot that's been changed. Still, I could definitely feel the creepiness and disgust that characters had in regards to the Phantom. The plot did quicken and I was gripped into the story again. It was enjoyable in some parts and completely confusing in others.
It could also be due to the translation. I don't think this rating is definite yet.
I'm so conflicted about this, because I absolutely loved the movie and would definitely love the stage performance. I just felt like the book was a bit of chore to get through in some parts, and maybe it's because I watched the movie first. There's a lot that's similar and a lot that's been changed. Still, I could definitely feel the creepiness and disgust that characters had in regards to the Phantom. The plot did quicken and I was gripped into the story again. It was enjoyable in some parts and completely confusing in others.
It could also be due to the translation. I don't think this rating is definite yet.