Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.77 AVERAGE
3.77 AVERAGE
mysterious
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
dark
mysterious
dark
mysterious
medium-paced
Después de haber leído el retelling [b:Deja cantar a la muerte|43837639|Deja cantar a la muerte|Sandra Andrés Belenguer|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1549320347l/43837639._SY75_.jpg|68219942] había quedado con muchas ganas de leer la historia original. No soy muy fan de las historias de misterios y policíacas, pero lo cierto es que esta consiguió conquistarme con su extraño narrador, algunos momentos cómicos y el personaje del fantasma que me dejó encandilada desde las primeras páginas.
Es un libro al que cuesta un poco cogerle el ritmo ya que su narración es bastante original y a veces se describen las situaciones desde diferentes puntos de vista. Por otro lado, al autor le encanta jugar y volvernos locos planteándonos situaciones aparentemente sin sentido y disparatadas, que descolocan al lector, pero que luego resuelve de la manera más inesperada.
Creo, que pese a las dificultades iniciales, es una historia muy fresca para su época, que consiguió engancharme y que disfruté especialmente a partir de la mitad del libro en adelante. Uno de los puntos que más me enganchó de la historia fue el fantasma, un canalla chulesco e inteligente, que tienen a toda la Ópera Garnier a sus pies. Es un personaje lleno de matices y, como decía, muy inteligente. Sin duda, la estrella de la novela.
Es un libro al que cuesta un poco cogerle el ritmo ya que su narración es bastante original y a veces se describen las situaciones desde diferentes puntos de vista. Por otro lado, al autor le encanta jugar y volvernos locos planteándonos situaciones aparentemente sin sentido y disparatadas, que descolocan al lector, pero que luego resuelve de la manera más inesperada.
Creo, que pese a las dificultades iniciales, es una historia muy fresca para su época, que consiguió engancharme y que disfruté especialmente a partir de la mitad del libro en adelante. Uno de los puntos que más me enganchó de la historia fue el fantasma, un canalla chulesco e inteligente, que tienen a toda la Ópera Garnier a sus pies. Es un personaje lleno de matices y, como decía, muy inteligente. Sin duda, la estrella de la novela.
I really enjoyed this. It did irk me that they called him the Opera Ghost instead of the title's cooler Phantom of the Opera, but alright. The protagonist is Erik, a disfigured reclusive genius (architecturally and sonically) who lives in the underground foundations of the Opera Garnier. This is perfectly complemented by its setting being early 20th-century Paris, wherein the city and society exacerbate the story's dark and claustrophobic undertones. The Phantom begins teaching a fledgling singer, Christine Daae, which metastasizes into a fatal obsession made worse by the reappearance of her childhood sweetheart Raoul. The Phantom's zealousness and jealousy erupts with a series of fatal events. some of which are: Carlotta's sabotaging and consequent upstaging by Christine, the fall of the chandelier, the extortion of the opera house managers, the kidnapping of Christine, and Raoul's suffering in the phantom's custom-made torture chamber. When he feels beloved for the first time, he lets Christine and Raoul go in a rare moment of tenderness. He then dies happy, and our narrator laments the shame and discrimination such a genius had to live under just because they are facially deformed.
This is not the best summary, but writing that out reminded me of how much this broke my heart. Erik's whole character (and story) is so gut-wrenching. His development exhibits such a classic tension between good and evil, and Christine almost becomes a stand-in for the reader's struggle to reconcile this dichotomy. He's the tortured demon to her tortured angel. Erik defies this and his rare kindnesses contrasts his much more numerous cruelties and I, with my sympathy, am left asking: shall I forgive him just because of the cruelties he too has faced? It's an interestingly explored emotion, which today would simply be interpreted as a red flag.*
Despite the Phantom's complexity, however, all the others are so dumbfoundingly flat. Christine's the best of them, as she becomes brave through her love, grief, and innocence, but everyone else had no personality. I know the Phantom's the focus, but it wouldn't hurt to give Raoul at least something to do. Even the most critical moment of Christine's rescue, he's utterly useless and Leroux inserts a weird orientalist deus ex machine in the form of "The Persian", who also serves as his sole vessel for exposition. Mme. Giry and all the staff are so cartoonish. Contrary to popular opinion, I actually like how the movie rewrites the story in order to fix these characters.
As the Persian tells Raoul, Erik is an architectural genius with an insane backstory (built a beautiful palace and almost got killed to keep its secrets, built the foundations of the Opera Garnier, etc.) but you know what? I'll take it. I love the fact that he's an architect and all the rich architectural descriptions this allows Leroux to employ (especially given the real-life inspiration). Architecture becomes a sinister active player in the story, which I enjoyed. You don't often get to read about trap doors, hidden mirror entrances, and an infinity room of a torture chamber. As someone who studies the practicalities of common typologies, the architecture employed in this is so fun.
Leroux's writing is also really fun, with cool titles such as THE TRAP DOOR LOVER and UNDER APOLLO'S LYRE (from what I remember). There's poignant emotions, a beautiful atmospheric setting, compelling storytelling and best of all humor. I laughed out loud when Erik called the Daroga a booby (twice). I am undecided about how I feel about if being told as an investigative account, as I would have preferred a more immersed point of view, but mood-wise it fits the period it was written in. Leroux's plot is extremely convoluted and absurd which, again, you know what? I'll take it. I think it adds to the book's fun and gaudy charm. It's a great subversion of classic heroic and romantic fairy tales, especially given Erik's complexity.
Overall, regardless of its flaws, it's just really fun, inventive, and enjoyable. I listened to this on audiobook, and for the last hour I just laid down in my bed and listened. So yes: very engaging. Great atmosphere. Broke my heart. I'd read it again.
This is not the best summary, but writing that out reminded me of how much this broke my heart. Erik's whole character (and story) is so gut-wrenching. His development exhibits such a classic tension between good and evil, and Christine almost becomes a stand-in for the reader's struggle to reconcile this dichotomy. He's the tortured demon to her tortured angel. Erik defies this and his rare kindnesses contrasts his much more numerous cruelties and I, with my sympathy, am left asking: shall I forgive him just because of the cruelties he too has faced? It's an interestingly explored emotion, which today would simply be interpreted as a red flag.*
Despite the Phantom's complexity, however, all the others are so dumbfoundingly flat. Christine's the best of them, as she becomes brave through her love, grief, and innocence, but everyone else had no personality. I know the Phantom's the focus, but it wouldn't hurt to give Raoul at least something to do. Even the most critical moment of Christine's rescue, he's utterly useless and Leroux inserts a weird orientalist deus ex machine in the form of "The Persian", who also serves as his sole vessel for exposition. Mme. Giry and all the staff are so cartoonish. Contrary to popular opinion, I actually like how the movie rewrites the story in order to fix these characters.
As the Persian tells Raoul, Erik is an architectural genius with an insane backstory (built a beautiful palace and almost got killed to keep its secrets, built the foundations of the Opera Garnier, etc.) but you know what? I'll take it. I love the fact that he's an architect and all the rich architectural descriptions this allows Leroux to employ (especially given the real-life inspiration). Architecture becomes a sinister active player in the story, which I enjoyed. You don't often get to read about trap doors, hidden mirror entrances, and an infinity room of a torture chamber. As someone who studies the practicalities of common typologies, the architecture employed in this is so fun.
Leroux's writing is also really fun, with cool titles such as THE TRAP DOOR LOVER and UNDER APOLLO'S LYRE (from what I remember). There's poignant emotions, a beautiful atmospheric setting, compelling storytelling and best of all humor. I laughed out loud when Erik called the Daroga a booby (twice). I am undecided about how I feel about if being told as an investigative account, as I would have preferred a more immersed point of view, but mood-wise it fits the period it was written in. Leroux's plot is extremely convoluted and absurd which, again, you know what? I'll take it. I think it adds to the book's fun and gaudy charm. It's a great subversion of classic heroic and romantic fairy tales, especially given Erik's complexity.
Overall, regardless of its flaws, it's just really fun, inventive, and enjoyable. I listened to this on audiobook, and for the last hour I just laid down in my bed and listened. So yes: very engaging. Great atmosphere. Broke my heart. I'd read it again.
adventurous
mysterious
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
It feels like a classic, in the best way, I enjoyed the social and mental complexity of it all a lot. It felt like a writer insert at some points which was interesting of a writing style. Even though I first encountered the play performed at my University, I do feel a deeper connection to the story even more now after reading the original vision. After all, it takes a harder look at society of the time and the constant judgmental system it was and still is, and allows someone to out smart them all with brazen creativity. Amazing. The story is both an adventure and a reflective think piece.