|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2006 5:13 pm
Utakan Krymerah I also wondered about the P.T.O. thing, but not from the movie. In Susan Kay's novel there was some comment that he signed the letters O.G. because...of something...I can't remember what it was, but it had to do with P.T.O. meaning something else. I thought it was some organization or something, but I guess "please turn over" would make sense...though it depends on what the comment about it was. x.x; I can't check because I don't have the book. I borrowed it from a friend. I also kinda wondered if Erik's deformity was based on anything real. I've heard of something that's quite grotesque, but babies born with that can't survive more than a few days. He signed them O.G. as in Opera Ghost because he considered himself as such/was called it. Then the fanciful title of Phantom of the Opera came up, so he signed them P.T.O as Phantom (of) the Opera. It's not official if it was based on any real specific disease that deformed him or if it was done by acid or any other accident. Kay's book is not official on the past, but the preferred and I believe only book on it. I know it's not official, I never said it was. In both the original and Kay's book he never signed the letters P.T.O. He said he preferred the Phantom of the Opera title but signed Opera Ghost instead because P.T.O. apparantly stood for something else...well it didn't really say that but it was implied. In most versians, as far as I know, it's a deformity. Well I guess in the original it never really said but from the description I don't think it could have been anything else. I might be wrong though. But it seems to make more sense that it's something he's had to deal with his whole life. I was just curious.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2006 6:01 pm
Krymerah Utakan Krymerah I also wondered about the P.T.O. thing, but not from the movie. In Susan Kay's novel there was some comment that he signed the letters O.G. because...of something...I can't remember what it was, but it had to do with P.T.O. meaning something else. I thought it was some organization or something, but I guess "please turn over" would make sense...though it depends on what the comment about it was. x.x; I can't check because I don't have the book. I borrowed it from a friend. I also kinda wondered if Erik's deformity was based on anything real. I've heard of something that's quite grotesque, but babies born with that can't survive more than a few days. He signed them O.G. as in Opera Ghost because he considered himself as such/was called it. Then the fanciful title of Phantom of the Opera came up, so he signed them P.T.O as Phantom (of) the Opera. It's not official if it was based on any real specific disease that deformed him or if it was done by acid or any other accident. Kay's book is not official on the past, but the preferred and I believe only book on it. I know it's not official, I never said it was. In both the original and Kay's book he never signed the letters P.T.O. He said he preferred the Phantom of the Opera title but signed Opera Ghost instead because P.T.O. apparantly stood for something else...well it didn't really say that but it was implied. In most versians, as far as I know, it's a deformity. Well I guess in the original it never really said but from the description I don't think it could have been anything else. I might be wrong though. But it seems to make more sense that it's something he's had to deal with his whole life. I was just curious. If P.T.O was at the end of the letter, it was signed as such. I've read Kay's novel, though I don't much feel like pulling it off the shelf for a romp through. Well it's implied as a deformity, but there are so many theories and versions that give him different cause/effect results. But we all assume he was born with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2006 6:21 pm
Utakan If P.T.O was at the end of the letter, it was signed as such. I've read Kay's novel, though I don't much feel like pulling it off the shelf for a romp through. I'm pretty sure in the original it wasn't. I don't think. Gah! Now I'm confused. sweatdrop Oh well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:16 pm
Krymerah Utakan If P.T.O was at the end of the letter, it was signed as such. I've read Kay's novel, though I don't much feel like pulling it off the shelf for a romp through. I'm pretty sure in the original it wasn't. I don't think. Gah! Now I'm confused. sweatdrop Oh well. I went through my book last night and found a passage about that. He loved the title as Phantom, but knew that would mean signing his letters as P.T.O which didn't sound as good to him as O.G. If you want, I'll even go as bold as to type it word for word if you like.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 3:43 pm
Utakan Krymerah Utakan If P.T.O was at the end of the letter, it was signed as such. I've read Kay's novel, though I don't much feel like pulling it off the shelf for a romp through. I'm pretty sure in the original it wasn't. I don't think. Gah! Now I'm confused. sweatdrop Oh well. I went through my book last night and found a passage about that. He loved the title as Phantom, but knew that would mean signing his letters as P.T.O which didn't sound as good to him as O.G. If you want, I'll even go as bold as to type it word for word if you like. No that's fine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 4:14 pm
Krymerah Utakan Krymerah Utakan If P.T.O was at the end of the letter, it was signed as such. I've read Kay's novel, though I don't much feel like pulling it off the shelf for a romp through. I'm pretty sure in the original it wasn't. I don't think. Gah! Now I'm confused. sweatdrop Oh well. I went through my book last night and found a passage about that. He loved the title as Phantom, but knew that would mean signing his letters as P.T.O which didn't sound as good to him as O.G. If you want, I'll even go as bold as to type it word for word if you like. No that's fine. Glad I could help, then.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 10:23 pm
Ok, here's one for the book nuts out there to help me work out. Now, I've read the book several times, love it, know parts by heart. Their is one thing that continues to make me wonder everytime I read it: The Ghost's Lady.
If you don't know what I mean, I'm talking about when Mame Giry tells the managers that the Ghost must bring a lady to the box with him. She presents the evidence of giving him a footstool, finding a flower and a fan. Now, I can find absolutely no reason for this bit of dialogue and it completely throws me for a loop.
What lady could Erik bring to the box? Certianly not Christine, she would be with the chorus during the operas. Does he need the footstool to get into the hidden pillar compartment? Then why the flowers or the fan? Gifts to Mame Giry?
Your thoughts/ideas would be greatly appreciated. 3nodding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2006 6:54 am
PhantomByNight Ok, here's one for the book nuts out there to help me work out. Now, I've read the book several times, love it, know parts by heart. Their is one thing that continues to make me wonder everytime I read it: The Ghost's Lady. If you don't know what I mean, I'm talking about when Mame Giry tells the managers that the Ghost must bring a lady to the box with him. She presents the evidence of giving him a footstool, finding a flower and a fan. Now, I can find absolutely no reason for this bit of dialogue and it completely throws me for a loop. What lady could Erik bring to the box? Certianly not Christine, she would be with the chorus during the operas. Does he need the footstool to get into the hidden pillar compartment? Then why the flowers or the fan? Gifts to Mame Giry? Your thoughts/ideas would be greatly appreciated. 3nodding They could actually be gifts. There's also a chance he brought a concubine, though more or less it's highly unlikely if he never really ventured outside. I think he was using it as a bit of a distraction or maybe a lie to himself. Y'know, pretend dates? When you're that lonely, you're bound to "make up" a date or significant other.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2006 3:57 pm
Utakan PhantomByNight Ok, here's one for the book nuts out there to help me work out. Now, I've read the book several times, love it, know parts by heart. Their is one thing that continues to make me wonder everytime I read it: The Ghost's Lady. If you don't know what I mean, I'm talking about when Mame Giry tells the managers that the Ghost must bring a lady to the box with him. She presents the evidence of giving him a footstool, finding a flower and a fan. Now, I can find absolutely no reason for this bit of dialogue and it completely throws me for a loop. What lady could Erik bring to the box? Certianly not Christine, she would be with the chorus during the operas. Does he need the footstool to get into the hidden pillar compartment? Then why the flowers or the fan? Gifts to Mame Giry? Your thoughts/ideas would be greatly appreciated. 3nodding They could actually be gifts. There's also a chance he brought a concubine, though more or less it's highly unlikely if he never really ventured outside. I think he was using it as a bit of a distraction or maybe a lie to himself. Y'know, pretend dates? When you're that lonely, you're bound to "make up" a date or significant other. At first, I thought it may have been an error is translation, or as the title of one of my favorite films says, lost in translation. However, I've since read more than one translation and it occured pretty much the same in both. I honestly believe it to be a plot point that Leroux dropped, yet didn't bother to remove. It makes no sense to have Erik with cortisans or concubines. It's out of his character and diminishes some of the power of things liek Christine's simple kiss to the forehead. He did venture outside though. He says in the book that he went out to barter with the merchants for food and flowers with a new disguise. I'd quote the book, but am too lazy at the moment to find the page. xp
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 31, 2006 9:08 pm
I saw the PTO thing. Actually, I'm almost positive it means "Please turn over" rather than "Phantom of the Opera". Here is my reasoning.
1. If the letter was signed PTO, what would be the meaning of this line: "These are both signed OG..." A letter can't be signed two things at once, and we already know that OG is Opera Ghost, so that has to be the signature.
2. Of and the are unimportant words, so it wouldn't be right to abbreviate one and not the other: It would have to be POTO or PO.
3. The translation in the French movie is "voir au dos", which means "see on back".
4. The hypotenuse of the binomial is congruent to the coefficient of six.
Sorry...just had to add that in...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 31, 2006 9:29 pm
Elanchana I saw the PTO thing. Actually, I'm almost positive it means "Please turn over" rather than "Phantom of the Opera". Here is my reasoning. 1. If the letter was signed PTO, what would be the meaning of this line: "These are both signed OG..." A letter can't be signed two things at once, and we already know that OG is Opera Ghost, so that has to be the signature. 2. Of and the are unimportant words, so it wouldn't be right to abbreviate one and not the other: It would have to be POTO or PO. 3. The translation in the French movie is "voir au dos", which means "see on back". 4. The hypotenuse of the binomial is congruent to the coefficient of six.Sorry...just had to add that in... Alright, since this seems to confuse you both, I shall quote directly from the book. This is the first paragraph on pg. 360 "The more I thought about it, the better I liked the idea. The corps de ballet were already calling me "the Phantom of the Opera," and intriguing soubriquet which appealed to me very strongly, until I realized that it would mean signing my ransom notes P.T.O One did not wish to descend to the ridiculous! O.G. I became and O.G. I have remained. But I still like to think of myself as the Phantom." The reason why it is not PotO like we say it is because correctly you infer there is the word of in the phrase. abbreviating "the" is fine. It's an English language rule somewheres. Why is the French movie being brought up? You mean the French book? Nothing translated is ever ACCURATE. You can't say "I love you" in French. You say J'adore or "I adore you". So many things do get new meanings in translation or get re-worded for better accuracy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 10:53 pm
Utakan Alright, since this seems to confuse you both, I shall quote directly from the book. This is the first paragraph on pg. 360 "The more I thought about it, the better I liked the idea. The corps de ballet were already calling me "the Phantom of the Opera," and intriguing soubriquet which appealed to me very strongly, until I realized that it would mean signing my ransom notes P.T.O One did not wish to descend to the ridiculous! O.G. I became and O.G. I have remained. But I still like to think of myself as the Phantom." This response intrigues me so. What version of the book do you own, Utakan, or at least which version are you quoting? I've read at least three different versions of the Leroux's book. Two were the original or at least most commonly used translation, but from different publishers and carried slight word differences. Another was a newer suppossedly more accurate translation. None included this particular bit of information on Erik's choice, nor can I even concieve of where such a statement/remark would be made by Erik in such a fashion or to who he would say such too. Where does this fit into in the story? Is it the Daroga he tells this too, since it's the only person I can see him saying such a thing too. My particular copy of PotO is only 315 pages long and none that I've read have ever been more than 350 pages in length. To me it would seem a book in which the story is still going past page 360 must be filled with padding and material not from Leroux's hand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 02, 2006 8:57 am
PhantomByNight Utakan Alright, since this seems to confuse you both, I shall quote directly from the book. This is the first paragraph on pg. 360 "The more I thought about it, the better I liked the idea. The corps de ballet were already calling me "the Phantom of the Opera," and intriguing soubriquet which appealed to me very strongly, until I realized that it would mean signing my ransom notes P.T.O One did not wish to descend to the ridiculous! O.G. I became and O.G. I have remained. But I still like to think of myself as the Phantom." This response intrigues me so. What version of the book do you own, Utakan, or at least which version are you quoting? I've read at least three different versions of the Leroux's book. Two were the original or at least most commonly used translation, but from different publishers and carried slight word differences. Another was a newer suppossedly more accurate translation. None included this particular bit of information on Erik's choice, nor can I even concieve of where such a statement/remark would be made by Erik in such a fashion or to who he would say such too. Where does this fit into in the story? Is it the Daroga he tells this too, since it's the only person I can see him saying such a thing too. My particular copy of PotO is only 315 pages long and none that I've read have ever been more than 350 pages in length. To me it would seem a book in which the story is still going past page 360 must be filled with padding and material not from Leroux's hand. I was quoting Susan Kay's Phantom. It seemed the question leaned more toward there than the actual novel. That and I would think it's more than apparent that Erik wouldn't write "please turn over" on his notes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 8:34 pm
Utakan PhantomByNight Utakan Alright, since this seems to confuse you both, I shall quote directly from the book. This is the first paragraph on pg. 360 "The more I thought about it, the better I liked the idea. The corps de ballet were already calling me "the Phantom of the Opera," and intriguing soubriquet which appealed to me very strongly, until I realized that it would mean signing my ransom notes P.T.O One did not wish to descend to the ridiculous! O.G. I became and O.G. I have remained. But I still like to think of myself as the Phantom." This response intrigues me so. What version of the book do you own, Utakan, or at least which version are you quoting? I've read at least three different versions of the Leroux's book. Two were the original or at least most commonly used translation, but from different publishers and carried slight word differences. Another was a newer suppossedly more accurate translation. None included this particular bit of information on Erik's choice, nor can I even concieve of where such a statement/remark would be made by Erik in such a fashion or to who he would say such too. Where does this fit into in the story? Is it the Daroga he tells this too, since it's the only person I can see him saying such a thing too. My particular copy of PotO is only 315 pages long and none that I've read have ever been more than 350 pages in length. To me it would seem a book in which the story is still going past page 360 must be filled with padding and material not from Leroux's hand. I was quoting Susan Kay's Phantom. It seemed the question leaned more toward there than the actual novel. That and I would think it's more than apparent that Erik wouldn't write "please turn over" on his notes. My apologies, I feel a bit stupid now. I've only read Kay's book once and could never really get into it. Especially the last few chapters. Thus, I didn't recognize theat bit. As for Erik using "please turn over," I could see him doing so. It would fit in nicely with the sarcastic/patronizing style of kindness in which his letters to MM. Richard and Moncharmin are penned.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 8:48 pm
It's alright. I kind of feel dumb as well for the assumption. I get on the wrong page of things sometimes.
True, true. Perhaps I suppose it's all in how we see Erik. Everyone has their own views, so I can see where the P.T.O thing would cause a conniption fit of a debate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
