|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 3:10 pm
I've only this conversation with my dad like.. 50 times which usually has something to do with him saying "CHRISTINE SOLD HER SOUL TO THE DEVIL!!!!!!"
Okay, yes, we all know that Faust was so focused on that it has to play a role within the story. And yes there is the whole Christine saying "I gave you my soul" bit towards the beginning but I think it's even more subtle than that. She didn't really "give her soul", in my opinion. Erik more "stole" her soul, if you will... he kinda... fed off of and played on her biggest emotional weakness, thinking that he was making her fall in love when he was really casting one of his wonderful illusions around her senses.
Erik is clearly symbolic of the devil. As Uta pointed out in another thread people who were deformed were thought to be cursed by the devil. He also lived below ground, and those who did his bidding were "rewarded".
Christine is also a symbol of Jesus. I mean... just drop the INE it isn't that hard to see. You can see a bit of Jesus's infinite kindness in her. Mind you I got most of my biblical knowledge from a book by a cult author but bear with me. Jesus reached out and helped people who were thought to be unclean by other Jews, imcluding the deformed, the lepers. You can see that Christine, despite the fact that she clearly does not love Erik and knowing she has been decieved, still holds some type of place for him, some desire to not leave him entirely alone. Thus she begs Raoul to sing for Erik one last time, her kindness ultimately leading to her near demise.
Also Christine tried to commit suicide, in essence she would have given her life to spare others pain. Erik told her, I believe, that many would die if she didn't choose to marry him, so she knew she could not choose to marry him so she took another route.
I'm not sure if I've made any point but knock yourself out with discussion.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 8:35 pm
I feel all special on helping create this discussion sub-consciously. XD
I do believe you have something going there. Your Faust referance only goes so far within this though. Erik is both like Faust and Mephisto in many ways. That he deceives Christine in order to gain gratification for himself makes him Mephisto. But that he longs for such passion in the world though he is far too old to get it makes him Dr. Faust as well.
Christine is not unlike Christ, but far from it as well. She is swayed by earthly devices and was brought to deception by the memory of her departed Father, whom she still clung to. She resembles a female Faust in that sense that she gives everything to Erik in order to feel herself closer to her father's memory and happiness.
Erik is represented as darkness and evil whilst Christine represents the light and goodness. But both are tainted in ways. Christine endured a life of poverty and then had her father stolen from her by whatever means that had wrought his demise.
They both ruin each other in a sense.
I don't think I made much sense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 8:31 am
hmph, well I can see where your going with Faust, but I'm rather sure Leroux intended the usage of Faust to add another level of sorrow to Erik's character only. Faust was a man of great knowledge, but still feeling empty and sorrowful, almost taking his life, he believes what Mephisto says when he promises him that drunken reverly and nights with women will fulfill him more than theology and trying to understand the worlds secrets. He sold his sould becuase his "art" in essence had nothing left for him, out of despair of heart if you will. Faust soon grows tired of the parties that Mephisto shows him and is condemning the devil for not keeping his promise (uh duh...) until he sets eyes on Margarite and he falls instantly in love. Mephisto tries to set Faust up with Margarite, providing him with jewels to seuduce her, and eventually Faust ends up ruining her life (getting Margarite pregnant [I believe] out of wedlock, getting her thrown in prison, and earning the hate of her brother who is then killed). It's a tragedy becuase Faust is just a pawn, it seems, in the hands of the devil becuase he really truly loves this girl and when he comes to prison to break her free, Margarite is a bit histerical, not recognizing Faust fully becuase of her tragedy. Faust opens the cell and tries to persuade Margarite to come with him but her purity refuses and she calls down the angels to rescue her.
Leroux intends us to parralel Erik to Faust becuase his primary goal is to make us to see Erik NOT as the devil, but a poor soul manipulated by him instead becuase his wretched life, his genius, his art. Erik then too, falls in love with Christine who is the Margarite of this tragedy (soorly indicated by when she actually plays the part on several accounts). Just then as Faust tries to be a part of Marguarites life and it ruins her, some parrallel can be drawn to Erik's interventions with Christine's life.
A final part of Faust that makes it differ extremely from all of the religious texts that were being written at the time is that Faust, the heathistic devil-worshipper that he seemed to be, was actually redeemed at the end at, instead of being handed his due fate with an "I told you so" choir of angels in the background. This is ultimate connection to the Faustian character becuase there is an extreme sense of redemption at the end for Erik becuase he finally attains the love that he wanted, returning Christine to Raoul as to make amends and set things right, and confessing to the Persian, transcending the devil character and becoming an obvious human with a heart.
This was Leroux's intention, you can make as many random connections as you want but in the end the reason Leroux choose Faust of all plays to repeat was becuase Erik is a character that is to be pitied, and seen as redeemed.
As for a connection to Jesus I see no textual support for that in novel. Assuredly she is kind and generous to some extent but that's becuase, psychologically, she's still a child and, as we all seem to agree, Erik is a pitiable character becuase he's human, and just becuase she feels human emotions indicates nothing of a Christ-like character to me.
[/rant]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 8:30 pm
I agree with RDS. In the beginning of Leroux's Phantom of the Opera, he portrays Erik as this mystical, monstrous being. By the end, however, he ultimately wants the reader to view Erik as a sad, broken man.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 8:37 pm
Hannibal Lecter M.D. I agree with RDS. In the beginning of Leroux's Phantom of the Opera, he portrays Erik as this mystical, monstrous being. By the end, however, he ultimately wants the reader to view Erik as a sad, broken man. Well it's a process of degridation. It's a mystery of sorts and so you must follow the fictional detective to the end to solve. What we're solving is Erik. Who is the Phantom? Why does he kill? What makes him the way he is? And why the mask? To be portrayed as this great, fearful creature of theatre superstition is shrouding him in another mask, so to speak, and basically starting us off at square one. We know nothing of him, but through the accounts of Christine and Raoul and even the managers, we come to see he is just a desperately lonely aging man with a horrendous face and no moral reasoning. By the end, to pull away his masks (both physical and psychological) we know Erik is the aforementioned pitious man. A villain by all rights, but one we pity greatly for the curse of his face.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
