Phantasmic love udner scrutiny

Phantom of the Opera vs Raoul

in my opinion OG (opera ghost) is better because he stays with her after she becomes an orphan, sings to her in her sleep, teaches her to become an epically great singer, and acts as a general guardian angel to advance her status and career.

raoul is a childhood sweetheart, and when they fall in love in the play, they havent seen eachother for almost a decade.

on the flipside, OG is horrifically disfigured, and a little bit mentally demented. lives pretty much completely alone as she would probably have to... then again she might become the next generation of OG which might be a fun twist on the original story.

raoul is definitely a normal lover, and hes got wealth and looks i guess...

applicable girls and guys, who would you pick?

unapplicable girls and guys, who do you think is better? by better im ean who would make a better significant other.

Oh, I'm sure Raoul would make a better husband or whatever, but he's tremendously boring by comparison. The O.G. is dark, creepy, obsessive, possessive, and dramatic, but don't tell me most girls wouldn't dig that at least a little bit. I've heard that the two men might be considered alternate sides of Christine's budding sexuality. Raoul is innocent and relatively chaste, whereas the Phantom kind of represents the dark, seething waters of unexpressed sexuality.

Of course, consider the time the book was written. In the novel, at least, Raoul is the clear golden boy.

The OG (I can't write OG without laughing) is obsessive, possessive and demented. All his good characteristics are therefore nugatory.

Raoul = winner.

Youd date a guy you hadnt seen for 10 years over a guy who had supported you ever since you had been orphaned, and made you the star soprano in an opera house?

Well, supported/creeped on you. What is he doing falling for a girl he's basically been mentoring since she was 7 (or whatever) anyway?

Ha, I guess I'm arguing both sides. But I think, while Christine owes the Phantom some thanks and respect, that doesn't mean she owes him her goodies.

I still wouldnt jump the bones of some one i hadnt seen since i was 7 over some one who had helped and supported me since then...

in fact i probably wouldnt jump the bones of either of them

^Ding ding ding! There's our proper answer, probably. Maybe in the best version, Christine would realize that she doesn't need to be with either of the two. Maybe she would realize that she has more than two choices. Maybe she and Meg run off together, and live a lush Sapphic lifestyle in 18th century Nice.

^ LOL, I like this conclusion much better.

However, I think I might jump Raoul's bones if he's a total babe, even if we haven't seen each other in years... I mean, come on, childhood sweethearts. That shit counts for something!

But loving guidance and support doesnt trump good looks?

Ah, the hormones are fickle things, aren't they?

Despite all the help (stalking?) that the OG gave Christine, it still doesn't mean she's going to like him romantically. That would be like some guy saying to me "But I got you a job and I organized your sock drawer and I bought you a sexy dress so you could dance for me! Why won't you love me??" You could say that the phantom had an unhealthy need to own Christine and her talent, and wasn't supporting her purely for her own sake. You're going to like who you like, not who you "owe" the most. That said, I still think the phantom is the more interesting of the two.

The Phantom of the Opera is an all time favorite of mine. That being said, I HATE Raoul, vicomte or not, he was pretty much characterless, boring, pathetic and almost feminine next to Erik. Christine however did make him the perfect damsel in distress, gave him a chance to practice his sword skills and rescue females from falling chandeliers and hidden lairs.

Erik on the other hand, despite all he's been through, is proud, with a strong character, determined, talented (a genius to some) and has pretty much done it all on his own. Yes, he's a bit cruel and primitive but he's functioned pretty much on his survival instincts.

It's easy to understand why he is drawn to Christine when she goes to live at the theater/opera after being orphaned. He saw himself in her. He could relate to loneliness, sadness and loss, yet still he couldn't quite trust her with the truth about him, his character or even real name.

I think that Christine, despite being kind, was weak in character, nerves and mind and, also, a bit immature for Erik. Still it almost broke my heart to see Erik who never considered anyone's needs but his own let both, Christine and Raoul, go at the end. Even if it wasn't a question of love, Erik was too proud that the story couldn't possibly end any other way (other than kill them both) once Christine's love for Raoul was confirmed when she agreed to marry Erik to save Raoul's life.

To me, the story is a more realistic and more tragic, version of ''Beauty and the best'' where Belle ends up with Gaston.

Had I been in Christine's place I would've chosen Erik. Actually, if someone could drag him out of the book or the movie for me, I'd be ever grateful. I adore him. Darkness, sins and all included.