Scan barcode
Reviews tagging 'Racial slurs'
The Phantom of the Opera by Gaston Leroux, Fiction, Classics by Gaston Leroux
5 reviews
kileyjojo's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
1.0
This book is very dated. There are words used with negative connotations. Some of the phrasing is rather offensive.
Aside from that, the story is very dull. If you're interested in this novel because of the musical or the film adaptations, this is not the story you would expect. The characters are whiny and unlikeable. The pacing is odd. Any of the action and suspense is taken away by unbearable dialogue.
Aside from that, the story is very dull. If you're interested in this novel because of the musical or the film adaptations, this is not the story you would expect. The characters are whiny and unlikeable. The pacing is odd. Any of the action and suspense is taken away by unbearable dialogue.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Confinement, Death, Racial slurs, Suicidal thoughts, Violence, Kidnapping, Stalking, Suicide attempt, Murder, and Gaslighting
livelaughomo's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
tense
medium-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? Yes
3.0
Content Warnings
Graphic: Emotional abuse, Kidnapping, and Stalking
Moderate: Torture and Murder
Minor: Body horror, Racial slurs, and Suicide attempt
maeverose's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Diverse cast of characters? No
3.0
Whelp. That sure was a book.
My rating is mostly for the unintentional comedy of how ridiculous the book is. I know some parts are supposed to be funny but I think I was laughing at the wrong parts. I also just love the idea of some guy secretly living in an opera house and messing with people. Sadly though I was bored most of the time while reading this. I liked Raoul and Christine well enough (though they were both extremely naive), Erik was very different than I thought he would be (I didn’t know anything about his backstory and I had no idea he’d be so talkative and weird. I thought he’d be more brooding lol). I found it hard to imagine the descriptions of the opera house, especially when they went underground, though that’s likely a fault of the translation.
Speaking of the translation, I don’t know if my edition (paper mill press) is just a bad edition but there were quite a few typos and a lot of things were worded awkwardly, and I don’t think it was just the writing style, it seemed like a bad translation. Maybe I’ll have to do some research and see if there’s a better one.
I really wanted to like this but I think I might just not get along with classics that well. Every time I read a classic I feel like I would like it better if it had been written today. Same time period, story and characters, just a more modern writing style (and less misogyny, racism and ableism… although this story relies so heavily on the ableism I’m not sure how you’d write it without it…). I don’t mind the old language so much but I don’t like the overly dramatic repetitive dialogue that classics often have (this one had a lot of that). I don’t like how repetitive in general classics tend to be. Which is sad because I want to like classics. The stories themselves are sometimes interesting but then the writing and dialogue ruin it for me :/
That ending though… Erik really went to all that trouble… just to break down over a forehead kiss and decide to let Christine marry Raoul after all. THEN DIE. OVER SAID KISS. Dude..
Also, I can’t imagine a room of mirrors being that convincing that you’d have to have prior knowledge of what it is to know it’s not actually a forest. YOU’D SEE YOUR OWN REFLECTION. COME ON.
I think this is probably much better experienced via the actual musical rather than the book. I’ve never seen the musical but now I want to.
My rating is mostly for the unintentional comedy of how ridiculous the book is. I know some parts are supposed to be funny but I think I was laughing at the wrong parts. I also just love the idea of some guy secretly living in an opera house and messing with people. Sadly though I was bored most of the time while reading this. I liked Raoul and Christine well enough (though they were both extremely naive), Erik was very different than I thought he would be (I didn’t know anything about his backstory and I had no idea he’d be so talkative and weird. I thought he’d be more brooding lol). I found it hard to imagine the descriptions of the opera house, especially when they went underground, though that’s likely a fault of the translation.
Speaking of the translation, I don’t know if my edition (paper mill press) is just a bad edition but there were quite a few typos and a lot of things were worded awkwardly, and I don’t think it was just the writing style, it seemed like a bad translation. Maybe I’ll have to do some research and see if there’s a better one.
I really wanted to like this but I think I might just not get along with classics that well. Every time I read a classic I feel like I would like it better if it had been written today. Same time period, story and characters, just a more modern writing style (and less misogyny, racism and ableism… although this story relies so heavily on the ableism I’m not sure how you’d write it without it…). I don’t mind the old language so much but I don’t like the overly dramatic repetitive dialogue that classics often have (this one had a lot of that). I don’t like how repetitive in general classics tend to be. Which is sad because I want to like classics. The stories themselves are sometimes interesting but then the writing and dialogue ruin it for me :/
Also, I can’t imagine a room of mirrors being that convincing that you’d have to have prior knowledge of what it is to know it’s not actually a forest. YOU’D SEE YOUR OWN REFLECTION. COME ON.
I think this is probably much better experienced via the actual musical rather than the book. I’ve never seen the musical but now I want to.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Ableism, Body shaming, Confinement, Emotional abuse, Toxic relationship, Kidnapping, and Religious bigotry
Moderate: Animal death, Death, Misogyny, Racial slurs, Racism, Torture, and Murder
Minor: Fatphobia and Xenophobia
incel behavior, controlling behavior, manipulationwolfiegrrrl's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? N/A
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.0
I had heard that the original Phantom of the Opera novel is far more horror-based and intense than the Andrew Lloyd Webber musical I am familiar with, so I was curious to see for myself just how different the two stories are from each other.
Mostly, I wanted to see what Erik's deal was because he has so much more going on than what the adaptations of the character that I'm familiar with touch on. Now that I have listened to the entire book and its epilogue, I'd say that the best way to describe Leroux's Phantom is "the character whose OP backstory was created after the main story was written in order to explain how the mystery worked and prove that it was just a man the entire time!" but it honestly leaves me with more questions than answers. I also really wasn't fond of the sentiment about birth deformities being a sign of inherent inner evil to be pitied by the "beautiful" people of the world, so I don't really know what to make of that regarding Erik's character development at the end.
That being said, the novel was rather boring in how it mostly consisted of uneventful exposition dumps until the story picks up about halfway through when the Phantom and the Persian take more prominent roles. Their part of the story is still mostly large exposition dumps, but at least those dumps were entertaining in how absolutely buck wild they are. My main complaint is that having to follow a whiny, self-entitled Raoul around through the eyes of the narrator was so draining because he is a prime example of the Nice Guy trope and I can't really say I was rooting for him like we're so clearly supposed to.
It was fun to spot all of the story/character notes that the musical plucked out when reworking the plot into more of a dark romance. Having experienced Leroux's original work, I now have a greater appreciation for adaptations that play around with the fun and interesting concepts that are laid out in the novel.
Mostly, I wanted to see what Erik's deal was because he has so much more going on than what the adaptations of the character that I'm familiar with touch on. Now that I have listened to the entire book and its epilogue, I'd say that the best way to describe Leroux's Phantom is "the character whose OP backstory was created after the main story was written in order to explain how the mystery worked and prove that it was just a man the entire time!" but it honestly leaves me with more questions than answers. I also really wasn't fond of the sentiment about birth deformities being a sign of inherent inner evil to be pitied by the "beautiful" people of the world, so I don't really know what to make of that regarding Erik's character development at the end.
That being said, the novel was rather boring in how it mostly consisted of uneventful exposition dumps until the story picks up about halfway through when the Phantom and the Persian take more prominent roles. Their part of the story is still mostly large exposition dumps, but at least those dumps were entertaining in how absolutely buck wild they are. My main complaint is that having to follow a whiny, self-entitled Raoul around through the eyes of the narrator was so draining because he is a prime example of the Nice Guy trope and I can't really say I was rooting for him like we're so clearly supposed to.
It was fun to spot all of the story/character notes that the musical plucked out when reworking the plot into more of a dark romance. Having experienced Leroux's original work, I now have a greater appreciation for adaptations that play around with the fun and interesting concepts that are laid out in the novel.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Body horror, Emotional abuse, Torture, Toxic relationship, Violence, Kidnapping, Stalking, Suicide attempt, and Murder
Moderate: Confinement, Death, and Suicidal thoughts
Minor: Racial slurs, Suicide, and Death of parent
zos's review against another edition
dark
emotional
mysterious
sad
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
Such a neat story. I am not typically a mystery fan, but this was a favorite of mine for a long time. I read this book before seeing the musical/movie/adaptations.
When I read this for the first time, I remember being totally taken aback by the scene with the lake.
Probably won't reread, but I did enjoy it while reading.
When I read this for the first time, I remember being totally taken aback by the scene with the lake.
Probably won't reread, but I did enjoy it while reading.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Toxic relationship, Kidnapping, Stalking, and Murder
Moderate: Death, Emotional abuse, Torture, and Murder
Minor: Racial slurs, Racism, Suicide, Suicide attempt, and Death of parent