jennyfair7

[jennyfair7]

So… I might have went a bit overboard, ehe

Plus close up

Soooo…. Yk about the whole 1920’s AU by @nerdywriter36 where Erik is a WWI veteran?

I was thinking about his awakening at the hospital and how it could have went…

I was thinking about him probably being unconscious for a while (some days? Or even weeks?) and then, after waking up, he asked the medics about the direness of the scars and got some pretty vague responses (tho still concerning), but then saw himself in a mirror that the nurses forgot to move away and, understandably, freaked out and became violent, this drawing shows that scene.

The hands are obviously some nurses trying to stop him from taking off his bandages (it wasn’t secure doing it yet) and one of them trying to drug him (to make him calm). The hands are disembodied for a couple of reasons: 1) It places Erik as the focus; 2) Can also be seen as a symbol for the ones lost to the war and the horrors of war (since they are gripping and paralysing him, a bit like trauma); 3)I’m unable to draw the other people (work smarter, not harder).

In the days after this accident he might have been drugged out of his mind (if they could afford it, which was rare, because those medications were needed for other patients) or tied up (which let his mind wonder).

The actual “unmasking” happened only after his wounds were closed (it took a while), he obviously didn’t react well and even tho he had wondered for a long time his imagination didn’t even come close to the reality he was facing.

I wanted to go with horror vibes here, it isn’t my strong suit, but I’m really proud of this.

Hope you don’t mind my yapping and theorising about your fic @nerdywriter36 and sorry for spamming.

I wonder if there will be elements of trauma on the actual fic.

[jennyfair7]

thinking about creatures.

[jennyfair7]

Bob Ross and Peapod the Pocket squirrel (1984)

[jennyfair7]

I embroidered a jean jacket for my soon-to-be sister-in-law’s birthday, and then finally finished it just in time for Candlenights, 6 months later 🎉

[jennyfair7]

Sweet baby 🥹

[jennyfair7]

Living the life he deserves

[jennyfair7]

31 DAYS OF HALLOWEEN ↳ DAY #16: THE LAST UNICORN  (1982) • dir. Jules Bass and Arthur Rankin Jr

[jennyfair7]

Sensation? Sentiment? It was both physical and emotional. His chest hurt, as if someone had cut it open to take out his heart. He felt a dreadful hollowness in it, a real emptiness that could never be filled except by Christine’s heart.

-The Phantom of the Opera by Gaston Leroux

[jennyfair7]

Hello! Do you happen to know who picked out the appliques for Phantom's cloak in mainly the Broadway production? I've done my own research and my own recreation, and it seems any of them are vintage appliques. Was it just all completely random?

I think many costume supervisors and costume makers has kept Maria Bjørnson's vision of antique pieces alive, where possible. Some Phantom cloaks are still decorated with antique jet beading, often sourced from scattered or ruined Victorian mourning pieces. But finding good pieces has become increasingly rare, so modern substitutes seems just as common.

For a costume display in the World Tour they wrote that:

"The cape is fine wool with antique jet beading"

This was true for the elder Aussie style as well as the UK. Probably elsewhere too, depending on the availability. One way to identify vintage or antique jet beading is that they use fairly small beads and with lots of hand-embroidered details, often in an openwork-pattern. The thread and/or fundament will often also have faded to brown. Here's typical examples of jet beading, in the cloaks of John Owen-Jones and Scott Davies in West End:

And the back of Ben Forster's West End cloak:

Last, but not least, Tim Howar in West End Live:

But many Phantom cloaks has also been fitted with either vintage or more modern sequin and bead appliquées. I think it's harder to separate what's new and what's antique in these. Here's some examples from the US where I'm not sure whether we're talking old or new (or maybe it's a mix).

The sequins may give a clue, as newer ones are often bigger and synthetic, while older ones tends to be smaller and maybe made of an early metal-plated synthetic material - or even metal if they are really old. But I would have to study them up-close to tell for sure.

There are also versions with mostly black tube beads, where the direction of the beading is what makes them glitter and sparkle from all angles. Here's Jonathan Roxmouth's cloak in the World Tour:

A cloak used in the Restaged US Tour:

And the collar of a vintage Golden Angel cloak, worn by Davis Gaines on Broadway:

I don't know exactly where Sam Fleming and other US costume supervisors sourced their materials, other than hunting vintage stores, antique stores, flea markets, the fabric NYC district etc. Anything that would make goodies surface, basically. It is in sync with the preferences of designer Maria Bjørnson, as she did favour vintage pieces when possible. Hence vintage materials are still often seen as accents and decorations on the POTO costumes. But vintage pieces have become increasingly harder to come by, so layering modern materials to create a similar effect is also common.

I hope that answered your questions!

[jennyfair7]

How would you rank each non-replica on a scale of creativity/original ideas?

That is a good question with many possible answers! Mostly because there are "good" creative/original ideas and "bad" creative/original ideas out there, and some of the most creative ones may also be the one I dislike the most... For example, if going by creativity and originality alone, Estonia would be very high on the list. But I'm not really loving the production overall, so I wouldn't say it's the best original take on POTO. If that makes sense. But if ranking the productions purely by how different they are and how hard they have worked on not looking like the original, I would say:

ESTONIA: Inter-war setting, rather bleak in its colour scheme and overall design, with one helluva mirror-discoball lair design, leather-coat Phantom, Vivienne Westwood-esque Il Muto, Moulin Rouge-ish Masquerade, 1990s Haute Couture Don Juan... There's so much to say. Definitely original, and not just giving "we had a low budget" vibe.

FINLAND / SWEDEN: 1980s costume vibes, gold mask, rock'n'roll, huge sets, tiny chandelier, gigantic orchestra, for the most actual opera singers in the leads. This one felt odd more than anything. But original? Very much so.

KRISTIANSTAD, SWEDEN: Definitely a production on a budget, but yet checking off all the boxes of what you'd expect of a POTO production. And with some super original ideas for some key scenes - Raoul stumbling around in the falling sets during the Overture, the elegant double staging in the boat scene, the rarities in the Phantom's lair, Red Death crashing through a mirror and later disappearing in mid-air... They had so many cool lil' details going on. In style fairly 1880s, and with a cool horizontal half-mask for the Phantom. I really appreciated this one.

SERBIA: One could maybe argue this was more low-budget than original...? At least the basic black set with few changes and the many low-key costumes didn't feel like the biggest effort out there. But different? Oh definitely.

BULGARIA: Pretty much the same comments as Serbia. However, the Phantom's fruit crown in PONR can never be unseen. Neither can the monkey musical box which seemed to have lost its will to live. Memorable for sure.

ROMANIA / NORWAY / GREECE / TOUR: Whereas the basic drum set was fairly similar to the Restaged Tour, it felt like an original production still. Some independent interpretations of the Palais Garnier (including featuring a huge window as a mirror substitute for Christine), more Edwardian flair of the costume design, and a kick-ass chandelier - grand, fun, and with some cool and independent directing ideas throughout. The idea of never leaving the opera house, for example, was interesting. Very enjoyable overall.

MEDITERRANEAN: Basing nearly the whole set design within a rectangular, turnable box on stage was a neat and cool idea. This, combined with oh-so-Victorian costumes and so many nods to Phantom history, felt original and clever. Also some stunning original visuals, like the Phantom's lair with the Piraniesi-esque labyrinth backdrop. Speaking of original, it probably looked very as expected with its heavy victoriana flair - but to me that's not a negative thing.

POLAND: One could argue this in large was a carbon copy of the 2004 movie. The costumes in particular, but also directing elements like including a sword fight in the Mausoleum scene. But the sets - oh, those beautiful sets! Also a wild chandelier crash.

SYDNEY HARBOUR: A really hard one to rank. The world's first outdoor production (ORIGINAL!), with sets looking like Bjørnson's design on steroids (not as original), with 1860s flair costumes (hello 2004 movie) with a dash of LND Australia (not as original), but then a flying gondola over burning water (ORIGINAL!), a huge cast (very RAH), and performing come rain or sunshine (ORIGINAL!). Something old, something new... But definitely a cool one for the Phantom portfolio!

RESTAGED TOUR: I was a bit in doubt on how to rank this one. I mean, the costume design is in large not new, it's Maria Bjørnson's costumes. But then new set design, new directing and new choreography. With various degrees of success. To me the most original idea is the drum set structure, and also some new magic tricks and added moments. I'm not loving the directing choices, as it makes both the Phantom and Raoul rather unloving candidates for Christine - why would she pick either of them? Also felt too much like a nod to Love Never Dies to appear truly original. So yeah, mostly for the sets.

HUNGARY and CZECH REPUBLIC: Whereas the productions themselves may not look the same, they both feel like two similar takes, to loving interpretations of the original, sticking to the same colour schemes and with a heavy Victorian flair. Directing wise they also feel like the same landscape. I appreciate both a lot, and especially Hungary has some clever ideas going on. I also loved how they picked Palais Garnier as a base - but totally different areas or angles of the Palais Garnier than what Bjørnson did. But if going purely by originality they don't move too far outside the box.

NEW ROMANIAN PRODUCTION: Nearly impossible to rank. AI design with some tweaks, which has resulted in a sort of amalgamated combo of all the non-replica production set design, with a sprinkle of Maria Bjørnson design on top. With some playing-card-odd costumes. Some visuals are stunning, some are very traditional, some are way out there. Yeah, I have no idea how to rank this one.

(and of course this is just my impression of them - have in mind that I've only seen three of them live, and if I see more of them in the future I may feel different about this ranking)

[jennyfair7]

im looking up corvids and like. sure man

[jennyfair7]

Gabriel Joseph Marie Augustin Ferrier

[jennyfair7]

ERIK NO！

[jennyfair7]

crab crab crab hand hand hand frighten

[jennyfair7]

Infinite hp

[jennyfair7]

Welcome to the 39th installment of 15 Weeks of Phantom, where I post all 68 sections of Le Fantôme de l’Opéra, as they were first printed in Le Gaulois newspaper 115 yeas ago.

In today’s installment, we have Part VII of Chapter 14, “La Lyre d’Apollon” (“Apollo’s Lyre”), and Part I of Chapter 15, “Un Coup de maître de l’amateur de trappes” (“A Masterstroke of the Trapdoor Lover”).

This section was first printed on Tuesday, 23 November, 1909.

For anyone following along in David Coward's translation of the First Edition of Phantom of the Opera (either in paperback, or Kindle, or from another vendor -- the ISBN-13 is: 978-0199694570), the text starts in Chapter 13 with, “'Christine,' said Raoul as he got to his feet, 'you say you love me but it was only a matter of hours after you were free again that you went back to him',” and goes to Chapter 14, “Then she rushed out in a state of near-panic, still pulling and smoothing her fingers as if she thought the ring would somehow mysteriously reappear of its own accord.”

There are some differences between the Gaulois text and the First Edition. In this section, these include (highlighted in red above):

1) Chapter XV was printed as Chapter XVI. This numbering error was made in Chapter VII, and was not corrected, so it was propagated throughout the Gaulois publication.

2) Chapter 15 in the Gaulois text is Chapter 14 in the First Edition, etc.

3) Compare the Gaulois text:

… vous dites que vous m'aimez et quelques heures à peine s'étaient écoulées depuis que vous aviez recouvé votre liberté, que déjà vous retourniez auprès d'Erik !…

Translation:

“… you say that you love me and yet scarcely a few hours had passed since you had regained your liberty, and you were already going back to Erik!…”)

To the First Edition:

… vous dites que vous m'aimez, mais quelques heures à peine s'étaient écoulées, depuis que vous aviez recouvé votre liberté, que déjà vous retourniez auprès d'Erik !…

Translation:

“… you say that you love me, but scarcely a few hours had passed since you had regained your liberty, and you were already going back to Erik!…”

4) This passage was added to the First Edition (indicated by the red arrow above), and does not appear in the Gaulois:

Soudain une silhouette bizarre se dressa devant les jeunes gens, leur barrant le chemin :

« Non ! pas par ici ! »

Et la silhouette leur indiqua un autre couloir par lequel ils devaient gagner les coulisses.

Raoul voulait s’arrêter, demander des explications.

« Allez ! allez vite !… commanda cette forme vague, dissimulée dans une sorte de houppelande et coiffée d’un bonnet pointu.*

Christine entraînait déjà Raoul, le forçait à courir encore :

« Mais qui est-ce ? Mais qui est-ce, celui-là ? » demandait le jeune homme.

Et Christine répondait :

« C��est Le Persan !…

– Qu’est-ce qu’il fait là…

– On n’en sait rien !… Il est toujours dans l’Opéra !

Translation:

Suddenly, a strange silhouette loomed before the two youths, blocking their path:

“No! Not this way!”

And the silhouette pointed to another corridor by which they must reach the wings.

Raoul wanted to stop, to ask for an explanation.

“Go! Go quickly!…” ordered this shadowy figure, enshrouded in a sort of houppelande and capped with a pointed hat.*

Christine was already dragging Raoul away, forcing him to run again:

“But who is that? Who is that man?” asked the young man.

And Christine replied:

“That is The Persian!…”

“What is he doing here?…”

“No one knows!… He is always at the Opera!”

* NOTE: Leroux's character of "The Persian" was based on an actual French historical figure, the Persian gentleman and expat, Mohammed Ismaël Khan. This image below depicts the houppelande coat and Astrakhan cap that Leroux was likely imagining when he was writing his novel.

This image is from Les Célébrités de la rue, by Charles Yriarte, published in 1864, a book that listed notable figures in Paris in the early to mid 1800s. It was published during Mohammed Ismaël Khan's lifetime, as M. Khan passed away in 1868.

It is worth noting that the Opera House that M. Khan frequented was the Salle Le Peletier, which was destroyed in a fire in 1873 (five years after M. Khan's death). Two years later in 1875, the Paris Opera was moved to the newly opened Palais Garnier (aka Erik's Opera House). So, contrary to Leroux's narrative, M. Khan never actually frequented the Palais Garnier. This is an example of faction (fact+fiction), one of Leroux's favorite literary devices, which Leroux used throughout Le Fantôme de l'Opéra to build a feeling of verisimilitude into his fictionalized narrative.

5) Compare the Gaulois text:

C'était Erik. Il avait les yeux de braise dont vous m'avez parlé. J'aurais dû le clouer sur la lyre d'Apollon…

Translation:

“That was Erik. He had the fiery eyes that you told me about. I should have nailed him to Apollo’s Lyre…”

To the First Edition:

Si vraiment nous avons aperçu Erik j'aurais dû le clouer sur la lyre d'Apollon…

Translation:

“If that truly was Erik that we saw, I should have nailed him to Apollo’s Lyre…”

6) Compare the Gaulois text (this was likely an error on Leroux’s part, since earlier, Raoul agreed to be in Christine’s dressing room at midnight sharp):

… à minuit et demi ! fit le jeune homme …

Translation:

“… at half past midnight!” said the young man …

To the First Edition:

… à minuit je serai dans votre loge, fit le jeune homme …

Translation:

“… at midnight I shall be in your dressing room,” said the young man

7) Compare the Gaulois text:

Jamais ! répondit-elle avec énergie. Je la renverrai à Erik en la déposant dans la loge du fantôme. Il faut qu'Erik puisse rentrer tranquillement chez lui le soir…

Translation:

“Never!” she replied forcefully. “I shall return it [the key] to Erik by leaving it in the Phantom’s box. Erik must be able to return calmly to his house in the evening…”

To the First Edition:

Jamais ! répondit-elle avec énergie. Ce serait une trahison !

Translation:

“Never!” she replied forcefully. “That would be a betrayal!”

8) Minor differences in punctuation.

Click here to see the entire edition of Le Gaulois from 23 November, 1909. This link brings you to page 3 of the newspaper — Le Fantôme is at the bottom of the page in the feuilleton section. Click on the arrow buttons at the bottom of the screen to turn the pages of the newspaper, and click on the Zoom button at the bottom left to magnify the text.