The following post is a bit of a departure from my usual style. It's definitely not a review, anyway. Below, you will find an essay I wrote in March of 2016, exploring the theological themes and implications of The Phantom of the Opera, for a theology class at the University of St Andrews. Taught by Dr Ian Bradley, the course, which is the only one of its kind globally, focused on the theology of musicals in the 20th and 21st centuries. I was a bit out of my comfort zone on this one - I'm technically a history student, not a theologian. But my love of musicals prompted a leap into the unknown, and I ended up having the best time (and getting the highest mark in the class, but that was just a nice bonus). This essay was my second piece of coursework, after a very fun Godspell presentation, and I had a wonderful time researching further into one of my favourite musicals. So, enjoy! It's written in a loose academic style, but I hope you'll find it an enjoyable read nonetheless (I threw some pictures in to loosen up the wall of text).
A Theological Reflection on The Phantom of the Opera
The Musical The Phantom of the Opera (herein after referred to as Phantom) premiered in London in 1986,
and continues to run in both London and New York City to this day. Based on
Gaston Leroux’s 1909 novel Le Fantôme de l'Opéra,
it introduces a mysterious Phantom who haunts the Opera Populaire in Paris, and
chronicles the story of his muse and obsession: the young soprano Christine
Daae. At first glance, Phantom
appears as a secular musical, with no outward expressions of God or faith in
God. Nevertheless, it is packed with biblical innuendo, echoing people, places,
and themes found in popular theology. To understand the theology inherent in Phantom, this reflection will begin by
examining the affect the production design had upon its theological messages.
It will then look at the theological themes that are most prominent in the show,
followed by an analysis of lyrics and songs that evoke biblical imagery.
Finally, the reflection will conclude with an investigation into the characters
of Christine Daae and the Phantom himself, and their parallels with biblical
figures.
Andrew Lloyd Webber, composer of Phantom, has obvious and well-known
links to Christianity and theology. As the composer of Jesus Christ Superstar
and a patron of Open Churches Trust, it is clear that he is influenced by
theology in his writing of music. Because of this, I would instead like to briefly
discuss Maria Bjørnson’s, the production designer, influence on the visual
theology of the show. In a 1988 interview for Connoisseur magazine, Bjørnson noted her interest in
creating the familiarity of a church setting for many audience members. With
the appearance of organs, candles, and drapes, Bjørnson created a church-like
setting for the show (and particularly for the Phantom’s Lair). This
understanding of Bjørnson’s use of religious imagery is part of the
understanding of the show, and will be explored further in this essay.
There is a distinct comparison between
the physical and emotional spaces of Jesus’ Garden of Gethsemane and the
Phantom’s Lair. The Phantom’s Lair is his place of contemplation, meditation,
and creation. In it, the Phantom feels that he can be left undisturbed in order
to devote his life to his music (for example, he composes the score for Don
Juan Triumphant and countless other unknown pieces). Moreover, as Jesus teaches
his disciples about prayer and a relationship with God in the Garden, the
Phantom uses his Lair to teach Christine about her voice and a relationship
with music (and more importantly, with him, her “Angel of Music”). The Lair
also plays a part in the Phantom’s capture, as Gethsemane does in Jesus’
capture. A night spent in the company of others culminates in the storming of
the Garden and the Lair by a multitude of soldiers, intent on the destruction
of the subject they hunt.[1]
Because of this parallel, despite knowing full well the atrocities the Phantom
has committed, the audience feels sympathy for the Phantom, and often acts as
though they believe he is being unjustly persecuted. Though I do not think a
comparison between the characters of Jesus and the Phantom is warranted, their
‘safe spaces’ are remarkably similar to one another’s, a detail I believe that
Lloyd Webber and Bjørnson constructed purposefully based upon Lloyd Webber’s
foundation in Jesus Christ Superstar and
Bjørnson’s desire to create a church-like atmosphere.
The knowledge of Lloyd Webber and Bjørnson’s
emotional and visual goals in mind allows us now to turn to theological themes
inherent in Phantom. Phantom abounds with any number of
possible themes, but this essay will discuss the themes of appearance versus
reality and forgiveness. Appearance versus reality harkens at once to the
Phantom’s physical appearance; on the outside, he appears calm, cool, and
sophisticated in his debonair suit and luminous white mask. But the reality is
that this cool exterior masks a deeply twisted persona, which emerges in
moments of rage or upset during the show. This depiction is reminiscent of 1
Samuel 16.7, which says, “man looks on the outward appearance, but the Lord
looks on the heart.” Bjornson intended the Phantom’s outward
appearance to look like he had poured his effort into it; the mask is meant to
resemble finely crafted porcelain. Thus, it is not immediately apparent to
anyone who looks at the Phantom that he is a madman. Until he reveals his true
personality to Christine, only God knows.
Forgiveness is essential to the ending
of the story of Phantom. Christine
has been wronged enormously by the Phantom; but also by Raoul, Madame Giry, the
Managers, and Carlotta. Though Christine expresses anger and fear during
“Twisted Every Way” and “Final Lair”, she nevertheless provides a biblical
model of forgiveness at the end of the show. Christine begs for God to give her
courage to show the Phantom the love and acceptance he needs, and doing so, is
able to forgive him for the suffering he has put her through. Because she does
this, Christine is able to rescue herself and Raoul (and really, the entire
opera house) from the “dominion of darkness” that is the Phantom’s Lair.[2] The
Phantom, on the other hand, is more of an example of what not to do. Matthew
6.14-15 notes, “For if you forgive other people when they sin
against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not
forgive others their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.” The
Phantom blames his sadistic behavior on never having been loved, appreciated,
or understood, and being, “met with hatred everywhere!” In fact, the Phantom
outright accuses others of sins and attempts to punish them. Again in the Final
Lair, he sings to Raoul, “Why should I make her pay for the sins which
are yours?” before hanging Raoul from a portcullis. The Phantom’s
inability to forgive others for their sins against him turns him farther
towards hatred; his very soul is corrupted, and he cannot be saved or welcomed
back into the human world.
With those theological and biblical
themes in mind, it is time now to turn to the characters of the Phantom and
Christine. Both the individuals and relationship between them parallel
significant biblical characters, almost too clearly to have been accidental.
The Phantom himself bears many similarities to the biblical representation of
the Devil; the “Angel of Music” (as mentioned above) literally becomes the
“Angel in Hell,” following the ‘fallen angel’ archetype as referenced in the
New Testament. 2 Peter 3.4 says, “God spared not the angels
that sinned, but cast them down to hell.” This is, essentially, what
happens to the Phantom during the show. His sins (murder, lust, and all manner
of malevolent deeds) are what condemn him to the hell that is the underbelly of
the Opera house, where he is doomed to suffer an eternity alone. Moreover, like
the Devil, the Phantom longs to be worshipped and revered, and is also guilty
of the sin of Pride.[3] Lloyd
Webber wanted the Phantom to appear as an “unrecognized genius,” far ahead of
his time musically. The Phantom believes he is more skilled than everyone else,
yet no one recognizes his gifts. In this
way, we can see how closely the Phantom resembles the biblical Devil.
Christine Daae, the young, innocent
ingénue who is our protagonist in Phantom,
reflects many characteristics of the biblical Virgin Mary. Stacy Wolf, in her
book Changed for Good, notes that
women in 1980s musical theatre fall into two categories; either virgin or whore,
wherein a virgin is the one with whom the hero falls in love.[4]
But Christine does not simply represent a
virgin or virginal figure; in many ways, she represents the Virgin: Mary. For example, as God uses Mary as his instrument
on earth, the Phantom uses Christine as his literal instrument in the world of
the Opera Populaire. Mary bears God’s
child, Christine bears the Phantom’s music. Moreover, the Phantom can be
perceived as Christine’s God for a time. He gives her the gift of music; he is
her saviour, and she is dependent on his instruction, grace, and love to excel
as a performer. At certain points, Christine’s physical appearance is
representative of Mary; in ‘Wishing You Were Somehow Here Again,’ Christine
appears in a blue cloak and red scarf. These are the traditional colours that
highlight Mary as she appears in artwork from late antiquity onwards.
Furthermore, it is significant that Christine appears in this costume in
‘Wishing’, a song in which she speaks to her father, who is referenced
throughout the show as a God-like figure in her life – never there physically,
but always spiritually present. Christine ‘speaking to God’ in an overtly and
unashamedly Marian costume, and in front of a large, imposing cross, is a
powerful piece of imagery intended to further emphasize Christine’s innocence,
naivety, and blind faith in her God-figure.
There is also somewhat of an
Eve/Serpent (as represented in Genesis 3) dynamic between Christine and the
Phantom. It is more subtle than the comparisons above, but the theme of
temptation underpins the entirety of the show. I believe the scenes where this
comparison is most evident are “Angel of Music” and “Point of No Return.” But
there are also strong serpent-esque vibes within “Stranger Than You Dreamt It,”
wherein the Phantom literally slithers across the floor like a snake. Moreover,
I have seen some Phantoms (including veteran Scott Davies and newcomer Ben
Forster) incorporate snake-like characteristics into their performances. Davies
hisses all of the ‘S’ sounds in the show, but it becomes most pronounced when
his Phantom feels threatened. Forster’s body language is very reminiscent of a
cobra about to strike; dangerous, yet sensual. It is clear that performers have made acting choices to
reflect the serpent-like quality of the Phantom’s character.
There are actions, too that make the Phantom appear as the serpent to
Christine’s Eve. In “Angel of Music,” he lures her through the mirror with some
sort of hypnotic power; Christine walks towards him as if in a trance, and
remains in said trance through until the end of “Music of the Night.” Moreover,
in “Point of No Return,” there is the explicit imagery of a bright red apple
with which the Phantom attempts to seduce Christine. The Phantom, like the
biblical serpent, beguiles, tempts, and enchants Christine for much of the show.
After having consumed the fruit of knowledge in the preceding scene, the
enchantment breaks; Christine, now full of knowledge, has removed herself from
the imaginary Garden of Eden she had seen the Phantom as part of, and now
beholds him for what he truly is – evil; the devil represented in flesh.
Within the song, “Point of No Return,”
there is a line in that song which has always intrigued me. Christine sings, “Past
the point of no return, no going back now. Our Passion Play has now, at last,
begun!” At first, this seems out of place. Did Lloyd Webber and Hart not
realize what a passion play was, thereby using it in a romantic or sexualized
way? It is possible, but I do not believe that is case. The passion play
reference comes at a climactic moment in the action; the Phantom has cornered
Christine onstage in a mock opera. In mere moments, he will be unmasked, and will
flee with Christine into his lair, where the grand final scene will take place.
And so, the passion play, as it is, is literally about to begin. The audience will
watch as they experience the Phantom’s, rather than Jesus’, trial, suffering,
and ultimate sacrifice (it is a stretch, but one could also argue that the
banquet scene preceding Point of No Return represents the Last Supper). The Phantom
does not sacrifice his literal life for the good of others. Or does he? Ben
Forster, current West End Phantom and former Jesus in Jesus Christ Superstar, notes the Phantom does sacrifice his life,
because Christine is all he has left of life. “He sacrifices his dream
and obsession […] she is the only person to show him humanity and kindness;” Forster
adds that the Phantom knows she needs to be free, even though it will literally
kill him to let her go.[5] Kieran
Brown, current West End understudy Phantom, agrees, “She is his everything,
but he has to let her leave.”[6] So
we can see that this major sacrifice is written into the script and ingrained
in the performances of various Phantoms. The Phantom experiences the trial and
judgment of the audience and other characters, he suffers loneliness and
betrayal from those he trusts most. When the Phantom sacrifices his life and
his love for the benefit of Christine and all of those at the Opera Populaire,
the Passion play narrative is completed.
Another lyric that stands out, and is
repeated frequently throughout the show, is, “Angel of Music.” It’s a phrase
used occasionally by the Phantom to refer to Christine (“Sing, my Angel of
Music!”), but more often is Christine who applies it the mysterious figure that sings to her
(“Angel of Music, guide and guardian,” for example). With Christine’s
comparison to Mary already in place, it seems apt to mention this quote from
Luke 1.28, “And the angel that came unto her, and said, Hail, thou art highly
favoured, the Lord is with thee.” Christine sees the Phantom as the angel sent
by her ‘God’, her father, just as the angel Gabriel was sent by God for Mary.
As God uses Mary, the Phantom uses Christine, heightening the comparison
between the two. Christine believes that the Phantom favours her above all
others as he not only teaches her to sing, but also seeks to remove those who
stand in the way of a successful operatic career. Moreover, in the song “Angel
of Music” itself, the Phantom appears to Christine quite miraculously, similar
to Gabriel’s appearance before Mary. The Phantom materializes out of the mirror
and, like Mary, Christine has a moment of doubt and fear, before coming to
trust and be comforted by the mysterious apparition that sings to her in her
dreams.
Though presented as a secular piece of
theatre, The Phantom of the Opera is
a musical which abounds with theological themes and imagery. Though they may
not first be apparent, once realized, they are impossible to ignore, and the
knowledge of these themes and parallels add depth to one’s impression of the
story, sets, costuming, and characters. The themes within the show, both
theological and secular, are universally recognizable, which contributes to Phantom’s unending popularity. The
lyrics and staging of many songs allude directly to biblical verses or
situations, and the characters of the Phantom and Christine themselves
personify key biblical figures. Phantom is
a musical that has something for everyone within it; there is a love story for
the romantic, dancing for the balletically-inclined, scenes which pass the
Bechdel test for the feminist, and, most importantly, biblical parallels and
theological themes for the theologian.
[1] John 18.1-11, Holy Bible: King James Version. New
Edition. Collins, 2011. Print.
[3] Isaiah 14.12-14, Holy Bible: King
James Version. New Edition. Collins, 2011. Print.
[4] Stacy Wolf, Changed
for Good: A Feminist History of the Broadway Musical (New York, 2011), p.
128
[5] Twitter Exchange with Ben Forster (@BenForster)(March 16th,
2015)
Please note: this is a piece of academic work and should not be reproduced or quoted without the express permission of the author.
