Holmes Meets the Phantom–Again

I’ve been on a Phantom of the Opera kick lately–I mean, more so than the ongoing attachment I’ve had to the story for the last eight years.  I wrote a post about different versions, and learned about a new-to-me book, The Canary Trainer by Nicholas Meyer–thank you, Swamp Adder!

Now how I could resist the Phantom of the Opera meets Sherlock Holmes, written by the director of Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan?  Especially after rereading the flawed but enjoyable Angel of the Opera by Sam Siciliano, another Holmes-meets-the-Phantom story.  It may not be quite fair to compare them (especially since The Canary Trainer was published a year earlier) but it’s also unavoidable.  TCT was better than AotO…and worse, contradictory though that might sound.

The big problem with AotO was that it completely maligned Watson.  TCT at least did better in that regard, and that does make a big difference.  Watson was back in his proper place as Holmes’ closest friend.  Holmes regards Watson’s writing about him with outward disdain and secret but obvious pride–as it should be.  The book opens very well, with Watson visiting Holmes and discussing past cases, finally teasing a new story out of him.  Here we go into a book-length flashback, told from Holmes’ point of view.  I think I would have preferred a story that kept Watson’s POV, but this worked well enough–and better than bringing in a superfluous new narrator.

The story is from Holmes’ “lost years,” the time between Moriarty going off a cliff and Holmes’ return from the dead.  Apparently Meyer has written other books set in this time period, including one that brings Holmes and Freud together.  I haven’t read the others, and though they’re alluded to occasionally, I don’t think it’s necessary in order to read this one.  The story, as you’ve probably guessed, has Holmes deciding to go to Paris.  He’s incognito, since everyone presumes him dead, and has to find other, non-detective work.  He chances to hear that the Paris Opera is hiring a new violinist, and applies for the job.  Once at the Opera, he finds mysterious happenings involving the Phantom.  He also encounters Irene Adler, who is singing at the Opera.  She recognizes Holmes and asks him to help her new friend, Christine Daae–the “canary” who has a mysterious trainer.

And so it goes from there, with a falling chandelier, an inept viscount, a soprano in distress and a crazy man in a mask.  Like Siciliano, Meyer doesn’t make major plot changes.  Holmes is investigating the story we all know, and if nothing is greatly improved, nothing is done badly either, plot-wise.

You might say the same for Holmes.  He was reasonably well-drawn, nothing extraordinary.  If there’s anything reading other writers tackle Holmes has done for me, it’s made me appreciate Doyle’s ability to give Holmes clues and let him draw conclusions.  No one else seems to be able to do that to any great extent, although in one scene Holmes does figure out Raoul’s entire life circumstances just by looking at him.  But it was one moment, instead of a perpetual state.  I won’t say that the absence of deductive reasoning was acute enough to have the character actually off-track, but he wasn’t strikingly on-track either.  He also seemed to struggle a bit in his investigations.  I think he was more accurate to the original and more likable than Siciliano’s Holmes, but also less capable–and not as likable or as capable as Doyle’s Holmes.

We don’t see a whole lot of Christine and Raoul, and they were pretty standard when we did see them.  Raoul is immature and incompetent, Christine is hopelessly innocent and naive.  They both fulfilled their roles without doing much more than that–although Christine did get to score one point on Holmes.  She’s talking about her Angel of Music, and Holmes says he seems very angry for an angel.  To which Christine returns, “Haven’t you ever heard of avenging angels?”  Touche, Miss Daae.  But on the whole, she was pretty much sweet and stupid.  Looking at the basic plotline of Phantom, Christine has to be either very stupid or very clever, either a victim or the one who’s manipulating the whole thing.  I’d love to see a version where Christine is manipulative (think about it–who comes out ahead quite frequently?), but so far everyone’s been choosing to make her stupid or at least confused (though I think Webber is open for interpretation).

Anyway, now we come to the key question: the portrayal of the Phantom.  Usually, he’s a deeply complex character: tragic, sympathetic, terrifying, sometimes romantic, brilliant…certainly the most interesting one in the story.  That’s the later versions; in Leroux, he’s much more a monster.  Everyone else has been working on reforming him ever since.  Except Meyer.  The Canary Trainer is the first and only version I’ve found where the Phantom is actually less sympathetic than in Leroux (so…points for originality?)  This is the first time he’s gone the opposite direction and felt more like a character from a monster flick, stranger, crazier, and less sympathetic.  If you’ve read Leroux, you’ll know that making him crazier is really saying something.

This is the first time the body count has actually gone up.  In Leroux, one person is killed by the chandelier; in The Canary Trainer, it’s almost 30.  Four men who were drugged in Leroux to get them out of the Phantom’s way end up killed here.  You can make the point that the Phantom is a murderer regardless of how many people he kills, but I think there’s still little doubt that Meyer was deliberately creating a more villainous Phantom.  I don’t quite know what to make of that.  In a way I do applaud his decision to do something different.  But…there’s a reason everyone else made the Phantom more sympathetic.  He’s more interesting that way.

That may kind of sum up the book.  There’s nothing really wrong with it.  It’s not flawed in the same ways that Angel of the Opera is flawed, nor is it flawed in other serious ways.  But it didn’t do anything all that interesting either.  Holmes and the Phantom were both stripped of what makes them fascinating (Holmes’ deductive ability and the Phantom’s complexity), and in the end you get a book that is not bad–better than some versions–but not great either.  I don’t hate it, and I don’t love it.  I think it comes out about even with Angel of the Opera, but that’s because it’s neither as good in some ways nor as bad in others.  I’m glad to have read it; I’m endlessly intrigued by what people make of the Phantom story.  But I do think Nicholas Meyer accomplished something much more impressive with The Wrath of Khan.

Author’s Site: http://nmeyer.pxl.net/

Other reviews:
Here, There and Everywhere
A Bluestocking’s Place
Anyone else?

About cherylmahoney

I'm a book review blogger and Fantasy writer. I have published three novels, The Wanderers; The Storyteller and Her Sisters; and The People the Fairies Forget. All can be found on Amazon as an ebook and paperback. In my day job, I'm the Marketing Specialist for Yolo Hospice. Find me on Twitter (@MarvelousTales) and GoodReads (MarvelousTales).
This entry was posted in Historical Fiction, Reviews and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Holmes Meets the Phantom–Again

  1. I love Holmes analogues, but I’m usually a little disappointed. Doesn’t stop me from reading them, however. I read Meyer’s The Seven-per-cent Solution years ago, and remember enjoying it, so I’ll look for this one, too. Like you, I don’t think I’ll like a less sympathetic Phantom, but it still sounds interesting.

    • I love versions of the Phantom, even though I find some disappointing…but I keep reading them! Always worth it, just to see what another author (or director) decided to do with the story. I hope you enjoy The Canary Trainer! It was interesting…even if I like sympathetic Phantoms.

  2. Coincidences abounding here. My last post was also on Holmes, comparing the Guy Ritchie style movies and the new BBC Sherlock.

    Then, I finally get around to my first Once Upon A Time post and pop over here to let you know, since you’d left a comment asking. What do I see but that you’ve also written about a version of Cinderella, on the same day. A bit odd, but I’ll just put it down to the old great minds thinking alike thing 🙂

    Phantom of the Opera and Sherlock Holmes? Hmm, I do remember a film where Holmes meets Sigmund Freud in Vienna.

    • Well…the Holmes coincidence is surprising, but I write about fairy tales a lot, so that’s not too weird… It’s weirder that apparently Holmes has met Freud in more than one story!

  3. Susan says:

    I am in no way knowledgable on Sherlock Holmes or Phantom of the Opera … but I’m intrigued that an author would take on the exercise of blending the two stories to play with the characters and weave a new fabric of the two classics. Considering the legions of die-hard fans, it seems a courageous project … only a project that another dir-hard fan would attempt, I’m sure!

    Cheryl, thanks for your comment on the fairy tale find. I added my thoughts on your comment (if you’re interested).

  4. Swamp Adder says:

    It’s interesting that Meyer would go out of his way to make the Phantom less sympathetic — it almost makes you wonder why he wanted to do a Phantom story at all, if he wasn’t going to do anything interesting with the character.

    I’ve read The Seven-per-cent Solution (the Holmes-meets-Freud one) and found it enjoyable but silly. In that one the focus is on the Holmes and Freud stuff (and Holmes getting his coke addiction cured, which is why he went to Freud in the first place), while the mystery itself — which only kicks in in the second half of the book — is almost totally bland and forgettable.

    The idea of a manipulative Christine is not one I’ve heard before. That could be really interesting!

    • It was kind of something interesting with the Phantom’s character…just sort of a one-note interesting thing. Oh, he’s more crazy…now what?

      And I swear, I think Christine could easily be manipulating it all. Things work out for her. First she has the Phantom teaching her to sing and making her a star, then she has Raoul swooping in to give her a marriage proposal, money and social status, not to mention (try) to disentangle her from the Phantom now that her career is taking off. She shrieks and looks scared a lot, yet in actual fact, everyone is exerting themselves in her best interest at very significant points.

      Oh well, maybe someday I’ll write a version with a manipulative Christine…maybe for NaNo this year!

  5. ov099 says:

    Thanks for the link! I liked your review… for me, I rather liked it in that a) I’m not terribly knowledgeable of the real, honest to goodness print Holmes, but the Basil Rathbone movies, so I couldn’t compare how Meyer really too that part of the book on and b) given that everyone changes the original Phantom story plenty, given my expectations were low in that regard, I was pleasantly surprise how, relatively speaking, it was pretty close to the original story (and this one, I have read the original book a few times, although, yes, have seen the Weber movie and stage version a zillion times – the movie, that is; stage once), All in all, it kept me reading along, and that was the most important thing. 🙂

    Oh, and given the choice, I rather prefer The Undiscovered Country over The Wrath of Khan, but that one is pretty good too. 🙂 (that would be out of the Nicholas Meyer stories – my favorite movie is actually Generations. Yeah, I know, so very much in the minority!).


    • True, this version was closer to the original Leroux than many others. In a way, that’s what pointed up Meyer’s efforts to make the Phantom seem more villainous. If the plot had diverged more widely, I wouldn’t have been able to compare incidents side-by-side–like whether the Phantom drugged or killed the men guarding the gaslights.

      If you’ve seen the Webber movie a zillion times, I recommend the DVD of the 25th anniversary performance of the play. Absolutely wonderful, well-worth watching a zillion times too!

      As to Generations, I might like that movie so much better if only it weren’t for that stupid bridge…

  6. I kind of like the idea of Holmes just becoming a violinist at the opera, then finding out about this Phantom business.

    But I do think Nicholas Meyer accomplished something much more impressive with The Wrath of Khan.
    Alright this made me laugh. Would be hard to top The Wrath of Khan.

    • I’m mixed…it’s fun that he came because of the violin-playing, but I also find it more plausible that he’d come because of the mystery.

      And how weird is it that there are actually two separate books that explore that question? 🙂

Share Your Thoughts

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s