Customer Reviews

The Angel of the Opera: Sherlock Holmes Meets the Phantom of the Opera

5 star:		(22)
4 star:		(8)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(4)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

There's a hokey premise lurking in Sam Siciliano's "Angel of the Opera: Sherlock Holmes Meets the Phantom of the Opera."

On the heels of a disturbing case (the conclusion of which sets the tone and pace for the rest of the book), Sherlock Holmes and his cousin Dr. Henry Vernier- the book's narrator and an amiable replacement for Watson, with whom Holmes has had a falling-out - are summoned to Paris, where managers of the Paris Opera House have had problems with a mysterious Opera Ghost.

Sounds corny, no?

The truth is, it's anything but. Siciliano ably takes Arthur Conan Doyle's and Gaston Leroux's creations, and weaves them into a story that is possibly better than those of his predecessors.

Vernier and Holmes share a delightful familial connection that takes way from Watson's absence as the two traipse through the underdwellings of the Opera House. It's not hard to imagine the two lurking in the background of Leroux's novel.

With considerable amusement, Siciliano transforms the flat, supporting characters of

"Phantom" into viable human beings.

The object of the Phantom's affections, Christine Daae, is a young woman torn by conflicting desires. Her lover Raoul de Chagny is a repulsive moonstruck suitor. Perhaps not Leroux's original concept of the characters, but infinitely more appealing to the reader.

Holmes and the Phantom's personalities are not altered, but the author presents them in a more accessible manner than Doyle and Leroux's versions- most likely because of the era they were written in- allow.

They are the Holmes and Phantom we are all familiar with; at the same time, they are no longer a stuggle to read.

The clash of titans is not so much a battle between enemies as it is a meeting of equals. Both are masters of their environments, incredibly gifted and neither is completely at ease with humanity.

From the moment Sherlock receives a warning telegram from the Phantom, neither man has the upper hand. When they finally come face to face, Siciliano wisely focuses on the mutual respect that only two of the most popular literary creations ever could have for each other.

Apart, the characters of Sherlock Holmes and the Phantom of the Opera are adorable. But when thrust together, as they are in "Angel of the Opera," the results are mesmerizing.

It has often been said that Gaston Leroux was confined by his genre and unable to properly explore the vast regions of a character that has more potential dimensions than, I'd wager, even he could anticipate. I tend to think that this is so with Sherlock Holmes as well. Arthur Conan Doyle's method of presenting his immortal character, in the voice of his long-time friend Dr. Watson, tends to make Holmes appear two-dimensional, in spite of Doyle's obvious storytelling ability. In this, Holmes shares a commonality with Erik, and, thus, they are a prefect match. For those of you who would dismiss this as some sort of silly Internet fanfiction you may put your doubts to rest. It is a remarkable book, well written and enjoyable.
However, in the interest of fairness I would like to voice a few warnings, for in bringing two great immortal characters together, there are some inevitable side effects.
First of all, those who explore this book as a fan of Erik's should know that this is more of a Sherlock Holmes story. He is the central character and it is told from the point of view of his cousin and companion. However, Erik's character is in no way diminished. The side effect is that everybody else gets diminished. Siciliano uses a common technique of storytellers who tackle immortal stories. Raoul, the Persian, and to a lesser degree, Christine, are all diminished to the level of base human vices. Not only that but Watson also suffers as his character is depicted as stuffy and secretly contentious with Holmes. Fortunately, however, these weaknesses, though at times annoying, can be justified as the symptoms of two such formidable personalities as Holmes and Erik coming together in a single story. They take the spotlight and everyone else gets pushed aside. Thus, in spite of all that, for sheer caliber of storytelling, I give this book five stars. It is a fantastic and ingenious spin on an idea that dates back to the 1960s. An idea that I am very glad to see in published form. As a fan of both Holmes and Erik I am very pleased.

The minor stretches to Holmes' character are forgivable, as is the lack of Watson. As a Sherlockian and a Phantom fan, I felt this book was wonderful. The author flawlessly enters a new character into the Phantom saga. Sherlock Holmes and Erik(the Phantom) are written with such depth and give out so much emotion that by the end of this book your eyes will not be dry. The dialogue between the two geniuses is not to be missed. A welcome read to the fans of Erik and Sherlock alike.

Reading this book has been a very satisfying experience. I cannot claim to be a Holmes connoisseur but I have been a fan of the Phantom for some time now, always eager to read or see an alternate version of the story. I have been waiting quite some time for this book and after reading it, I believe it was definately worth it. The plot is very good, even the somewhat minor characters are for the most part well developed -note the conflict between Raoul's background and temperament and Christine's choice between conventional thinking and idealism; Conflicts that help define them and create depth. That certainly is a refreshing change from plenty other versions of the Phantom that over analyse Erik, while leaving every other character shallow and undeveloped. The Persian was a surprise; A direct contrast to Leroux's original and Kay's version, but an interesting change nonetheless that fits right into the story.
There is one more change from the main Phantom's story that proves ultimately enjoyable, although initially questionable; It is the consolation of the Happy Ending ,using professor Tolkien's term. One would assume that this development would deduct some of the Phantom's tragic nature, but it doesn't. I would actually dare say that it makes Erik even more human in our eyes, especially after the way he interacts with every other character in his underground home. There is still the bittersweet taste, provided for the reader by Holmes himself; but ultimately, a feeling of justice and comfort is overwhelming. Certainly, if overworked, this can become tiresome and unrealistic - but in Mr. Siciliano's case, it has become a very welcome addition to the Phantom's legend. Five stars.

This book was actually quite enjoyable (even though I consider myself a Holmes and Phantom of the Opera purist....). I was actually thrilled that this book was published...What more could I want? Both of my favorite literary characters in one book! Overjoyed isn't the word!

I really enjoyed this book...I loved the way our author kept true to the original characters...and I actually could see this story taking place. In Leroux's "Phantom of the Opera"....Chapter 20...we hear of a "shade" which is not "he" (The Phantom), but supposedly a detective....who else could this have been other than Holmes....????
During the 1890s, Holmes was in his hiatus period...Watson believed him dead (according to the Doyle writings) and could not this "shade" mentioned by Leroux be our beloved detective? I'd like to think so!

It is very unfortunate that this book is now out-of-print! It is a great read (though with anything that touches upon "classical" writings...there are "mistakes" when comparing it to the original canons; yet most of them can be forgiven!). If you are still unsure...borrow it from your library before investing in a "rare" out-of-print edition.

As a "Phantom" fan, I found this to be thoroughly enjoyable. A couple of twists made the ending a bit of a surprise. Thanks to Sam Siciliano who brought Michael Crawford's version of the Phantom to life and gave us an ending his Phantom deserved!

I was given the book for my birthday back in 1995, and it has long been one of my favorites. After discussing the book with some friends who are also fans of The Phantom of the Opera, I decided to write and post a review.

In The Angel of the Opera, we have an Erik who is more to my liking - not a monster, but a lonely, anguished man who has been shunned by society and who sees in Christine Daaé his last chance at love. Towards the end of the book, Erik puts it quite well when he says, "There are men who can live alone without the society, the intimacy, of women, but I am not such a man. Knowing Christine has made it far worse. I thought, I truly thought, that she might love me. I can bear my dreadful solitude no longer." How can you not feel for the man?

Unlike The Canary Trainer (another PotO/Sherlock Holmes crossover, this one by Nicholas Meyer), this story follows Leroux's original much more closely with some necessary changes made to include Holmes and his cousin, Henry Vernier. No, there's no Watson in this one. Mr. Siciliano wanted to give us a more human Holmes than the thinking machine created by Doyle. To do that, he needed to change narrators. He did this by giving us Dr. Henry Vernier, who tells us the Watson's portrayal of Holmes was not quite accurate and that the detective and the doctor did not always exist on the best of terms.

In fact, the reason it is Vernier who accompanies Holmes to Paris is that his cousin and Watson have had a falling out at this time. There may be some readers who consider this "Watson bashing," but I don't. To me, bashing is unreasonably insulting a person or a character. What we have here, and in a lot of fan fiction, is what I think of as reinterpreting of a character. Sometimes that reinterpretation can devolve into bashing, but in this case, I don't think so. However, back to the story.

The author is well versed in both Holmes and Phantom, and his research shows up in the careful details he has included in his story. One of the first clues that Siciliano knows his Holmes is when he calls a relative Violet Sherrinford. Students of The Great Detective will recognize the name of Sherrinford as that purported to be the name of Holmes's father. And, of course, Violet is a common name throughout the Doyle stories.

As for the world of PotO, the author's detailed descriptions of the opera house and its workings are in-depth and necessary for understanding events as they later unfold. He also has knowledge of Brittany, and his inclusion of standing stones near Perros is not something just thrown in for the heck of it. In my own research of Perros and Brittany, I learned that there are many remnants of the regions Celtic past including standing stones.

Essentially, the story involves Holmes being called to Paris by the management of the Paris Opera. While there, Holmes makes the acquaintance of PotO's characters. Christine Daaé is a confused young woman who not all that long ago believed in the korrigans (pixie-like people). Raoul de Chagny is a sometime arrogant young man who can be rather full of himself. Count Philippe is always arrogant (he reminds me of my own version of Philippe in Variations!) The others are all there, too - Meg Giry, Mme Giry, the Persian (who is portrayed in a less than stellar light), and other minor characters.

There is another character we meet only at the end of the book, but who is alluded to throughout the story - the love of the narrator's (Vernier's) life, a woman named Michelle. Vernier's observances of the behavior of Christine and Raoul serves as an interesting counterpoint to his own feelings for Michelle, like in a piece of music where two different themes are played at the same time yet compliment each other rather than detract.

Holmes and Erik have several excellent conversations. My favorite is at the masked ball. You know, Red Death and all that stuff. Holmes attends, dressed as Quasimodo. (The parallels between Quasimodo's presence in the Notre Dame Cathedral and Erik's in the Paris Opera is brought out several times.) Here is a sample from that exchange:

The Red Death smiled, an expression that made him look even more ghastly. "You are amusing, Quasimodo, most amusing, but I do not believe you. Your face is mostly putty."

"Your own face blinds you. It is no more real than mine. No faces are real; they are all illusion, constantly changing, all masks. It is foolish to envy another his mask. A mask has no more permanence or reality than anything else in this life."

The Red Death stared at Holmes, his eyes aflame. "You would not find that so easy to say if you were to trade places with me, if you had a face even a mother would cringe before." A strange, pained smile pulled at his mouth.

"I know that. However, although it is something of a cliché, that which lies under the mask is what counts. Too many fools and villains have the visage of Jove or Adonis."

"All the more reason to hate this life, this face, which Fate has bestowed upon me."

I could go on, but you get the picture.

As for the framing story. In the beginning of the book, we find Holmes and Vernier finishing up a case in Wales, in the home of Major Lowell and his daughter, Susan. Lowell spent many years in India, and married an Indian woman. Susan is the product of that union, and is shunned by society because of her half-caste status. She also suffers from trachoma, which she contracted in India and which has left her mostly blind.

You may be able to see where this is leading, and while some readers have suggested that the ending of this book is clichéd, I found it satisfying nonetheless. Clichés would not exist if there were no universal truth behind them. Besides, like all of us, I wanted Erik to find some happiness.

I had to wait about two weeks to get this book, so needless to say, I was extremely excited to be able to finally read it. It was definitely worth the waiting. I loved the ending especially, because a character as special and unfortunate as Erik deserves a finale other than a quiet death. Is there any other book that follows up his end relationship? I really want to know! I was a little surprised at the way Nadir and Raoul were portrayed, however. I think I prefer Raoul as he was in the play Phantom of the Opera. One other thing, isn't it the grasshopper that blows up the opera and the scorpion that saves everyone? It was quite the opposite in this book. But anyway, I definitely recommend this book to anyone even remotely interested in Erik or the Phantom of the Opera story. I'll have to look into buying this sometime. Great book!

This is one of the best Sherlock Holmes stories that was not done by Sir Arthur Connan Doyle. It had a great plot and it was written great. Another really great book is Sherlock Holmes and the Red Demon.

This was a very good Sherlock Holmes novel. I am a Sherlockian and this was one of the best Holmesian stories I have read that was not by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. I would recomend this book too anyone wo is interested in Sherlock Holmes.