Summer Art: Cheating with old stuff

I have a totally cool piece of art for today, but I have to ask permission to use it first, so while that happens, plz to enjoy this concept art from Wasteland: Earth, which you can still read by following the link at the right hand side even though I haven't updated it for months (in my defense, the computer it was saved on blew up).

I should really recolor this now that I suck slightly less at Photoshop, but it is good to see whee I came from.

I would describe the character and story, but seriously...the link is right there. There's only like ten chapters, it won't take long.

Line art:
Colored profile:






Materials used: Pencils and Photoshop
Sketchbook: On Her Once White Wings, the Raven Wheels Above The Wasteland

Summer Art Cont...

This really needs no need to explain this.
Materials: Waterproof meant-for-kids markers
Sketchbook: Such Mad Hope from the Gates Of Horn And Ivory

Summer Art

Because he is infinitely cooler than me, I'm going to see if I can emulate my good buddy Holden who posts art he has made every day, sometimes new stuff, sometimes old stuff. You can check it out (and I strongly urge you to do so), here.

Today, we have some characters from the Ivory Tower.

The Ivory Tower was/is a concept I'm still mucking with, but as with most of my ideas, I enjoyed the conceptualizing and pretty utterly failed at the execution. The basic premise was the anthropomorphic personifications of academic subjects. The point was to explore the relationships between them. Humanities students don't identify with Math students who don't identify with Art students, and so on. And within the basic houses, there are huge differences.

I once walked in on a furious debate between a History student and an English student about who had to write more papers. The argument was silly to begin with because so much depends on what teachers you have. Some teachers assign 3 papers a quarter, which determine your whole grade (I HATE that, for the record). Others require a page long paper every week. And of course, the KIND of writing is different. While obviously, most English students can and do write research papers, and History students can and (though less often) do write creative works, the emphasis is still very different. But I didn't want to introduce a Quantity Versus Quality dynamic to what was already an asinine discussion.

Engineering students frequently don't relate to Physics students, even though there's so much overlap. Drama kids rarely get along with band kids. The point is, there is a culture to subjects, at least on the university level if not throughout academia, and I wanted to represent it with characters. Of course, all of this is through my perceptions of said subjects, and others have totally different ones, which was why I had wanted it to be a rather collaborative effort, and indeed, got a lot of tips and ideas from various individuals.

So the Ivory Tower itself is a giant...castle/private school. Rather like Hogwarts now that I think about it. It is presided over the rarely seen Polymath and broken into the 3 main houses mentioned above: Humanities, Sciences and Art. Of course, even here, there is some difficulty. The Physikies...Physics, Chemistry, Biology, etc...disdainfully look down on the Softies...Psychology, Anthropology, Sociology (triplets), Political Science and so on, which bounce between Science and Humanities as the Social Sciences. Mathematics and Physics don't get along because they are the two big guys in the little sandbox and they're just alike enough to hate each other and just different enough to not merge into a crazy amorphous blob. No one knows what to do with the art students. Or the philosophy students, but for the most part, they stay out of everyone's way.

So with that longwinded introduction over, here is the first couple Students I worked up.

Statistics is that girl everyone kind of hates, but also wants to be with. Sociology has a huge crush on her, but since they're so often in the same study group, he doesn't say anything because he doesn't want it to get 'weird.' She's the kind of girl who actually runs for the ASC. And wins. Her brother, Mathematics, particularly avoids her because she so often tries to one-up him and twists his words around in knots. She never goes steady with any one person for long and frequently makes rounds among the Softies. Her younger brother, Probabilities is always trying to tag along but he just mucks up her scene and she's always trying to distance herself from him.

Speaking of...



Meet Probabilities and his best friend Quantum Theory. Quantum Theory is Physics ginger-step-brother. Literally. But he doesn't let the weird stares or the nearly universal awkwardness and sidelong glances get him down. Probabilities and Quantum Theory hang out a lot, mostly because they get ignored or shunted by everyone else, and because they're a little young, they don't always relate the same way the others do. This, however, leads to lots of (truthfully, hilarious) pranks and shenanigans as they try to get everyone to just lighten up.

Materials: Pencil, .4 fine point pent, Photoshop.
Sketchbook: His Chthonic Majesty Dreams of English Summer Rain

Summer Projects: Part 1(?)

I'm not gunna lie. My back hurts. My legs are sore. I'm extremely tired. I've spent over a hundred dollars and worried it will be an epic waste, which would really suck because that's not exactly money I have to toss around. I've set my stove on fire, yelled at my cats, walked to and from base, twice (making it about a four mile trip, carrying groceries), and frequently found myself going, "WHY did I think this would be a good idea?"

All for these.



What, you may legitimately ask, are these infernal contraptions? Eyes in glasses? Toenails? Have I taken up some dark magics?!



My answer to all that is: I bet that would be easier.

Frankly, I blame Amazon. They had this huge digital sale, tons of books under four dollars. And one of the 99 cent ones was 'Make Liqueurs as Gifts!' and I was like 'Hey, I'm not really drinking anymore but totally have this booze left over, I bet it'd be swell to have homemade gifts of teh alcohols to give away!' It helped that I had recently been wanting to paint glass jars for no apparent reason. I had thought to make candle holders but this seemed so much cooler.

I'm going to share a secret with you, kittens. It takes a FHTAGN TON of alcohol to make liqueurs. Mostly vodka. I think I went through a 1 1/3 liter. I also polished off a bottle of gin.

If I had been smart and really thought this out, what I would have done was pick a relatively easy recipe, and tried it. If it worked out, I would have branched out, tinkering as I went.

I am neither smart, nor good at thinking things out.

What I did instead was by about six different kinds of fruits, nuts, spices, extracts...plus jars, a strainer, and coffee filters.

Those bottles are the main bunch, but there are another three in a closet, because they need to be kept in a warm dark place. So there's close to a dozen of these suckers. And, continuing my trend of idiocy, I decided to experiment straight off. I tried to keep detailed measurements and whatnot but there's a disturbing amount of 'approximately's written in my journal. I also got a giant At-A-Glance calendar to let me know when to shake this bottle, turn that bottle, strain this, etc.

What I should have done when I realized I was going to burn through alcohol like a fratboy was taper down all of the recipes. So what if I would have leftover fruit (which I do anyway)? Good snacks, way to be healthy. And truthfully, I did start really paring it down as we went, but it was still a lot.

So if this fails, it's going to fail epically.

But if it works...



...this could be the beginning of the Opheliac line. I've already started naming them. The above bottle will eventually be Incarnadine. I'm also designing labels, but these will be relatively simple and of course dependent on them not totally sucking. The above bottle again, has to sit without being moved for three months. My raspberry ones for pretty much the same amount.

So...I will keep you in the loop on that. Honestly, it was really fun, just stressful because I realized after it was too late to really stop that it probably could have been handled better.

Oh, and sugar syrup sucks to make. Just throwing that out there.

I had thought about making a whole new blog just to focus on different summer projects (art, writing, this, etc), but since I haven't done anything on this blog for awhile, and it would just get shut down once I start working again, I figured this was best.

Hit me up with your thoughts.

Early Morning Philosophy #2

Whenever I watch a movie that features Arlington National Cemetery, I won't lie, I fight the urge to tear up a bit.

Not simply for all the alabaster graves...though there are SO many of them...but for all the people I know aren't there...including those once thought our enemies. I have seen many war memorials now, and though I am grateful for a new kind of war that doesn't involve lining up on hilltops to fire at each other 'like a good sport,' it grieves me that our non-traditional wars are not really conducive to memorials as we understand them. And the people we tend to fight now would never be able to afford them anyway.

I am sad for all the families in the arid nations of AK's and sand and oil. I've been accused of being unpatriotic for this, but I consider quite the reverse true. If the adage: "With great power comes great responsibility," is true, I believe we, as Americans, have the highest responsibility to be respectful of fallen fighters on all sides.

I am adamantly opposed to violating the dead. When Achilles killed Hector, that was fine, that was his right as a warrior, and it was an honorable battle. But when he towed Hector's bleeding body around Troy's walls, there was an almost ubiquitous dissaproval...even from the gods.

I do not believe anyone to be my enemy. I have wished harm upon individuals, but only in moments of anger, and always because they have threatened or injured those close to me, and usually, much of the ire is born out of my own incompetence at defending my loved ones. I do not hate any group of people.

This is one of the reasons...perhaps the biggest reason, war is a horrifyingly soul-raping, wretched endeavor. I believe there are things worth fighting for. I believe there are things worth dying for. While I am more than a little hesitant to claim there are things worth killing for (because it is hard for me to conceive, let alone justify such a claim), I recognize that sometimes easy choices are simply not given to us, and I do not judge those who fight. Despite my own deontological moral philosophy, I absolutely believe there is honor in being a soldier, and it is totally appropriate to respect and honor THEM for their service.

The dead have no enemies (unless of course, the Zombie Apocalypse arrives, in which case, I'm going to have a LOT of moral paradigms to rethink). An enemy is someone who wants to harm you in some way. I do not believe the dead wish ill of anyone. As such, when someone dies, they cease to be an enemy. I'm not suggesting we suddenly forgive or forget. All claims to objectivity aside, history will always be replete with at least passive judgments. But this does make desecration of the dead a moral sin. The most justly won victory can be completely tainted by such behavior, the most righteous defender brought down to the level of the basest of villains.

But I am not a soldier. I have no enemies. I have never fired a weapon, I have never been fired upon. I have never watched someone close to me die, knowing their killer was still alive and it was within my power to do something about it. It is simply not a position I have ever occupied, and so I cannot, in all fairness, pass firm judgment upon it. I have what I believe, and I believe it to be right, and someone would be hard pressed to convince me of any justification otherwise. But I will not pretentiously flout high standing ideals, safe in the comfort and security afforded me by the very individuals I would be lambasting.

I hope that all those people who were once considered enemies find peace in whatever afterlife they find, should they believe in one, and peace in the nothingness if they believe that instead. I hope their loved ones have a place to go to remember them, to honor their ideals if they are worth honoring them, to honor the individual if he or she is worth it to them, or at least to mourn the tragedy that was their life and death. And I hope that as best as we are able, we respect those who fight for causes not our own and that when the fighting ends, and the issues resolve and the wounds began to heal, we put aside thoughts of 'enemies,' and return to being just people.

Early Morning Philosophy #1

Most people think that optimists--hopeful people, people who choose to focus on the good--turn a blind eye to the realities of the world. That they live in houses made of fuschia glass, incapable of facing truth. I disagree. In my experiences, people of hope are more aware of the world than most, because they look at each moment. They refuse to sweep all negative events into a sweeping, 'Well, what do you expect these days?' generality that the pessimistic and the despairing do; instead, they believe that each victim, each sad tragedy is worth being mourned in and of itself, and not just part of some overarching (and therefore ignorable) whole. They refuse to let themselves become desensitized, and so, feel each sadness fresh each time. It easy to shrug off sadness, easy to act as if it is to be expected, and after all, what could *I* have done about it anyway? It is much harder to refuse to accept that as the rule, to strive instead to make it the exception. To focus on the good is to encourage it...Evil is the greatest, and original troll which thrives off the attention it gets. Optimists don't claim the world is great. I don't even think it's that good. But the potential for good is there, and to trivialize it by considering any such encouragement as juvenile does no favors for anyone. Pessimism is an easy way out because it gives those who do wrong an excuse, a cop out. "How could you have expected me to do the right thing?" they ask, "When the wrong thing was so much easier and practically EXPECTED?" I am willing to accept, though not agree, that optimism is probably foolish. I will never accept that it is weak.

A Philopsychological Analysis: V and Phantom

Today I watched two movies with a few similar themes that got me thinking about a variety of topics. The first was V for Vendetta, the second, the 2007 adaptation of Phantom of the Opera. One of this movies is almost incontestably better than the other, but that's not really the issue here. I noted some correlations between the two titular characters.

I'm using the movies for this case, as opposed to the books and/or original musical for a variety of reasons. One is, as mentioned, I just watched them. Two, I haven't read the original V for Vendetta in ages. Three, while I'm quite aware that the movie barely does justice to almost any aspect of Sir Andrew's music, there's the simple fact that I don't like Sarah Brightman. Not because she is in any way untalented, because she's quite gifted. I just think she's a robot. And by that, I mean, her voice has no soul to me. It doesn't move me at all, I am not in the least sympathetic to Christine, and in fact, kind of want the Phantom to drown her at some point. I am told by those more musically inclined than I am that the actors are singing off-key in some of the major songs. I couldn't tell you. It is my personal opinion that Raoul and Christine are fine singers on their own (one has a Tony and one has been performing opera since she was 4), but that they didn't harmonize particularly well, which hurt their duet performances. In the end, virtually all my issues (especially all the gross inconsistencies (Meg has wet pants, wet pants, wet pants, camera change, DRY PANTS)) are solely the fault of the director, Joel Shumacher (who is also responsible for the violent assault of our childhood known as Batman Forever and Batman and Robin). Admittedly, I blame him for lots of things, including the KT meteor. I don't like him, is what I'm saying.

You can tell I'm going to digress a lot.

Anyway, similarities.

To get the obvious one out of the way for you trolls, there's the whole mask thing, ostensibly to hide a great deformity that works as an allegory to their own inner scarring. They are both verbose, well versed in literature and theatrics, etc.

The deeper, and I feel, more significant similarity is that they are both offered a chance at a real human relationship by the woman they care about; arguably the first and only time this has or will ever happen. And they turn it down. My personal interpretation has always been that, having spent all their lives filled with darkness and hatred, the sudden introduction of something as pure as love overwhelms their twisted minds and brings them to the sad conclusion that they are incapable of returning in kind, as they are so very broken inside. You could make the case that V is simply too dedicated to his cause, but I believe the case for his 'monster' status is pretty well made in the film.

This line of thinking got me into a philopsyhological mindset, with which I found myself analyzing much of Phantom. In the end I focused on the triangle relationship, and the idea of personhood.

There will be a lot of stretching for some of these points, and clearly, much comes down to interpretation. That is, after all, the beauty of art.

The first point is that human beings act inconsistently, and paradoxically, and the characters in the play reflect that. There are numerous moments of conflict, times where warring motivations vie for decision-making significance. This is especially true with Eric (the Phantom), but both Christine and Raoul make good representations as well.

For example, rarely do I question the sincerity of the characters. Sanity, yes, sincerity, no. I believe Eric means it when he says he loves Christine, and I believe he means it when he says he'll kill Raoul if she doesn't stay with him (not exactly something a truly loving person would do).

Speaking of that, let's talk about that sanity thing. The only sane one in this triangle is Raoul and he makes up for it by being rich and spoiled. Christine clearly has some left over neuroses and abandonment issues thanks to her father passing away. As far as I can tell, she honestly believes in the beginning that it is the spirit of her father coaching her, and even after everything that happens in the first half of the show, she still goes to his grave, as if to confirm he is actually in it. When Raoul goes up to the roof with her, she hears the Phantom calling her, and she clearly is not sure if she's actually hearing it or if it's in her mind, because the lines of reality have seemingly become blurred.

Eric, of course, is even worse off. At best, he's a sociopath, devoid of what most of society recognizes as a moral compass (hence, the killing and all). More to our purposes, he has a sexual pathology. That actually doesn't have a lot to do with actual sex. To wit (and how often do we get to use that phrase?), he obviously spends a lot of time fantasizing, mostly about Christine. Note the drawings and paintings of her, all the little miniatures and of course the life size model. This is pretty classic behavior of someone with potentially highly dangerous sexual deviancy. Not that fantasizing is bad, in and of itself, we all do it. It is just that when classifying sexually violent crimes, it has been noted that only sadists and organized, anger excitation/power assertive/anger retaliatory rapists enjoy imagining the crime as much as, if not more than, actually committing it. So the fantasy aspect is considered very important, because offenders escalate up from that. Virtually all sexual crimes start with a deviant fantasy. That doesn't mean all fantasies will lead to deviant behavior (again, a lot more people would be guilty than are) but it is something to keep in mind.

Going up the usual progression, there's peeping, stalking, and finally assault/kidnapping, all of which Eric does at some point.

The danger here is that the world does not conform to our fantasies, and he has not been socialized to handle rejection and disappointment. But wait, you say, he never intended, nor demonstrated any attempt to hurt Christine.

Which leads to my second point. Eric did not see Christine as a person, someone with autonomy and agency. She was an object, a living, moving version of the mannequin he had made of her. She was a figure of his dreams, and when she did not act exactly as he'd pictured, he became violent, manipulative and destructive. This is also pretty standard behavior for a sexual predator.

When he brought her down to his lair, he probably imagined she would wake up, he would play and she would be inspired to sing and that would inspire him and they would exist in some kind of blissful resonance. The problem with making a human your muse is that real muses are remote, untouchable, as Christine had always been to him before. Now she was close, and all of her faults and humanity, manifested in the (not very subtle) action of pulling his mask off, were undeniable. This is one of the first examples of his reactions to non-conforming behavior. I don't really know what he expected to have happen, but he obviously didn't account for her curiosity.

If Eric had truly wanted Christine to come with him, as an autonomous human, he would have come to her more openly. Not like bells-and-whistles-and-hey-by-the-way-I'm-horribly-deformed, but certainly not purposefully inciting her to believe her father had sent him in some mystical way, not using smoke, mirrors and magic to make her question her senses and not hypnotizing her musically. I have sometimes heard people say they dislike the movie version of 'Music of the Night' because near the end, he's more or less groping her, but I don't really understand this reaction. Listen to the lyrics, they're all 'abandon reason' and good sense, 'give in to the darkness' and 'let me do what I want with you.' Between that and her glassy-eyed 'under the influence' look, and I'd say 'Music of the Night' is the essentially a lyrical roofie. Yeah, you heard me, he spiked her ears so he could have his way with her. Of course, I doubt 'his way' would have entailed a sexual relation for quite a while, not out of respect for her, but because I'm not convinced he's capable of such intimacy. I'm sure there's fanfiction to prove me wrong (very very very sure).

Which brings us back to the Viscount. I do not believe that Raoul spends most of the play viewing Christine as a person either. His reasons are more that he's a chauvinist, typical of his time period. When they first meet again, and Christine tries to tell him she can't go out, he bulldozes over her words and insists she go to dinner with him. He does this sort of thing a lot. When Christine says 'Yo, let's escape because someone is trying to kill me' he's like 'Lol, you so crazy, girl.' Honestly, when she's explaining that she was in a dungeon and sharing how conflicted she is because she's terrified but also sympathetic to her captor, he looks at her as if she's explaining how the Saurians of Venout 9 have been communicating to her through her hair curls. To him, she's something to be protected and sheltered. You imagine that in HIS dreams, he is the perfect noble, she the perfect wife, to be set on a mantle piece, looked at and praised. Even 'All I Ask of You' (one of my favoritest songs ever) shows this relationship. All of Raoul's lines are 'Let me take care of you and lead you and tell you what to do'...'Let me do X for/to you.' Now, in his defense, she is frightened and probably needs someone to be there for her, to promise to take care of her and to help her figure everything out. I'm not solely blaming Eric or Raoul for seeing Christine as...well, what she is. An ingénue. For most of the show, she is passive, allowing things to happen to her, rather than causing them to happen. Part of this is, that's her character, some of it is the crazy. At least Raoul seems to seek some kind of involvement on her part. Eric's seduction seems more like 'Just be here and let things happen' as opposed to 'Do this with me.' Splitting hairs, though.

And for a while Christine and Raoul seem happy enough, so I'd like to think that they'd gotten over this. Then we get the after math of 'Masquerade.' Again, Christine is asking Raoul to listen to him and again, he is sure he knows best and she should stop being so bloody hysterical. He's not hearing her and is thus denying her basic personhood; in other words, he doesn't respect her.

The pivotal moment, and another of my favorite songs, comes with 'Point of No Return.' Eric is almost asking Christine to choose him, but he's also doing it according to his script, which he wrote. He expects her to follow the lines he has laid out for her, to just go along with it. Still not recognizing her as a person with agency. However, you can almost see Christine's spine straightening as the song goes on. Maybe she's tired of being pushed around. Maybe she thinks this is the only thing she can do to save the opera house and her friends (considering how that turns out, especially for the chandelier, I find this doubtful). Either way, she has finally come to recognize her own agency and is ready to demonstrate it. You can actually see the moment when Raoul sees it too. He half stands, a suggestion of tear coming to his eye as he realizes she might not actually choose him. She might just choose to go with this dark, exotic stranger, who promises enticing, forbidden joys; a contrast to the moral, socially acceptable (and therefore less exciting) life that he represents. She has a choice, and he might not be it. Yet before the song is done, he sits down again, jaw tightening as if he is coming to terms with the idea, resolving to let her handle it. Notice he doesn't send in the fuzz the moment things aren't going his way. You can bet Eric would not have exerted so much discretion.

When Christine pulls off his mask the second time, it should have been clear to Eric he was not going to be able to control her, but I think by then, he was done with the upstairs world and didn't really care what they thought. You can see the apologies in her eyes and this is one of the many times we see conflicting emotions and motivations. Maybe she thought the display would be good for him, freeing him in some way. Maybe she just wanted people to believe her. He doesn't seem angry with her action, perhaps a little disappointed, but also understanding. His expression says 'You did what you had to do.'

Still, Eric does not extend agency to Christine, dragging her down 'to the dungeon of' his 'black despair,' and shoving a veil on her head. But Christine has found some kind of inner strength now, and she is not jumping (or singing) on his say so anymore. What she is doing is holding him to a standard, speaking to him in plain terms and recognizing his personhood in a way he hasn't recognized hers. She points out that he's had a choice this whole time and he's been making the wrong one. He is not an object to be pitied, a pet to take home and nurse. He's a human being who has caused suffering to others. Then Raoul shows up. I think this is because he views Eric's kidnap of Christine as more than just 'you're taking my property' and more 'you're forcing Christine into this.' Obviously, he wants Christine to come back with him, but I think he was also concerned she was being taken against her will (whatever her and Eric's duet of musical foreplay said).

The Phantom asks Raoul before throwing a noose over his neck 'Why would I make her pay for the sins which are yours?' I find this to be an interesting question. On the surface, he views Raoul as a rival, someone who has gotten in the way of his plans. Still convinced of his fantasy, he probably believes that if not for Raoul, Christine would have acted exactly as he wanted. On the other hand, I wonder if, even unconsciously, he projected onto Raoul faults he saw in himself. He heard Raoul promising to do everything FOR Christine, he heard him in the beginning and probably later on ignoring her pleas. Here, Raoul has everything he doesn't: respect, passable looks, wealth, prestige, and yet he still disrespects Christine. In this way, I think Eric sees him as both rival and mirror and hates him in both capacities.

At this point, things become kind of muddy for me. Christine has made it perfectly clear that she holds Eric in contempt. So when she goes out to him, it could be argued that she is disingenuous, and simply doing it because she wants to save Raoul. For his part, I think Raoul is reaffirmed of his respect for Christine's personhood when he realizes she has to save him. Was Christine deceiving Eric by seeming to accept his offer? I don't think so, because I think he would have picked up on it. Certainly, he expected that to be her reason.

I find the 'You deceived me. I gave you my mind blindly' line to be important because it is another big step for Christine. Not only does she recognize she is in control of her own life but also that she has to take responsibility for her actions. She allowed Eric to manipulate her, she allowed him to control her. By proxy, she allowed Raoul to overrule her by never being assertive. Realizing that Eric was not solely at fault, that she too had created this situation, I think she decided that staying with him was a consequence thereof. And I think that while she honestly loved Raoul, she also sincerely intended to stay with Eric. Maybe because she felt he needed her more, maybe inside she was really frightened. I don't know, but in any case, she was ready to stand by that decision.

But Eric lets them go. Feeling human affection for the first time, something in his mind must have snapped, the curtain must have finally gone up (see what I did there?), leaving him no more excuses. He had said earlier 'the world showed no compassion to me,' as if that justified all of his wrongdoings, but now he had to face them in the eyes of someone who truly cared for him, who didn't judge him for his deformity. It was all too much. Whatever shame he felt before was increased exponentially now. So he demands they leave him to be alone with his misery. He has finally accepted Christine as her own person and realized that he can't force her. And he is pained he tried.

I've sometimes wondered why Christine comes to give him the ring. I always thought it was a token of her care. After all, Raoul had given it to her, she could easily have kept it. But she gives it to Eric, as if to say 'Even though I can't be with you, I choose to leave this with you of my own volition.'

You can see Raoul leaning on her and his development is never made more obvious than the switching of the lyrics. Now it is he who says 'Say the word and I will follow you.'

I think there is probably no greater image of self-hatred than the shattering of mirrors. Both Eric and V do it after being forced to see themselves through the eyes of the ones they love. It is a visceral and I think, truly heartbreaking attempt at trying to destroy oneself.

All of these points can be argued, and there were a lot of side paths that I didn't go into. But I hope my points were clear enough and that maybe you'll think about some of these things the next time you pop in the soundtrack or turn on the movie. You can wonder (although if you do, I'd be concerned) why Christine chooses Raoul over Eric (I'm gunna go with the whole 'murder' thing). In the end, I don't think it matters as much as the fact that she was given the choice and that she chose to make it.