Ethan Freeman played the Phantom in Vienna, London, Toronto, and across Europe (as well as having previously played Andre on the West End). He kindly answered some questions for us back in the mid 1990s.
Are there any differences between London and Vienna – if so, what are they?
The general tone of the production in Vienna was slightly more Operetta-like, probably due to the language, the sound of the translation and style of acting of some of the players. The tempo was also at some points quite different depending on who was conducting, and would undoubtedly feel strange to me now. The audience tended to be less tuned in to the humorous moments in the show in general, and some scenes like “Managers I & II” for example, simply run better and are more clever in English.
How did you get the role?
I got the role of the Phantom after auditioning for Hal Prince and Gillian Lynne and the Viennese producer and musical staff. They appeared very excited about the audition. I’d sung “Music of the Night” which they praised in a friendly manner (Hal is always positive and encouraging), and they sent me off to learn the segment from the Final Lair “Order your fine horses… This is the choice. This is the point of no return!” When I came back the next day to do it (the Phantom candidates appeared by then to have been reduced to three) Hal said “OK Ethan I want you to scare me!” So I did the section with as much power and venom as I could muster (Id never seen the show – I think Id heard the record once or twice…) and after it was done, Hal just said “Great. You scared me!” and that was that really. Later that day they explained to Alexander Goebel and me what they would like and would we be willing to share, obviously with Alex, who was very well known, being the dominant of the two. So we split 5/2 which frequently ended up being 4/3 as the run went along.
How did you research the character?
I read the novel finally, all the way through. Ruth Hale, my partner in “Cats” at the time, later to premiere as Mme Giry in the Hamburg production, gave me a copy as a present. I’d seen several of the films over the years so I knew there wasn’t much to be mined from those – although Lon Chaney Snr did display some magnificent body language, and I’ve nicked at least one dramatic gesture from him. Principally though, I had several long meetings with Hal in New York to talk about the role and show. He instructed me to go watch Michael a few times then come back and talk some more. Crawford was magnificent, at the peak of his vocal power and still fairly fresh in the role and I was moved and impressed as I have not been since by a Phantom. (Though Dave Willetts, I must say, also made a huge impression the first time I saw him, for his power and well-delineated psychotic behaviour.) At first I thought boy, you’ve got your work cut out for you on all fronts. So, I would say my “research” of the role was principally based on my own discussions with Hal and also largely on my own thoughts and feelings. Obviously most of the physical manifestations of the role, make-up, costume, blocking, etc were predetermined so there wasn’t much scope for change. To be honest, I feel some of the Phantoms I’ve seen tend, in an effort to be different, to stray from the basic line of the drama and weaken themselves as a result. Michael’s acting was extreme, yet very clear and economical at the same time, and I also try to offer the audience a complicated and ambiguous character going through clear, unambiguous moments of his life – otherwise it’s so easy for the audience not to “get” everything that’s there – or to “get” things that aren’t intended to be there at all.
How do you feel on stage?
So varied in thought and feeling that I can’t really give a concise answer. I feel quite differently now to how I felt 600 odd shows ago. I used to have to concentrate on staying concentrated – now it just happens. I know what to achieve and just try to let it happen. I’d say I’m both in and out of Erik at the same time and he in me.
Do you think it’s based on a true story ie. did the Phantom exist?
I doubt it – I haven’t read this newer novel “Phantom” yet and don’t intend to until I finish playing the part. However I’ve been to the Palais Garnier and in all senses of the word it is a ‘phantastic’ theatre, one which easily conjures up many stirring images – beautifully represented in the Phantom designs, I’d say!
What do you think of Erik?
I wish he’d let me have a little more time to myself! Oh, I don’t know. He’s a sad, bitter, brilliant man. He has a great brain and can be a real bastard. I find him easy to understand – he’s motivated by a terrible profound loneliness and has been forced to create his own universe which has its own laws. Anyone who has known some kind of loneliness or feeling of apartness when they were children or growing up can tune in to this crucial aspect of the Man, which is his great mythical attraction. He is so powerful, awesome, in control and yet so hurt and vulnerable. He must epitomise great beauty and great ugliness at war with each other, reason and insanity, God/Satan, Id/Ego battling it out. In the end, he learns about sacrifice, shows mercy and is redeemed by love – a great, archetypal Romantic drama – another reason why the story has always been so popular. I can’t stand it when I see Erik played as a “nutter”. Yes, he goes “crazy” a few times, but in general he is not insane in the pathological sense. I feel if he is played as a schizophrenic or a psychopath, the romantic ideal of the story is dashed, because both of those conditions would indicate a “determination” that makes any hope of redemption impossible, and would break with the “Romantic” style. He is very melancholy, angry, egocentric, neurotic perhaps, and goes off into rages of frustrated sexuality, but he is not insane. And I’ll kill anyone who thinks otherwise!
What do you think happens to him at the end?
That’s our little secret! I think the different fan magazines have probably spent pages on that so I don’t see I need to contribute. He goes!
Why do you think the show is so appealing?
Some lovely songs, great orchestrations, a nice mixture of melodrama and light comedy, some stunning sets and a lot of good theatrical magic: and on the thematic side, many of the things I’ve mentioned before, which I suppose you could define as the archetypal Beauty and the Beast scenario which, if honestly portrayed, can tug the heartstrings of even the most urbane Japanese businessman.
What is your favourite role of those you’ve played?
Obviously Phantom is the supreme role in my repertoire to date. I did however, really enjoy my stints in other Lloyd Webber shows as well. Che in “Evita” was very cool to play and Gus/Growltiger, while exceedingly ‘uncool’ thanks to the heavy knitted costumes, was a joy to play, despite being totally knackering, and one that I was surely born to do. I really enjoyed doing Hajj, the Poet in “Kismet” with the BBC Radio 2 last year, working with the composers, and would love to have the chance to do that again on stage someday.
What role would you like to play?
I’d quite hope to have a go at Sweeney Todd somewhere down the line and would still like to play the Celebrant in “Bernstein’s Mass” at some point. (I’ve nearly done that a couple of times.) Add to that a heap of great operatic roles I’d love to do but probably never will and whatever new, unknown roles lie lurking up ahead. We’ll wait and see!