


In the end, like all of the above literary icons, Erik was more than the “Phantom of the Opera.” Erik was, underneath the mask, a human being, albeit one with a number of issues, including social anxiety and paranoia. In this way, he echoes earlier figures of horror, such as Quasimodo of “The Hunchback of Notre Dame” and the Frankenstein’s Monster from “Frankenstein.” His quest to love and to be loved, as well as his aristocratic demeanor, also mirror the nobler qualities of an earlier literary figure, Bram Stoker’s Dracula.

He needed to feel loved by the ones he believed he loved… he craved for recognition for his achievements… and desperately needed to interact with the world without having to strike terror in the hearts of those who see him. Indeed, along with many of his contemporaries, Erik shared traits and attributes that were all too human. Erik was not the overwhelming force of evil that people had portrayed him to be. However, behind the mask was, ultimately, a man. The focus had always been on the horrifying visage he presents before the public, and less on “Angel of Music” persona he bore when he trained the young ingénue, Christine Daae. In almost all incarnations of the character outside of the novel, there is almost always only a small measure of sympathy accorded to the deformed and persecuted Erik. He was the ghost that haunted the halls of the Opera Populaire, terrorizing the diva Carlotta and several other performers who were housed there, as they clashed with his artistic sensibilities. The man behind the monster has been labeled as the villain of Gaston Leroux’s novel just as often as he has been named a misunderstood protagonist.

In the literary world, there are few villains and monsters as sympathetic and as “human” as Erik, the Phantom of the Opera. (Link is dead, but I'll leave it up so we know where it came from)
