Fiction or Non-Fiction - Does it change the story for you?

Like many historically set stories, fans love to wonder if the story of the strange man haunting the Paris opera house is true or not. That Gaston Leroux, the story's writer began his telling of the story by swearing it all was true adds fuel to this.

While there is nothing wrong with wondering about whether or not the Phantom of the Opera truly did live, my question for all readers is this:

Does it matter? Does knowing or believing one way or another change your feelings or perceptions of the story?

Certainly it doesn't matter to me whether or not Phantom is real as we read from the novel. Somewhere this story took place, if not in the bowels of the Paris Opera House, or say the Majestic in New York City, a man obsessed over a beautiful woman and rivaled a man he hated.

Ever since I read Leroux's statement that the Opera Ghost exists, I believed it. Maybe I wanted to believe. Everything about Phantom feels familiar to me. Erik is someone I've known forever.

For me, this beloved story is true and someday I'll be able to prove it.

Truthfully, I didn't read the prologue, (as I hardly do when reading) and I went through nearly the whole thing thinking Leroux stuck those little notes at the bottom trying to make people believe him. Well, I don't know how, but as I was talking to a friend of mine on the phone about the book, I accidentally dropped it. It had fallen on the first-page of the epilogue where Leroux was, again, insisting upon Erik's existence.


I think believing the story is true makes it all more mysterious and fascinating, I will defiantly be crushed if it is proven to be all a lie.

From Leroux's statement in the novel and his insistance of Erik's existance after Lon Chaney starred in the silent version, made me believe and wish someone had asked him how he knew.

The gossip around tinsel town said Leroux's insistance was a gimick to promote the film, but it didn't look like that to me. The mere fact that there is a de Chagny family line validates my belief.

Same here. I think The Phantom of the Opera is far too complex to be fiction in my point of view.

I actually fell in love with the story fully believing it to be fiction. Leroux's protests that all was factual were (in my mind) a great literary device to add just that much more depth and intrigue to the story but not actually true.

At best I think the closest it can be to being "true" is to say that the book is based on actual events. No matter how much research Leroux did, I seriously doubt he was able to dig up a word-for-word account of what happened, especially during the roof scene.

I prefer to believe that Leroux used an amazing imagination to come up with this beautiful yet rather twisted story. But, if there is solid fact behind it, it doesn't really change the story any for me.

I don't think it matters too much to most. But I don't think the story is true. I think a man like Erik may have existed but he probably wasn't as deformed as Leroux described and he probably didn't kidnap anyone name Christine or claimed to be her Angel of Music.

But if we found out it is real: It would change the story for me personally because I view it as fiction.

I must agree with AngelicRose that it could have possibly happened but not the same names as they use, or the grotesque deformaty.

But the story wouldn't change for me if they found it was real.

I don't think that my love for this book changes whether its true or not. I can believe in someone being deformed terribly and hiding from the world. I can believe some man being ugly and in love with a beautiful woman ( it happens here in real life) But somewhat in my mind Leroux made Erik almost magic. Which is something I don't grasp so well.I think Leroux had lots of facts but ... he didn't have enough so he used what little facts he had and then made up the rest. But he did a fabulus job of it. Its very believeable ( is that a word?)

Believable is indeed a word. And an excellent quality in a piece of literature.

i love the story weahter it`s true or not. after all many of the best stories(besides phantom) is only a fantasy.
but i believe it is. Even before i read all those proofs you guys have found, it was something, don`t know what, that told me it could be true

hope i doesn`t sound too crazy

I believe we are all intrigued by the possibility and by the fact that The Phantom's story has a strong poignancy, applicable to all our lives. There is something familiar about his struggles, tragedy, longing, and decency that strike home. Inspiration seems key to each of us who are connected, and then there is the general romance of it all. One day it will be indeed be a surprise to know, but for now, Erik is as alive as one wishes him to be. And he is quite well in my corner.

When I started the novel, reading Leroux's prologue, I assumed he was using a writing technique to draw the reader in. Could it have been real? I'm not sure now. After reading the book, there's really nothing in it that could be out of the question. I mean, he was human, his "tricks" were basically explained, so it takes the supernatural part of him down. It could have happened.

Does it matter to me? Not at all. To me this is still one of the best stories ever written. Fiction or non-fiction. I would love someday to return to Paris and see the areas described in the novel.