Has reading Leonard Wolf's Phantom made you stop beliving in Erik?

I recently purchased Leonard Wolf's translation of The Phantom of the Opera and was read most of his notes. He believes the story is fiction, correct? At this point, I don't know what to think. Wolf has notes on almost every paragraph of Phantom, and he seems to know very well what he is talking about. Sure, Leroux claims the story is true, but look at this quote from Wolf's book:


In 1907, Leroux's career as a journalist came to an abrupt end. he had just returned from Italy, where he had been sent by Le Matin to cover an eruption of Vesuvius. There, fleeing lava, he has spent three days in a shack playing poker. when he returned to France, he settled down to savor some vacation time, when, one night, he was wakened from sleep by a messenger from his newspaper bringing him an order from Bunau-Varilla, his editior-in-chief, to go to posthaste to Toulon, where the gunship Liberte had been damaged by an explosion Leroux, perhaps exasperated because he had been thinking of changing his mode of life, shouted down, "Shit! Go tell Bunau-Varilla, shit!"
That dramatic gesture put paid to a brilliant journalistic career, but confronted by loss of income, Leroux made the long-deferred decision to devote himself to writing popular fiction.


Ok, here's what I get out of that:

A) Leroux's work was simply fiction. He claimed the story was true for money, or whatever reason
B) Leroux's story is actually true. There just isn't a whole lot of evidence to prove Erik's existance (obviously, since he spent his entire life behind a mask).


Anyway, feel free to contradict me, I don't mind being proven wrong.

Since this is about the original novel, I've moved it to that area. It's just a different translation. Even though you speak of the the validity of Erik's existance, I will not merge with Erik: is he for real? topic.

******************

Wolf is giving his views and is not looking to prove the story of POTO to be true. He's presents what he finds as evidence the story is fiction. True, saying a story is true could generate publicity for the book, however, that type of advertisement was not common in those days. It's possible, but not likely.

Look back at the evidence which has been presented in the Erik: is he for real? thread. Remember, Leroux's daughter and granddaughter verify that he swore the story was true.

When the 1925 film version was released, Leroux stood by his statement that the story was true. Remember, the novel was never taken seriously by anyone until the silent film was released. Even then, it wasn't until recent years that it's become a household word.

Again, review the evidence presented in the Erik: is he for real? thread and draw your own conclusions. For me, the Phantom of the Opera was a true story, Erik did exist, and he was a disfigured genius obssessed with the love of a young diva named Christine. After all the fear and agony he put Christine and Raoul through, he released them to be together, knowing he could never give his beloved the kind of love she deserved. Whether a true story or not, it really doesn't matter. The event is timeless and the love eternal.

Well I would think his family would be inclined to believe him...
Thanks for moving it, I believe I made the mistake of looking at other books then hitting the back button. Let's see what everyone else thinks. A new discussion should do us some good anyway, things have been a little slow around here lately.