Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

read book* *Different edition

The Phantom of the Opera

by Gaston Leroux, Alexander Teixeira de Mattos (Translator)

3.94 of 5 stars 3.94 · rating details · 68,495 ratings · 2,258 reviews

The Phantom of the Opera was first published as a serialisation in Le Gaulois from September 23, 1909 to January 8, 1910.

The Phantom of the Opera lives under a famous opera house. A mere chorus girl, Christine Daae, becomes, under his guidance, a well known singer with a beautiful voice. But her old child hood sweetheart, the Vicount Raoul de Changy, has also entered the...more

Paperback, 360 pages

Published December 30th 1987 by Harper Perennial (first published September 23rd 1909)

more details... edit details

Get a copy:

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Lists with This Book

The Devil Wears Prada by Lauren Weisberger

I Only Watched the Movie!

33rd out of 757 books — 3,436 voters

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix by J.K. Rowling

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire by J.K. Rowling

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban by J.K. Rowling

Best Books Ever

261st out of 24,559 books — 93,726 voters

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30 of 3,000)

filter | sort: default (?) | rating details

Jan 24, 2008 Chloe rated it 4 of 5 stars Recommends it for: anyone who loves symbolism and is familiar with many Gothic stories.

Recommended to Chloe by: No one recommended it to me.

Shelves: modern, weird-tales-and-horror, favorites

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here. This book has been one of my favorites for almost a decade. However, I find that there has been some misunderstanding in regard to what the story is supposed to be. If you are expecting the spectacle and high romance of the stage version, the glitter of the 2004 movie, or the straight-out horror of many other adaptations, you will be sorely disappointed. Firstly, the book has a unique approach. Leroux was the founder of the style known as “faction” or “research fiction”. (The most famous author...more This book has been one of my favorites for almost a decade. However, I find that there has been some misunderstanding in regard to what the story is supposed to be. If you are expecting the spectacle and high romance of the stage version, the glitter of the 2004 movie, or the straight-out horror of many other adaptations, you will be sorely disappointed. Firstly, the book has a unique approach. Leroux was the founder of the style known as “faction” or “research fiction”. (The most famous author of today who writes in this style would probably be Lemony Snicket, only his work strays from the straight path allows for more direct action.) The book is written as a collection of evidence compiled by a journalist. And, for reasons unknown to me, this completely infuriates many readers. Personally, I find the idea creative and intriguing. Perhaps this is because I am one of the few people alive today who read the book before seeing the show or even hearing the entire recording of the musical. I had no ideas as to what I was to expect. So I had no expectations and was completely thrilled. (Conversely, I had great expectations for Susan Kay’s book and hated every bit of it.) The style used creates a surprisingly original tone that produces a realistic, rough, organic feel to the story. For me, this style made me think. I was not familiar with the plot (I was only ten) and so I had to pick out clues, form theories… It was great fun. Also, the characters tell the story, and the characters have their own biases and viewpoints. I enjoyed putting the testimonies together and noting the differences.
Another aspect some people find annoying is the way some of the book becomes over-the-top. One must remember, however, that the book is a tribute to Leroux’s favorite stories: dramatic, Gothic novels. The world of Phantom is not unlike the world of Sweeney Todd or Edward Scissorhands –it exists, but we are viewing a stylized version of it. Personally, I find this enjoyable. Also, it is somewhat satirical in some of its elements. For example: we have the Gothic hero, the innocent maiden and the evil monster… only the hero isn’t heroic at all (he never accomplishes anything), the maiden isn’t completely innocent (she lies, she manipulates, and she can’t give Raoul a straight answer as to what she would do if Erik were handsome), and the monster isn’t monstrous. While it is a tribute to old Gothic works, it is also somewhat of a send-up.
Lastly, I think that the way some people criticize the ending shows a lack of understanding. While the Phantom may not be quite as romantic as the ALW version is, I do not think that the ending was sudden. The Phantom’s character is not a purely evil monster who suddenly becomes good because of a woman’s kiss. We see throughout the story that the Phantom has a whole range of emotions and a complex character. Why else would Christine have befriended him when she thought he was the Angel of Music? A nice voice and a vile personality would not have cut it. Why else would Christine have returned to him? What exactly past between them when she was with him? Please, carefully read her words to Raoul on the roof scene. Otherwise, as some critics have noted, Erik’s need to be loved is actually greater than his desire for Christine. He does love her, yes, but there is the question of how can someone show love if he has not experienced it. Every character in the book sees him as a monster. When Christine does not he can finally behave otherwise. Towards the end, he states that were he loved he would be good, that he is not evil and wants to be good.
Aside from that, a whole lot of the book takes place after the final kidnapping of Christine, so the ending is not sudden at all. Practically the entire book builds up to it. If you understand the symbolism, it is even more obvious. And the argument that Erik’s “change” (which I argue is not exactly a change but rather a development that the novel was leading up to) is anti-feminist and encourages women to believe that a kiss can cure “evil” is absurd. She does not stay with him, he is still mentally unstable, and on top of that it was not some kiss of romantic love. She kissed his forehead. She is showing him some acceptance as a human being, which is an entirely different situation altogether.
The other points of criticism mentioned by many detractors generally fall into the, “But I like the stage story line so much better!” category and are not worth addressing.
I believe that the reason why I love the book so much is the fact that it is so multilayered. There are so many elements of symbolism, so many little mysteries to be uncovered. Because of the style, the title character never directly speaks. So, we get second-hand, as it were, testimonies which may or may not coincide. What is left unsaid? What is changed? Why do some of the statements not reflect the author’s own as put down in the epilogue? I also love the little nods to Poe and various operas. Also, the Freudian relationships are especially fascinating. Some people do not understand why Erik loves Christine or why Christine has an attachment to Erik and then to Raoul? I say, please notice the many references to the character’s childhood and to their parents. Christine, who was very close to her father, is still missing him and wants to fill his place. The Angel of Music was a link to her father. Later on, Raoul becomes a link to her childhood. Erik’s love for Christine is most obvious. Even while remembering her kiss he refers to his mother. The book is fraught with Freud.
So, if you want a book that you can pick apart for symbolism, one that does not take itself too seriously, one that pays tribute to its genre (even while slightly sending it up), and one with memorable characters and extremely stylized and atmospheric settings, this is the perfect read. If you want the stage show or the movie, please buy tickets or rent the DVD.
I suggest reading it in a dimly lit room, with lots of comfy pillows and a mug of something hot to drink. Maybe play a recording of Faust in the background.
(less)

52 likes · like · see review

Apr 06, 2013 Aerin rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: litrachur, ghosts, horror

It's the standard love triangle: a beautiful ingenue with a choice between two paramours. Does she choose the sexy bad boy who smacks her around a bit but gives her a case of the tingles in her nether regions? Or the steadfast prettyboy who's devoted and tenderhearted but totally blah in the pants department?

It's not even a contest, really, who you're likely to root for if you're a fan of these types of stories. How can nice compete with raw sex appeal? Especially if Mr. Bad Boy totally has some...more

17 likes · like · see review

Dec 30, 2008 TheKBSeries rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

This book changed my life...I'm so not kidding. I saw the play years before I decided to read this book. I'm so sorry that I waited so long because it was fantastic! I plan to re-read it again! It has everything in it! It's scary, creepy, romantic, sweet, sexy, dark, sad, depressing, etc. This is the third book on my list that I would recommend to anyone that i meet! (having harry potter and the twilight series at number one and two spots. haha)

W A R N I N G *MAY be a spoiler in this next parag...more

22 likes · like · see review

Dec 30, 2008 Shannon (Giraffe Days) rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: classics, 2008, gothic-horror

This is another book that has been lingering around with a bookmark sticking out of it since October. It's not that it's a hard read - on the contrary, for an "old" book, it's incredibly readable. I don't know who did this translation or whether that has anything to do with it, but it is easy to read. But to be honest, it lacks something. It's just not as dramatic as the musical, though it has its moments.

I've never seen the musical, sadly; I've only the seen the most recent movie version - whi...more This is another book that has been lingering around with a bookmark sticking out of it since October. It's not that it's a hard read - on the contrary, for an "old" book, it's incredibly readable. I don't know who did this translation or whether that has anything to do with it, but it is easy to read. But to be honest, it lacks something. It's just not as dramatic as the musical, though it has its moments.

I've never seen the musical, sadly; I've only the seen the most recent movie version - which I liked (Gerard Butler, woof!). There are quite a few differences, in the characters' roles and in the ending, though the overall story is the same I think. I think pretty much everyone knows this story but just in case: it begins with the two managers of the Paris Opera House handing over the place to the new managers, Richard and Moncharmin, with dire warnings of the opera ghost. The new managers laugh at this and think the old managers are having a joke on them, and refuse to pay the ghost his "allowance". Even when disasters start occurring, they don't believe.

One of the disasters is for their lead opera singer, Carlotta, to lose her voice. She is replaced by Christine Daaé, who proves to have a remarkable voice - she has been trained by the "Angel of Music", who is actually the opera ghost who is obsessed and in love with her and carries her off to his home under the opera. Only the Vicomte de Chagny, Raoul, even seems to notice, and that's because he too loves her.

I won't bother to tell the rest of the plot; if you don't know it already, you probably don't want it spoiled. One of the big differences between the musical and the book is the character of the Persian, which is only in the book. The Persian is a police officer who followed the Ghost - Erik - from India and Turkey, mostly, I think, to keep an eye on him. Erik's past is all explained in the Epilogue, and it's a lot more complicated than in the musical/movie. It was great to have the character fleshed out so much, though his story is also rather bizarre.

But speaking of the Persian - it's when he enters the story that it drops off considerably. There's a whole chapter, in the cellars under the opera, that's quite boring and confusing. In fact, one thing I can't get my head around is Erik's house on the lake under the Opera. The Opera was built over a lake?

All the comic elements you'd be familiar with are here, namely in the form of the managers, who drive themselves quite crazy. Madame Giry is only an box-seller in the book, and Erik is portrayed as rather ruthless and a monster. The book is, no doubt, a product of its times - while it does say that Erik was always treated as a monster because of his monstrous face, it doesn't really make the connection that he is not inherently a monster but is perceived by others as one, and so they made him who he is. He cashed in on his looks, in other words, in the only way he could. All he wanted was "to be loved for himself." A tragic tale.(less)

13 likes · like · see review

Jul 29, 2007 Suvi rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: _book-shelf, novels, 1900-1939, _france, gothic

I hate when people try to compare this to the movies. Apart from the silent movie they have nothing to do with this story, except that the characters and the plot are almost the same. Same goes with the musical. Although enjoyable as its own, it has a completely different approach to the situation. The book just has more depth and is overall a great gothic twist of the basic Beauty and the Beast folklore. It's not scary for modern readers, yet it is a wonderful and twisted love story. Then again...more

5 likes · like · see review

Sep 11, 2008 Amanda rated it 4 of 5 stars

Recommended to Amanda by: I saw the play - it was incredible

This book was surprisingly good... a surprise because most books written around this time (I believe this was written in 1909) seem to be very boring and/or difficult to read. I have seen the play (and loved it) and was always curious about the original novel, which, I'll say right now, is definitely worth reading. Very captivating and suspenseful and emotion-invoking. My only real complaint is on the character of Raoul who is often described as what I would call a "weenie" - crying alot and ful...more

13 likes · like · see review

Nov 27, 2007 Emily rated it 5 of 5 stars Recommends it for: everyone

Shelves: classical-books

This is such a great, memorable book of all time. I love the story.

I've seen the Broadway Musical and the 2004/1925 movies, i expected the story to be as romantic and touching as A.L. Webber's original musical. And, yes, it WAS romantic and touching. However, the 1925 movie probably was the closest version of movie i saw towards the original piece of book, by Mr. Gaston Leroux.

At first, I didn't know the book was a horror story, but i was thrilled and was even afraid to read it in the dark--...more

7 likes · like · see review

Mar 08, 2013 Marvin rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: horror, kindle

It is about time I've read this old horror classic. I've seen the 1925 Lon Chaney film, The 1943 movie with Claude Rains movie (My favorite even though it is the less horrific and inundated with light operatic moments), the 1962 Hammer film and the film of Webber's musical (My least favorite. I am sure the stage musical was in no way as boring). So I guess I felt the novel wouldn't have anything new to say. I should have known better. It is always best to go to the source. Of all the cinematic e...more

1 like · like · see review

May 13, 2008 Sara rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

I'm a fan of Gothic novels, so this was a fun read. I haven't heard the story of the Phantom since my parents took me to see the musical (incidentally, my cousin told me that the chandelier fell into the audience and I totally believed her).

I'm really fascinated by the idea of a labyrinthine second world under the opera house. Apparently Leroux set his story in the real Opera Garnier, which makes me wonder how much of the underground rooms actually exist. Wikipedia tells me that there really is...more

4 likes · like · see review

Dec 05, 2011 Hana T rated it 5 of 5 stars

I thought this book was confusing book at sometimes but since I watched the movie I understood it because I already watched some parts to it. I thought one of the sad parts was when the Phantom finally dies...I would reccomend this book to people who like to read Horrors.

2 likes · like · see review

Mar 29, 2011 Gina Mora rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: books-2011

One of my new favorite books of all time...and one of the saddest. I never realized what a tragic character Eric, or the Opera Ghost, was. He just wanted to be loved. This does not excuse all of his behavior, but it does explain it. From his childhood, even his mother rejected him and despised him. I know that Christine is supposed to be the heroine of the novel and Raoul is supposed to be the hero. Yet, I found Raoul to be whiny, immature and just young- in the throws of a first love like all t...more

4 likes · like · see review

Jan 20, 2011 ShaLisa rated it 3 of 5 stars

Is the phantom to be pitied or despised? Is he cruel or passionate? Afterall, he a genius and a murderer. This book had layers of symbolism. I appreciated the depth - a story that presents a man of unparallel genius but also has an ugly face turning him into a monster. His story is sad. He is unloved and wants desperately to be loved and pleads with Christine to love him as though he could force such a thing. Does Christine love him? He is her angel of music, her tutor, the phantom that fills th...more

2 likes · like · see review

Feb 17, 2009 Black Elephants rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: scifi-fantasy

Hold your hand up at your eyes as if you are about to pull the trigger of a pistol because we are about to discuss the ins and outs of the the mystery that Gaston Leroux claims to have succintly unraveled in The Phantom of the Opera. Like most great science fiction—Jekyll and Hyde, Frankenstein, etc—Leroux promises that the indepth research, second-hand accounts and confessions he has collected will finally unveil the labyrinthine scandal that still is fresh in the memories of Parisians.

And what...more Hold your hand up at your eyes as if you are about to pull the trigger of a pistol because we are about to discuss the ins and outs of the the mystery that Gaston Leroux claims to have succintly unraveled in The Phantom of the Opera. Like most great science fiction—Jekyll and Hyde, Frankenstein, etc—Leroux promises that the indepth research, second-hand accounts and confessions he has collected will finally unveil the labyrinthine scandal that still is fresh in the memories of Parisians.

And what is that scandal? Why none other than the disappearance of the prodigious soprano Christine Daae from the Opera House where the setting takes place, the vanishing act of her lover the Viscount de Chagny, the questionable death of his brother and the last appearance of the cadaverous Opera Ghost.

With such a pearl of intrigue and mystery, there was no way that Leroux could fail to write a spellbinding novel. And he does succeed, sometimes. His characters for the most part are uninteresting unless they're put in danger. The Viscount, Raoul, spends a great deal of time being lovelorn or sobbing passionately into his hands. In contrast, Christine, who is the stronger of the two, actually puts on a very brave face for a heroine of the 1900s. She only faints at appropriate times and feels helpless at truly bleak moments. For a girl being driven out of her sense of reality by her stalker boyfriend, she has a pretty decent head on her shoulders. As for the Opera Ghost, the phantom is stripped of all the humanity that later versions and musicals reendowed him with. Erik, for that is his name, perhaps was a great serial killer in Persia. He has an inhuman face and eyes that can only be seen in the night. He is a monster, and like the devil, he uses his voice and music to seduce Christine to the netherworld of the Opera house where he plans to make her his bride.

In regards to the writing, Leroux will never be able to classify his work along with that of Stevenson or Shelley. The narrative's authoritative voice falters too often especially in regards to details and transitions. The characters are overdramatic. The Opera's maze-like structure is too difficult to explain, and in the end, Erik is too inhuman and crazy to even pity. But there is that tension. It is a fine thread that pulls the reader through all the holes. It helps the reader cross all the gaps. It weaves a suspenseful story full of danger, trapdoors and nooses. It ignites a plot that has an explosive ending. So that even though the reader may scoff, may wince, may even laugh, they read on to find out if there was a wedding and if it all finished in the happiness of a most perfect union.

(less)

6 likes · like · see review

Aug 11, 2007 Tiffany rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition Recommends it for: fans of the musical, fans of suspense novels or ghost stories

Shelves: classics, movies, fantasy

One of my fondest memories is going to Canada with my mom and aunt to see Andrew Lloyd Webber's version of The Phantom of the Opera when I was in 6th grade. Since then, I've seen the opera again, as well as the 2004 movie. After I saw the movie, I decided it was finally time to read the book upon which the opera was based.

I really enjoyed the book, but all along, I wondered if I only enjoyed it because I'd seen it performed a number of times. Was I only able to get into the book because the exp...more One of my fondest memories is going to Canada with my mom and aunt to see Andrew Lloyd Webber's version of The Phantom of the Opera when I was in 6th grade. Since then, I've seen the opera again, as well as the 2004 movie. After I saw the movie, I decided it was finally time to read the book upon which the opera was based.

I really enjoyed the book, but all along, I wondered if I only enjoyed it because I'd seen it performed a number of times. Was I only able to get into the book because the experience of seeing it performed was such a good memory? Honestly, if I'd never seen the musical, I'm not sure I would have made it past the first few chapters. I think, had it not been for knowing how great the story is (or Webber's version, at least, and subsequently wanting to compare the two), this book would have fallen into my Nancy's Rule of 50 category. Not that the first chapters were bad, but more that they were .... ordinary. They were good enough, but they wouldn't have captured my attention enough to make me want to continue reading.

Luckily, though, since I was driven by my desire to read the book upon which the musical and movie were based, I pressed on. As it went on, the book got better. I found myself not wanting to put it down, and breezing right through it. The epilogue let me down a bit, but overall, I really enjoyed the book. It was a nice, quick read, and despite its dark subject, it was a good summer read.

One thing I appreciated about reading the book is that it cleared up a lot of questions raised by the opera and the movie -- you know, things that the writers want to keep true to the book, but either don't have time to explain, or just choose not to explain. I never understood why Raoul was supposed to keep his hands at the level of his eyes. The book, of course, explains this. It's about time! And it's always a bit discombobulating when plots and characters are different in the adapted versions versus the original books (I think, perhaps, Meg Giry is my favorite character in the movie, but she's actually hardly in the book! And Raoul is almost a wimp in the book compared to the musical and movie), but still, the book holds up well, even though it was being compared in my mind to the acclaimed performed versions.(less)

2 likes · like · see review

Aug 06, 2011 Gemma Irene Seyger rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: favorites, i-own-it, phantom-of-the-opera, classics, i-actually-cried

"Masterpiece" doesn't cut it. It's a work of art. To be honest, I didn't even know this was a book until I found it in the library, but now it's one of my favorites (let's put it this way -- I read it in one day). I love Gothic novels, but this one tops everything I've ever read. I'll admit it's not for everyone, but I have no idea what people mean when they say it's hard to read. The characterizations are so vivid, it was like being sucked into the pages. From the follies of the opera managers,...more

5 likes · like · see review

Apr 30, 2013 Martin rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

I loved the book. So different but so similar to the wonderful musical! Reading the book demonstrates the genius of Andrew Lloyd Webber in finding just the right parts and characters that would make the greatest musical of all time.

This book is very well written with deep characters and complex plot. Great mystery, thriller, and romance. I could not put it down!

1 like · like · see review

Jan 08, 2010 Maryam Sarmast rated it 2 of 5 stars · review of another edition

اصلا فكر نميكردم موضوع كتاب واقعي باشه.بايد اعتراف كنم براي اولين بار فيلم
از كتاب بهتر بود، علت اصليش هم موسيقي فوق العاده "آندرو لويد وبر" بود

Christine:
In sleep he sang to me
In dreams he came.
That voice which calls to me,
And speaks my name.
And do I dream again?
For now I find,
The phantom of the opera is here,
Inside my mind

Phantom:
Sing once again with me ,
Our strange duet.
My power over you,
Grows strenger yet.
And though you turn from me,
To glace behind.
The phantom of the opera is there,
Inside you...more

like · see review

Jan 05, 2009 Brittany rated it 3 of 5 stars

As expected, there was more detail in the book than in the movie. Some of the parts of the story that are left out of the movie thickened the plot and enriched the story, but other parts were, for me, too heavy in the details. I preferred the movie, which could be a reflection of the fact that I saw it first, but my main criticism in this respect is that the music is so integral to the story that to simply read about it does not do it justice. Great story, great book, awesome movie. Now I just n...more

like · see review

Jan 04, 2010 Karen Powell added it

What is interesting about this novel in light of the Andrew Lloyd Webber musical, is that the novel seems devoid of a hero. Erik, the Phantom, is a murderous psychopath. His muse, Christine, is a fragile wreck, and her lover Raoul is described as childish and whiny by the author. Yet, the gothic tale is very suspenseful, and we almost don't know who to root for. Erik's background is fascinating, and his genius almost overshadows his murderous rampages. The decent beneath the Opera House is very...more

8 likes · like · see review

Mar 27, 2009 Elizabeth rated it 5 of 5 stars

I. LOVE. PHANTOM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This all started when I saw the movie a long, long time ago for the first time. I loved it right away and watched it again ... and again ... and again ... and again! Then, just a month ago, I saw the Broadway show and I LOVED IT EVEN MORE!!! I highly recommend seeing it, it's fantastic. Anyway, then I decided to read the actual book that started it all. The beginning of it was a little tough to get into, but after that it was fantastic. The play,...more

5 likes · like · see review

Mar 12, 2009 Krystal rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

I originally got this book for Aaron for Christmas, because he likes the movie so much, but he hasn't had time to read it, so I picked it up about two days ago. It's about 300 pages and an easy read, it probably took me 10 hours or less over the course of two days to read it.

It was a little different than the movie which I liked. It took a little longer for the love story to unfold, but they probaby had to scrunch it down in the movie to make it fit in a reasonable amount of time. It had mostly...more

1 like · like · see review

Mar 03, 2009 Burgendya rated it 5 of 5 stars

This book is a wonderful gothic literary work. Gaston Leroux brillant writing has me as well as other readers with this masterpiece.

The Phantom of the Opera is about an insane musical genius haunting the Paris Opera House. Christine Daae, a new chorus girl, catches Erik's (phantom) eye and for the first time, the phantom falls for her. He comes to her as an Angel of Music and as he watches her from behind her mirror, he teaches Christine how to bring people to their knees with the splendour of...more

4 likes · like · see review

Apr 17, 2013 Pandora rated it 4 of 5 stars

It would have gotten five stars if I had felt the characters weren't so... blah.

It isn't the type of "blah" that would stop you from reading the story, it's not the type of "blah" that's boring, it isn't even the type of "blah" that makes you feel blah about the book or the characters. It was simply just.. "blah."

For me, Raoul was to impulsive and I expected more from him since his fiance's life is at risk and all but he yells out her name in spite of all threats and is too cocky for his ow...more

like · see review

Apr 12, 2013 Miraphora rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Chi ha visitato l'Opera Garnier di Parigi sa cosa significhi entrare e rimanere completamente a bocca aperta di fronte all'opulenza, alla bellezza e all'intensità dei suoi interni. E' praticamente impossibile rimanere passivi, è impossibile non immaginare quel teatro illuminato e popolato da donne e uomini in sfarzosi abiti da sera. Se entri all'Opera, torni indietro nel tempo e passeggiare nel foyer, nel bellissimo ridotto e nei palchi tappezzati di velluto rosso sangue ti trasforma in una dama...more Chi ha visitato l'Opera Garnier di Parigi sa cosa significhi entrare e rimanere completamente a bocca aperta di fronte all'opulenza, alla bellezza e all'intensità dei suoi interni. E' praticamente impossibile rimanere passivi, è impossibile non immaginare quel teatro illuminato e popolato da donne e uomini in sfarzosi abiti da sera. Se entri all'Opera, torni indietro nel tempo e passeggiare nel foyer, nel bellissimo ridotto e nei palchi tappezzati di velluto rosso sangue ti trasforma in una dama o in un lord d'altri tempi.
Poi, mentre giri a bocca aperta con gli occhi pieni dell'oro e del rosso delle decorazioni, ti trovi di fronte all'ultima porta a sinistra, prima delle scale di servizio, e non credi ai tuoi occhi quando leggi la targa. Loge du fantome de l'Opera. Il numero 5 è il palco, famosissimo, del Fantasma dell'Opera e questa è l'unica testimonianza in tutto il teatro che l'Opera è stata lo sfondo della storia di Erik, di Christine Daae e del visconte Raoul. Onestamente questo atteggiamento snob, quasi di rifiuto, dei francesi nei confronti di un classico della letteratura che ha contribuito a rendere famoso il Palazzo e anche Parigi stessa mi ha delusa. Pensavo di trovarmi un coinvolgimento maggiore, un vanto da parte del teatro ma niente. La targa e i gruppi di turisti che sostano lì davanti per le foto di rito sono gli unici tributi a Leroux e a Erik.
Una volta visitata l'Opera, leggere Il fantasma dell'Opera è un obbligo, un rito. La visita e la lettura sono così necessarie una all'altra che poterle fare contemporaneamente sarebbe la perfezione. Eppure mi sono dovuta accontentare di sfruttare le foto e i ricordi per arricchire la lettura.
La storia di Leroux è molto più complessa di quello che sembra. Non è solo la storia del mostro cattivo, del fantasma che rapisce la bella Daae e che alla fine muore. Questa è la storia di una figura fantastica, di un genio dell'architettura e della musica, perché Erik non è solo un povero essere sfigurato ma molto di più. Erik è il signore delle botole. Per buona parte del romanzo viene descritto in questo modo ma solo alla fine, quando viene svelata parte della sua storia, si capisce cosa significa. Il fantasma ha creato dalle fondamenta l'Opera, conosce tutti i suoi passaggi perché sono suoi, usciti dalla sua mente e ci abita perché è la sua tana, il suo luogo sicuro, dove nessuno lo potrà mai più vedere e dove, quindi, non dovrà più soffrire. La sua natura geniale, però, gli rende impossibile rimanere nascosto e poiché è immensamente vanitoso cerca sempre un riconoscimento. Tormentare i direttori del teatro è solo una parte dell'attenzione di cui ha bisogno. Il culmine è quando decide di rapire Christine perché in lei ha riposto tutte le sue abilità musicali. Erik ha una voce bellissima, perfetta, e grazie a lui la Daae si trasforma diventando una bravissima cantante. Ma Erik, che è infantile oltre ad essere perverso, decide di prenderla per sé per amarla. La devozione - commovente - con la quale si prostra ai piedi della Daae strazia il cuore: "E' vero, Christine...non sono né angelo, né genio, né fantasma...Sono Erik!" per lei è disposto ad annullarsi completamente, per un momento in cui lei lo guarda negli occhi senza la maschera è disposto a rinunciare a tutto. Erik è un personaggio fatto di estremi: è folle e perverso - il signore delle botole, che tortura persone innocenti e uccide - e genio della musica - nel suo Don Giovanni trionfante - è bambino desideroso d'amore di fronte a Christine, è uomo geloso antagonista del bel Raoul, è ironico, divertente e generoso, è amico, è uomo di parola, Erik è un personaggio troppo ricco di sfumature per poter essere compresso dentro le mura dell'Opera e nessun personaggio del romanzo gli rende pienamente giustizia, se non Leroux.
Di solito Il fantasma dell'Opera viene spacciata come una storia d'amore, dove il cattivo è Erik, la bella è Christine e il bello è Raoul. Io ci ho visto più dell'amore sempliciotto dei due bellocci, più dell'amore che lo stesso Erik nutre per lei. Per me questa è una storia di sofferenza e di isolamento. Erik è così perché in tutta la sua vita non ha conosciuto altro se non l'odio, lo scherno e l'indifferenza e solo grazie alla sua intelligenza è riuscito a migliorare la sua condizione passando dall'essere fenomeno da baraccone a genio dell'architettura. La sua deformità non è legata a qualche romantico incendio che gli ha rovinato parte del viso (maledetto Lloyd Weber che mi ha inculcato l'immagine di Gerard Butler come Erik), ma è congenita, ci è nato così ed è diffusa a tutto il corpo. Il suo aspetto è così spaventoso che sembra uno scheletro e non per niente lui stesso si identifica con la morte. In Erik sono morti i comportamenti civili, lui è istinto puro.
Leroux ha saputo cogliere alla perfezione il senso della storia, relegando le componenti romantiche ai due personaggi più ingenui e ridicolizzati della storia, la Daae e Raoul. Tutti gli altri, com'è giusto che sia, temono il Fantasma e ne sono affascinati allo stesso tempo. L'autore ha costruito una trama ben collaudata, come se fosse fatta di ingranaggi, e ad ogni scatto ha rivelato un pezzo del puzzle, trasformando la narrazione in un'avventura che spinge il lettore fino alle viscere del teatro.
A dispetto delle apparenze lo stile è molto ironico, svelto e preciso, proprio perché tutta la storia ha bisogno di dinamismo per potersi muovere tra i piani dell'Opera e per mantenere il ritmo di Erik, che sparisce e riappare tra una botola e l'altra. L'abilità di Leroux è stata quella di costruire la storia come se fosse un'indagine, dove lui diventa l'investigatore il cui unico scopo è raccontare la vera storia di Erik, senza accuse, senza recriminazioni dando al lettore la possibilità di scegliere se il Fantasma è stato malvagio o geniale. Io, come si può immaginare, sostengo al 100% Erik nella sua malefica genialità, perché di Raoul belli e sentimentali è pieno il mondo (e la letteratura) ma di Erik, unico e magnifico, drammatico e intenso, bambino e diavolo, ce ne sono pochi e sono tutti vittime dell'umanità che li relega nel lato oscuro della letteratura. Ma, per quanto l'umanità abbia tentato di nasconderlo, Erik ha trovato la strada per risalire in superficie - attraverso le sue botole - e rimanere sotto le luci della ribalta nella sua immensa grandiosità.
Lode a Leroux per aver scritto una storia così bella, intensa ed emozionante.
"Povero sventurato Erik! Bisogna compiangerlo? Bisogna maledirlo? Chiedeva soltanto di essere qualcuno, come tutti gli altri! Ma era troppo mostruoso! E dovette nascondere il proprio genio o utilizzarlo per compiere trucchi, quando, con un viso normale, sarebbe stato uno degli spiriti più nobili della razza umana! Aveva un cuore capace di contenere il mondo intero, ma alla fine dovette accontentarsi di una caverna. Decisamente bisogna compiangere il fantasma dell'Opera!"(less)

like · see review

Mar 31, 2013 K. Smith rated it 3 of 5 stars

So I read this again (I read it when I was a teenager) and I feel the same way about it as I did then--the Opera Ghost is a complete and utter sociopath and yet somehow people, musicals, overly-hormonal teenage girls take this character and roll him up into some sort of large-chested, Bronte romance that is utterly sick. Leroux did a good job walking the line of amorality and immorality yet strangely touching with this character--a downright self-centered egoist where even his 'sacrificial act o...more

1 like · like · see review

Mar 21, 2013 Samantha Bil rated it 4 of 5 stars

I recently read The Phantom of the Opera by Gaston Leroux. Many people claim that it is a tale of horror. It was very frightful and extremely suspenseful, but I think that there‘s much more to the story. Basically, some ‘Phantom’ is trying to lure in a young, orphaned singer that he loves, Christine, who thinks he is some angle that guides her to become an amazing singer. She is apart of the Opera that he lives under. There is somewhat of a love triangle as a childhood friend, Raoul, comes back...more I recently read The Phantom of the Opera by Gaston Leroux. Many people claim that it is a tale of horror. It was very frightful and extremely suspenseful, but I think that there‘s much more to the story. Basically, some ‘Phantom’ is trying to lure in a young, orphaned singer that he loves, Christine, who thinks he is some angle that guides her to become an amazing singer. She is apart of the Opera that he lives under. There is somewhat of a love triangle as a childhood friend, Raoul, comes back into Christine’s life. Raoul tries to make Christine see that the Phantom is a dangerous creature and not an angle.

The beginning sounds like a detective’s report. It sucked me in because I love mystery novels. When I began to learn more information about Christine Daae, Raoul and the Phantom, I started to become very interested. Within the first fifty pages I was really caught up in the story. When the Persian began the narration I got to the point where my eyes were running over the pages to keep up with the pace of the plot.

When I watch scary movies I always wonder who is going to die first. I didn’t really want to know if the Phantom was going to kill Christine or Raoul. The only thing I wanted to know was if Christine would choose to love Raoul, her childhood sweetheart, or the mysterious Phantom. Honestly, I wanted Christine to choose the Phantom. I felt pity for him and wanted him to be happy. The Phantom, Erik is his name, had been born a hideous person. Erik had never felt love nor kindness. Even his mother turned from him. “Poor, unhappy Erik! Shall we pity him? He asked only to be ‘someone’ like everybody else. But he was too ugly! And he had to hide his genius or use it to play tricks with, when, with an ordinary face, he would have been one of the most distinguished of mankind!” (260). Erik only kidnapped Christine because he thought he could finally be normal with her. To be able to feel loved for who he was. This is important because Erik hardly knew kindness. It showed me that everyone deserves a chance in any aspect of life.

Throughout the novel Leroux used very large paragraphs during the duller parts and where the reader was learning new information. In the more exciting parts he used smaller paragraphs. I think this helped make the suspenseful parts become more exciting and intense. I have to admit that the long paragraphs was where I would begin to become confused because my mind started to wander. There were also a lot of large words that I didn’t understand. I didn’t mind them though, it was a new challenge.

Over all I really enjoyed reading this novel. It was compelling and I just wanted to keep reading. It was one of those times that you feel sad because it’s over. I wasn’t completely satisfied with the ending. I am determined to read the sequel, Erik, next. I would recommend this book to anyone who enjoyed the musical or likes reading mystery novels.

(less)

like · see review

Feb 15, 2013 Jackie rated it 2 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Being a HUGE fan of the musical (and the film adaptation that many consider the worst version), I wanted to read the book. Got it YEARS ago and I gave up after chapter 3. Finally picked it up again and glad I finally got through it.
Naturally I was disappointed that it didn't resemble the story of the musical at all. The amount of exposition was understandable... to a point. After a while, I just got bored with it. Plus the chronology of the narrative felt like it jumped around a lot, lingered in...more

like · see review

Jan 29, 2013 Rhoda Namboze rated it 3 of 5 stars

*warning: may contain details that are spoilers*
I may have made a mistake of watching the 2004 movie-musical adaptation of this book, which itself was another adaptation of the 1968 musical. Tried as I may, in the back of my head I kept going back to the movie. It blinded me, I felt like I was reading some mildly well-written fan fiction of the movie, which is sad because in its own respect, the book can stand on its own, so damn you Andrew Lloyd Webber. Erik, the phantom, was Gerard Butler in...more

like · see review

Jan 17, 2013 Emily M rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

I can’t decide weather or not I liked this book. There are some things that I really enjoyed, but also some things I did not like at all.

What I did like:

The overall story line was great. The love triangle made the story more interesting than just two people who fall in love. It added more conflicts to the story and at times left me wondering who Christine was going to be with. I understand she has a connection with Raoul, but every time she was around Erik he would always seem to lure her in....more I can’t decide weather or not I liked this book. There are some things that I really enjoyed, but also some things I did not like at all.

What I did like:

The overall story line was great. The love triangle made the story more interesting than just two people who fall in love. It added more conflicts to the story and at times left me wondering who Christine was going to be with. I understand she has a connection with Raoul, but every time she was around Erik he would always seem to lure her in. I feel like Erik has a good heart and just does not know how to use it. “He fills me with horror and I do not hate him. How can I hate him, Raoul? Think of Erik at my feet, in the house on the lake, underground. He accuses himself, he curses himself, he implores my forgiveness!...He confesses his cheat. He loves me! He lays at my feet an immense and tragic love. ... He has carried me off for love!...He has imprisoned me with him, underground, for love!...But he respects me: he crawls, he moans, he weeps!...And, when I stood up, Raoul, and told him that I could only despise him if he did not, then and there, give me my liberty...he offered it...he offered to show me the mysterious road...Only...only he rose too...and I was made to remember that, though he was not an angel, nor a ghost, nor a genius, he remained the voice...for he sang. And I listened ... and stayed!...That night, we did not exchange another word. He sang me to sleep.” (pg.156)

Another thing that I really enjoyed was the setting of the story. I had never read a book that took place in an opera house in France. It was a small detail to the story that I thought made the difference in the world.

What I did not like:

I did not enjoy having to look up words every other page. Since this book was written in the early 1900’s some of the words were difficult to understand. It would have been much more enjoyable if the words were simpler.

I also did not like the character Raoul that much. He was the narrator of the story and I felt like he was very whiney and too emotional. I would have much preferred to have read the story from the Erik’s eyes. I feel like reading the story from Erik’s point of view would have made the story more dark and interesting. “He had a heart that could have held the entire empire of the world; and, in the end, he had to content himself with a cellar.” (pg. 298)

Besides the confusing words and disappointing lead character I really enjoyed this book. If I was used to reading books from the early 1900’s then maybe the words would not bother me so much. For now, I leave this book with three out of five stars. Maybe in a few years I will pick it up and read it to see if I can pick up on anything that I missed.
(less)

like · see review

Dec 11, 2012 H. M. Snow added it · review of another edition

I decided to read Phantom of the Opera after watching the Royal Albert Hall performance on DVD. My main reason was to check the original story to find out why the closing scene involved Meg Giry finding the Phantom's mask. What I found instead was a rather different story, the same in essential points but much richer in details and characters. The fact that it is written as a factual report of a sensational death/disappearance made it somewhat easier for me to navigate the occasionally cumbersom...more

like · see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … 99 100 next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

topics	posts	views	last activity
Calling all Phans!! Book, movie, or stage?	25	57	May 21, 2013 11:17am
She should have chosen the phantom	106	325	May 20, 2013 09:14pm
Reading the Classics: The Phantom of The Opera	27	143	Apr 02, 2013 11:37am
Is Phantom a victim?	25	117	Mar 25, 2013 11:27am
Love Never Dies	26	80	Feb 26, 2013 09:46am

combine
Other Editions (330)

More editions...

Genres

Classics

2,438 users

Horror

419 users

Romance

386 users

Mystery

240 users

Gothic

208 users

Historical Fiction

160 users

Literature

143 users

Cultural > France

123 users

Fantasy

121 users

Classics > Classic Literature

64 users

See top shelves...

Readers also enjoyed similar books

About Gaston Leroux

Gaston Louis Alfred Leroux (6 May 1868, Paris, France – 15 April 1927) was a French journalist and author of detective fiction.

In the English-speaking world, he is best known for writing the novel The Phantom of the Opera (Le Fantôme de l'Opéra, 1910), which has been made into several film and stage productions of the same name, such as the 1925 film starring Lon Chaney, and Andrew Lloyd Webber's...more

More about Gaston Leroux...

Books by Gaston Leroux

Rouletabille: Le mystère de la chambre jaune; Le parfum de la dame en noir

More…

Share This Book

Facebook Twitter Your website

Trivia About The Phantom Of Th...

25 trivia questions
1 quiz

More quizzes & trivia...

Quotes from The Phantom of the Opera

“Erik is not truly dead. He lives on within the souls of those who choose to listen to the music of the night.” — 228 people liked it

“If I am the phantom, it is because man's hatred has made me so. If I am to be saved it is because your love redeems me.” — 213 people liked it

More quotes…

title link	preview: The Phantom of the Opera
avg rating	preview: The Phantom of the Opera Goodreads rating: 3.94 (68495 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/480204.The_Phantom_of_the_Opera?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1327867727l/480204.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/480204.The_Phantom_of_the_Opera?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]The Phantom of the Opera by Gaston Leroux[/url]

The Phantom of the Opera

Friend Reviews

Community Reviews

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website