Erik: Villian or not?

[Jody]

A villian is someone who commits crimes or evil deeds. By dictionary definition, Erik is a villian. However, just because he is a villian does not mean that you have to hate him. In fact, many people do have compassion on him as his story unfolds in the novel. I found myself wishing that Erik would start a new life with Christine rather than she starting a new life with him, as he sang in the production.

[Phangirl7]

Yes, just because Erik is a villian does not mean you have to hate him. In fact, I kind of feel bad for him being left alone like that because Christine wanted to run off with the stupid Vicomte... er, Raoul. Who knows, if they'd stayed together, she might have been able to change him. Maybe. I would probably be scared to death of novel Erik. If I met him in a dark alley, I would turn the other way and RUN.
P.G.7.

[lillottezobel]

I love Erik. A friend of mine who read the book says he's evil, trying to convince her otherwise. He never directly killed anyone-they just died in his torture chamber (ANd woe to those with a nose, with a real nose, who are curious enough to go ento my torture chamber!) It all is roots: his parents never loved him, as far as he knows, Christine doesn't love him, and he can't "break the law" if he never knew what the law was. No, Erik is not evil, but the story needed an antagonist, so we'll call him the villain.

[Leannain]

I love Erik. A friend of mine who read the book says he's evil, trying to convince her otherwise. He never directly killed anyone-they just died in his torture chamber (ANd woe to those with a nose, with a real nose, who are curious enough to go ento my torture chamber!) It all is roots: his parents never loved him, as far as he knows, Christine doesn't love him, and he can't "break the law" if he never knew what the law was. No, Erik is not evil, but the story needed an antagonist, so we'll call him the villain.


He killed people with his lasso and he was responsible for the deaths of the people who incurred the Sultan's wraith(Erik built his chamber of horrors).

The lack of love from his parents or girlfriend/wife/female attention, doesn't justify the act of murder. The problem with Erik was, he never found a healthy outlet for his emotions.

He preferred to unleash his emotions(in this case negative emotions) on the people he either thought of as impediments(people who wanted to spirit Christine away from him) or in the bodies of the victims of the Sultan.

Erik was a murderer. In his own tragic way, he was everything an Angel of Music shouldn't.

It doesn't matter that Erik was charming in his own way. He's still a murderer. For all we know, Jack The Ripper could've been one of the most handsome actors of his time. Doesn't take away from the gruesome killings he did.

[lillottezobel]

He does some things he shouldn't, yes. But agian, he didn't take law school. He does seem to begin the story as a villain, but as the story passes-especially in the end of the ghost's love story-his side is revealed. You're entitled to your opinion, and I'm entitled to mine. But please read Chapter 26 again. And I never said he was handsome-he was as ugly as ____. But he was a genious, he claimed himself he was no angel, and only wanted to be loved for himself.

[lillottezobel]

And everyone has anger issues.

[Dinkleberry2010]

I suppose Erik could be considered a romantic or even a tragic character by some. I view him as a twisted, sick, perverted character. I don't see anything romantic or tragic about Erik. I see him as an obsessed character. But of course that is just my opinion.

[rae709]

I fell in love for Erik immediately. I didn't see the villainous creature. I saw the lonely man who wanted someone to love and stay with him. He had no one, and if you really think about it he shows the fear of being alone that most normal human beings are ashamed to show.
Just putting it out there.

[irukandji]

I love Erik. A friend of mine who read the book says he's evil, trying to convince her otherwise. He never directly killed anyone-they just died in his torture chamber (ANd woe to those with a nose, with a real nose, who are curious enough to go ento my torture chamber!) It all is roots: his parents never loved him, as far as he knows, Christine doesn't love him, and he can't "break the law" if he never knew what the law was. No, Erik is not evil, but the story needed an antagonist, so we'll call him the villain.

No person is 100% evil just as no person is 100% good. Evil people can do good things just as well as good people can do evil things. What makes Erik the villain is that he performs more evil deeds than any of the other characters in the book and he's not conflicted over his deeds. For instance, Count Philippe's death. Erik killed him, simple as that. Yet he chooses to say the Count's death was an accident. On the other hand, he denies loosening the chandelier and killing the woman despite the fact that the Persian accuses him of doing so. I believe him with regard to the chandelier. Yet he has no real feelings over being accused or murdering, whether he committed the crime or not.

I find the torture chamber one of the most appalling examples of just how much of a villain he can be. Why would this man, this genius, who can easily outwit and escape the authorities and the curious need a torture chamber? He wouldn't. Yet he devises a the most vicious kind of torture because it can be administered without getting his hands dirty. He doesn't have to force torture on anyone. They simply fall into the chamber and he has a window to view window to watch if he chooses. My thought on this is that it was deliberate. He wanted to trap and torture people.

I get the impression from this thread that evil equals hatred. So, if I say Erik is evil I therefore must hate him. I don't agree. His evil side is fun to explore and it makes him a very interesting character.