Reviews

The Hunchback of Notre-Dame by Victor Hugo

siren224's review

5.0

وخلصت الحكاية
للاسف
خلصت مع دموعي ومع دقات قلبي اللي بتعلي مع الابطال
مكنتش عايزاها تخلص
لو في رايتينج اعلي من خمسه كان اخدوه .. احلي من البؤساء وحزينة جدا ....
مين فينا القبيح ... قبيح الخَلقة ولا الُخلق !
لما شعب يبقي مضغوط ومسحول بيطلع اسوأ ما فيه !
هيطلعه في مين غير الضعيف
مع اني مش شايفاه ضعيف انا شايفاه اقوي واحد فيهم !!
نبتدي واحده واحدة
الاول وصف رائع للفترة دي من القرن الخامس عشر القرون الوسطي لما كان العمارة والفن ااقل حاجه وكانت الثورات والتحرر من كل الاعراف والتقاليد هو اللي بيسود .. ضحكني جدا حوار المسرحية والكاردينال وطبعا لويس الحادي عشر العجيب ده
ندخل بقي في الكنيسة انا رسمتلها صورة رائعة معماريا في دماغي
حسيت انها شامخة وجميله زي بطلنا الحبيب كوازيمودو
...من اول الرواية وانا بحب الكاهن وكوازيمودو وبكره فوبوس اوي هو وبطرس
الكاهن ده بطلي المفضل
هو مجنون واناني بس حبه ليها عميق
حب من نوع غريب
حسيت بعذابه وانها مش حاسه بيه
حسيت بمعاناته وهو شايفها مع فوبوس
بس هو غريب اناني معقد اوي شخصية محيرة جدا
تحس ان طفولته اثرت عليه اوي وانه اتعقد بسبب الطفولة دي
متعة وانا بقرا الفقرات اللي كان بيكلمها فيعا ...
كوازيمووودو المسكين ... ميتة بشعه بس رومانسية
اد ايه الحياة بتقسي علي ناس بريئة
مشعارفة هو لو طبيعي كان هيبقي رقيق كدة ولا همجي زيهم
ولا هو اصلا الطبيعي وهم الوحوش
وصف فظيييع ورسم رائع من فيكتور لنفسيته
ابكاني كتير
اللسميرالدا
تخيلتها ومعرفتش
لاحظت ان اكتر الناس الحياة بتقسي عليهم بيكونوا اكتر الناس طيبة وشفافية
مكنتش عايزة النهاية دي ابدا
طول الوقت بقوب هينقذوها
معجبنيش فكرة ان الغجر مصريين
عصبتنس الفكرةومعرفش اساسها التاريخي ايه
كرهت بطرس وفربرس لانهم اناتيين ومجانين
نهاية مفجعه للاسف
فيكتور انت اتفوقت علي ديستيوفسكي في البؤس
رواية لا تنسي

luizazagonel's review against another edition

challenging reflective tense slow-paced

• Plot- or character-driven? Character
• Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

rchl8's review

dark emotional sad slow-paced

• Plot- or character-driven? A mix
• Strong character development? Yes
• Loveable characters? It's complicated
• Diverse cast of characters? Yes
• Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.5

ladymeleys's review against another edition

4.0

Por donde empezar?… creo firmemente que para todo libro existe un momento adecuado y este tuvo que esperar casi un año para mí. Comencé su lectura en enero y paré pues no avanzaba nada y me era súper tediosa tanta descripción y tanto detalle en cosas que siento que me hicieron perder mucho tiempo. No me gusta el autor, no pienso leer más de él, lo siento pero me provocó casi un bloqueo… Dicho esto, yo misma me asombro al decir que luego de más de la mitad de libro AMEEEE la historia, odiando sus descripciones. Terminé odiando a Disney por haberse desviado tanto de la historia en su adaptación que dicho sea de paso es la 34.ª película en el canon de Walt Disney Animation. Luego me dicen cosas de Sarah J. Maas y otros autores que hacen retelling, pero lo que hizo Disney si es un retelling de los más pésimos.
Esto es una historia triste y lúgubre donde todos los personajes son condenables y pintorescos, los hechos son cruelmente planteados y la única pobre infeliz en todo esto fue la cabrita Djing y de la cual en un punto no sabemos más de ella. Odié mucho a Frollo por su vileza, hasta a Esmeralda por tonta y a Febo porque aunque lo pintaron como un honrado caballero simplemente era un canalla, sobre todo porque mientras lo leí lo veía en mi mente con la imagen que Disney me dio de él.
Como historia, cuando obvio las descripciones innecesarias y superfluas creo que es una historia magistral pero no lean este libro si no quieren ver destrozada su infancia.

audiobebop's review against another edition

3.0

What a rollercoaster of depression and architectural descriptions. Hugo did my girl Esmerelda dirty.

Spoiler

The good people get fucked, and the morally ambiguous/evil people don't get what they deserve.

wisteriamoon's review

4.0

Someone tell me how Victor manages to BREAK MY HEART so well! Oh my stars... that was such a sad book. But a good one! Despite its many imperfections, I'm still happy that I read because I really do love Victor Hugo. His lyrical writing and the way he talks to the readers as if they were his dear friends, his thoughtful and loving depiction of women and his obvious love for his own characters... all of these things work so well for me, and I still have such respect for him. I wish I could go back in time to speak to him about his books and characters. I do have something to say about this book, though, and that is the portrayal of disability—for Quasimodo is disabled. Aside from his body's disfigurement, he is also Deaf, and it is suggested—none too mindfully—that he is Neurodivergent as well. So no, this is not a supernatural or monstrous condition—it is a real disability, and I truly believe it should be handled as many other components of humanity are: with the assumption that despite this, or even because of it, they are still worthy of love, and of their story being well told. As far as I know, Victor Hugo is able-bodied. He wrote this story for the able-bodied, in many ways, assuming that we would pity Quasimodo. "Look at this poor fool," he seems to say. But did he ever consider, I wonder, that a little girl would watch the Disney movie and know that Quasimodo was disabled, just like her—although definitely with a different disability, I will stress—and see that he was being abused because of his supposed monstrousness, and wonder how others could simply watch this without addressing it? Did Victor know that when that little girl voiced that she disliked the show because she felt so similar to Quasimodo and it was easy to imagine herself in his position, she would be immediately told to never mention it again? (I must note that this was said by a well-meaning family member, probably just trying to protect her.) I can't read Hugo's thoughts, and I have no idea if he wrote this knowing that disabled people would in fact read it. And don't get me wrong, there were moments in this story where Quasimodo was portrayed with incredible beauty and empathy. I do believe that Hugo was well-intentioned in his writing of the story. But there is an innate assumption that Quasimodo is less than human because of his appearance, and the make-up of his mind... that he is, in fact, like a poor animal or beast who doesn't know any better than to love someone, even if she will never love him back—because certainly she will not, not when he is so hideous-looking. She tries, of course, but her pure spirit cannot stand his presence for very long... and it all turns my stomach a little, just to know that Quasimodo is so often dehumanized. The Disney movie gets many, MANY things wrong about the book. They objectify Esmeralda and portray her as almost the opposite of what she is in the book, they steal away Frollo's moral grayness—which I'm not too mad about, because I hate Frollo and always will lol—and they completely omit many women from the text. Additionally, they make Quasimodo into a hapless, childish soul who is only to be pitied. We never think, for a second, that he will end up with Esmeralda—any statements that we make regarding his ability to find love would be platitudes. But I'm going on a tangent; my main point is that Quasimodo does not even receive the privilege of being seen as human, because of his lack of beauty. And what does that say about society? Yes, Victor does not make Quasimodo into a villain; but he turns him into a beast who deserves nothing but pity, and while I do appreciate his efforts, and I do still adore Quasimodo and wish him every happiness (he ripped my heart apart lol), it still made me cringe to see the way he was handled in some scenes.

Here's a thought: disabled people deserve better. Not in spite of their disabilities, but in harmony with them, along with them, because of them. Quasimodo deserves love because of his imperfections, notwithstanding his hideous appearance which brings him to the point of wishing he could be made of stone instead of being treated the way he is. Be deserves better, not to be cured of his disfigurement but to find beauty in himself, because there is so much of it, as Victor observes. He finds himself unworthy and heart-broken in the end, but he deserves a story where he is found worthy of all the love in the world, a story where he doesn't have to withstand abuse because he is guilty and grateful for Frollo taking him in. He deserves to be loved, he deserves a story which does him justice, just as we all do. I hope that someday disabled children will see themselves in stories, fighting dragons and falling in love and pursuing their dreams—and yes, falling short and getting their hearts broken, just as all of us do. Because as cheesy as it sounds, humanity isn't about beauty. It's not about the love which makes us into handsome princes or beautiful princesses. Disabilities shouldn't have to transform to "earn" love, and disabled authors should have the chance to tell their own stories, and therein lies the one thing keeping me from rating this book five stars.

Okay... I talked for longer than I thought I would, but all that to say, there were so many things I loved about this book. The characters' journeys were beautiful, the descriptions of the bells were breathtaking, and the depictions of motherhood and its power, as well as the power of redemption, were just beautiful. Also, Victor Hugo is way too funny and I don't know why nobody talks about it. This man is a comedian!! I loved Esmeralda most of all, she was a wholesome bean and I truly am heartbroken by Hugo's depiction of prejudice and injustice and how it affects the world at large. He truly was a magnificent writer ahead of his time, in everything but disability rep, which I do believe he would have written better if he'd had more resources, or been in modern days. As much as I love Victor, I know the best way to understand an experience is either to go through it yourself or do extensive research, which I'm not sure if he did. I DO know that he researched architecture, but I'm not sure about the disability part lol! There are also depictions of other races in this book which I can't personally speak for, but which I know were unflattering for the most part... but that's not a conversation for today. Basically, even though Victor Hugo is a silly goofy guy sometimes, and even though I'm salty about beauty standards, I still quite enjoyed this book!

And if anyone read all of that... thanks so much for listening to me rant! Sorry it was so long lol!

cschmi46's review

4.0

A really excellently told story. Like most of Hugo's works, there's a lot of tangents about vaguely-related facts (in this case mostly the history of Gothic architecture) but - again like most of Hugo's works - the substance of the book is so wonderful it's worth working your way through.

victoria_2000's review against another edition

3.0

Het boek is wel leuk, maar geen aanrader. Ik spreek geen Frans dus het origineel kan ik niet over oordelen, maar de Nederlandse vertaling die ik heb gekozen vond ik matig. In principe is alles te verstaan maar de meeste zinnen voelen onnatuurlijk, wat het lezen minder leuk maakt. Het blijkt ook wel een wat oudere vertaling te zijn. Niet gek, want de klassieker van Hugo is bijna 200 jaar oud.

Het verhaal is een stuk tragischer dan je zou verwachten, aangezien er een Disney film van is gemaakt. Aan het einde van het boek werd Esmeralda namelijk aan de galg opgehangen wat ik dus helemaal niet zag aankomen, want ja, dat gebeurt niet in de film. Ik begrijp overigens niet hoe dit ooit een kinderfilm is kunnen worden, zelfs met de nodige wijzigingen.

Ik denk dat dit boek een stuk leuker zou zijn als je als lezer bekent bent met Parijs (of beter nog, er woont). Ongeveer een derde van het boek zijn zeer gedetailleerde omschrijvingen van plekken die daar te zien zijn, wat ook wel laat zien wie de oorspronkelijke doelgroep was voor dit boek. Dit was voor mij wel pittig omdat ik tot nu toe niet in die stad ben geweest. Voor de rest is het wel een prima boek, ik denk echter dat ik het niet gauw opnieuw ga lezen.

sammiotter's review

slow-paced

3.0

hilkesfinger's review

adventurous dark emotional mysterious reflective sad tense medium-paced

• Plot- or character-driven? Character
• Strong character development? It's complicated
• Loveable characters? It's complicated
• Diverse cast of characters? No
• Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

4.0