Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.85 AVERAGE
3.85 AVERAGE
Not as good as Les Mis but great nevertheless. Though the passages about medieval Paris architecture may only interest those who adore the city or architecture in general. I personally loved the whole package. The characters are legendary and one of the best ever invented.
Love is like a tree: it grows by itself, roots itself deeply in our being and continues to flourish over a heart in ruin. The inexplicable fact is that the blinder it is, the more tenacious it is. It is never stronger than when it is completely unreasonable.
This was such a disappointment. Honestly, I'm sorry but it was unbearably boring and had so many digression chapters that I lost track of the main story. How is it possible that this was the inspiration for the iconic Disney movie, when it doesn't even remotely resemble it?
I really enjoyed the book. Hugo is a man of details and does an amazing job of portraying love/passion/relationships. I do not need everything to be flowers and butterflies to be satisfied, and I can see why he wrote it the way he did, but I can't help but be left a little empty at the ending of the book. Overall, a fantastic novel.
This was an interesting book and I did like the story, but it didn't flow very well and, in my opinion, had a lot of unneeded detail and irrelevant chapters.
I'd recommend reading some other edition of these books. This one has a difficult old font (the two stories actually have different fonts, both pretty bad ones) and it is so small that it's honestly difficult to read. Or I might need new glasses.
I've never really cared all that much for the story of The Hunchback of Notre Dame. Most characters annoy me to no end. Les Miserables is a far better story.
I've never really cared all that much for the story of The Hunchback of Notre Dame. Most characters annoy me to no end. Les Miserables is a far better story.
DNF at 213/265.
Not badly written but so fucking boring it's impossible to read. Les Miserables was way better.
It's hard to believe Victor Hugo wrote this in like 6 months. It's SO LONG and he spends forever giving way too much background information. Like a whole chapter just describing Notre Dame. Which I fucking skipped because I just don't care.
Also too many side characters of no consequence. If it just focused on Claude Frollo, Quasimodo, Esmeralda, and Phoebus you'd have a decent 100 page novella.
Not badly written but so fucking boring it's impossible to read. Les Miserables was way better.
It's hard to believe Victor Hugo wrote this in like 6 months. It's SO LONG and he spends forever giving way too much background information. Like a whole chapter just describing Notre Dame. Which I fucking skipped because I just don't care.
Also too many side characters of no consequence. If it just focused on Claude Frollo, Quasimodo, Esmeralda, and Phoebus you'd have a decent 100 page novella.
challenging
dark
emotional
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
N/A
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
medium-paced
The last 10% was really excellent and there's no denying the writing is well done, but I didn't actually enjoy much of the book. It didn't give me the scenes I wanted and did give too much extra history.