You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.85 AVERAGE
3.85 AVERAGE
3.5
Notre-Dame de Paris, la historia de cómo todo el mundo se muere y te da un poco igual.
Creo que lo más entretenido de leer este libro ha sido reconocer las cosas que Disney decidió adaptar y las que no. Hay momentos muy claros en los que, si has visto la peli, piensas "ah mira pues eso pasaba de verdad" o "de aquí sacaron esta escena, pero sucede diferente".
La verdad que podría haber pasado con la mitad del libro. Al revés que con Los Miserables, todo lo que leía me parecía poco, con Notre-Dame de París, había ratos en los que pensaba seriamente si saltarme el capítulo. Sobre todo esos capítulos o fragmentos en los que se paraliza la historia por completo para describir un mapa de París. De hecho hay un capítulo entero (París a vista de pájaro, si no recuerdo mal), que son unas 30 páginas del libro, en el que Victor Hugo se dedica a describir cómo se vería el París del siglo XV desde lo alto de Notre-Dame. Al principio aún me molestaba en buscar por internet qué eran algunas cosas, pero si en cada frase tienes que parar, mirar el mapa de París e intetar imaginarte qué había allí, porque obviamente el París del S.XV no es el París actual, pues te pierdes y tardas la vida en leer el libro.
Principalmente por eso no me ha gustado demasiado. Esperaba más historia de Quasimodo y menos historia de París, algo más similar a Los Miserables. Es posible que la imaginería de la película de Disney me hiciera esperar algo que no era.
En general, la historia en sí me ha gustado, quitando las cosas geográficas, me ha gustado ver las diferencias entre los dos relatos y ha sido muy interesante ver las sombras de los personajes. Solo diré que si Claude Frollo está muy bien representado en Disney y es un personaje odioso, Febo es casi igual de despreciable y asienta mi creencia de que ni este Febo, ni el de Disney, me caen particularmente bien.
Notre-Dame de Paris, la historia de cómo todo el mundo se muere y te da un poco igual.
Creo que lo más entretenido de leer este libro ha sido reconocer las cosas que Disney decidió adaptar y las que no. Hay momentos muy claros en los que, si has visto la peli, piensas "ah mira pues eso pasaba de verdad" o "de aquí sacaron esta escena, pero sucede diferente".
La verdad que podría haber pasado con la mitad del libro. Al revés que con Los Miserables, todo lo que leía me parecía poco, con Notre-Dame de París, había ratos en los que pensaba seriamente si saltarme el capítulo. Sobre todo esos capítulos o fragmentos en los que se paraliza la historia por completo para describir un mapa de París. De hecho hay un capítulo entero (París a vista de pájaro, si no recuerdo mal), que son unas 30 páginas del libro, en el que Victor Hugo se dedica a describir cómo se vería el París del siglo XV desde lo alto de Notre-Dame. Al principio aún me molestaba en buscar por internet qué eran algunas cosas, pero si en cada frase tienes que parar, mirar el mapa de París e intetar imaginarte qué había allí, porque obviamente el París del S.XV no es el París actual, pues te pierdes y tardas la vida en leer el libro.
Principalmente por eso no me ha gustado demasiado. Esperaba más historia de Quasimodo y menos historia de París, algo más similar a Los Miserables. Es posible que la imaginería de la película de Disney me hiciera esperar algo que no era.
En general, la historia en sí me ha gustado, quitando las cosas geográficas, me ha gustado ver las diferencias entre los dos relatos y ha sido muy interesante ver las sombras de los personajes. Solo diré que si Claude Frollo está muy bien representado en Disney y es un personaje odioso, Febo es casi igual de despreciable y asienta mi creencia de que ni este Febo, ni el de Disney, me caen particularmente bien.
adventurous
challenging
dark
emotional
funny
mysterious
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
challenging
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
N/A
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
challenging
reflective
slow-paced
Depois de ver tantas vezes o filme da Disney e gostar, decidi ganhar coragem para pegar no livro. Tem mais para além da adaptação, e nem sei como expressar-me corretamente. Gostei, mais do que aquilo que esperava. Uma história dramática, mas que conquista. Victor Hugo ganhou o meu coração.
heartbreaking and verbose and a love letter to Paris and another reminder of why I hate men
4.5/5
Oh, disney ¿Cuando dejarás de cegarnos con ese dulce manto de mentiras y felicidad?
Este es el tipo de libro por el cuál leo clásicos y no me canso de recomendarlos.
Lamentablemente mi cerebro se siente perezoso hoy así que no profundizaré con la trama pero quiero dejar en claro que sin duda los personajes son maravillosos y si, tal vez estoy decepcionada por la imagen que disney construyó en mi cabeza pero eso no elimina lo bien construidos que están todos los personajes.
Frollo y Gringoire son sin duda mis favoritos pero cabe destacar que le tengo cierto cariño a Esmeralda que aunque sea una adolescente dependiente y estúpidatodo lo contrario a lo que disney me había enseñado. Disney, te lo suplico, ¡Ya deja de mentirnos! la manera en la que Victor Hugo la describe es simplemente hermosa. Aquel amor con el que el autor la describía me hizo suavizar mi odio contra ella.
Llevo arrastrando este libro desde Agosto del año pasado y aunque parezca ilógico, no me pareció pesado como muchos me habían prevenido. Si, es un libro díficil al inicio pero eso es por la enorme cantidad de datos arquitectonicos que tiene. Capítulos enteros que tratan de las construcciones de Paris, pero, dejando eso a un lado, no es tan pesado como parece.
He disfrutado de la ambientación, la prosa, los personajes y la historia. Solo me queda por decir: ¡Que lectura tan maravillosa!
Oh, disney ¿Cuando dejarás de cegarnos con ese dulce manto de mentiras y felicidad?
Este es el tipo de libro por el cuál leo clásicos y no me canso de recomendarlos.
Lamentablemente mi cerebro se siente perezoso hoy así que no profundizaré con la trama pero quiero dejar en claro que sin duda los personajes son maravillosos y si, tal vez estoy decepcionada por la imagen que disney construyó en mi cabeza pero eso no elimina lo bien construidos que están todos los personajes.
Frollo y Gringoire son sin duda mis favoritos pero cabe destacar que le tengo cierto cariño a Esmeralda que aunque sea una adolescente dependiente y estúpida
Llevo arrastrando este libro desde Agosto del año pasado y aunque parezca ilógico, no me pareció pesado como muchos me habían prevenido. Si, es un libro díficil al inicio pero eso es por la enorme cantidad de datos arquitectonicos que tiene. Capítulos enteros que tratan de las construcciones de Paris, pero, dejando eso a un lado, no es tan pesado como parece.
He disfrutado de la ambientación, la prosa, los personajes y la historia. Solo me queda por decir: ¡Que lectura tan maravillosa!
How strange it felt to read the scene about the fire on Notre-Dame, imagining it, the colors and all, and to learn, at the same instant, that the real cathedral was actually on fire; I felt like an abominable witch! And stopped reading while watching tv, disbelieving.
But let's concentrate on the book.
What I love about Hugo's books is the writing. It's so beautiful, it flows, it's agreeable to read, and the novel doesn't feel long thanks to it. The reader can find many gorgeous quotes about different topics, be it architecture, books, or friendship, love, family.
The thing I really don't like about Hugo's books is the multiple digressions. It can drive the reader mad, as it cuts the story, sometimes completely, to focus on things the reader often doesn't care about. Don't get me wrong: I loved some of the digressions, mostly the ones about architecture, the one about its "struggle" against printing was my favorite. But all the historical references which have nothing to do with the actual story were sometimes tiresome. I wanted to go back to the characters and what was happening to them!! (they are also introduced quite late in the book I thought!)
The story itself was - I want to say as usual, but I have not read all of Hugo's books, so … - very cruel. All the characters are brokenbefore the book starts, or will be broken along the pages. It's depressing; the reader despairs for the characters. No happy ending, which is not surprising - I was still shocked, I wasn't prepared for this! The ending is heartbreaking, so cruel it seems impossible.
Now, the characters. Oh, I have feelings!!
- Esmeralda: I was incapable to love her fully, and to really grow attached to her because she is so superficial. She only sees and watches the surface of things:
- Quasimodo: a really moving character even if I'm not sure it was what the author wanted. He is described as awfully ugly, and the narrator explains that, because of his appearance, he can't be but an half-formed being, an half-formed soul, an imperfect soul. I thought it was borderline. He broke my heart to pieces. He is my favorite character, without a doubt! Misunderstood, mistreated, despised, he defends himself as best he can, but he is completely submitted to two characters who play with him.
- Frollo: definitely an interesting character. I felt pity for him, but also "hatred" of a kind, aversion. He can't do anything against what he feels, but it isn't really love (or INSTA-LOVE: great negative point of the entire book); it's more like desire, passion. He can't control it; he isn't himself anymore, he is completely lost in the twists and turns of a feeling he wasn't ever suppose to feel, a feeling he is discovering, and one that frightens him. It can leave the reader to think about the priests' chastity in the Catholic Church… Some of my favorite scenes involved him!
- Phoebus: ah! A new addition to the list of my most hated characters! I can't bear him: a seducer, a coward, indifferent to anyone but him.
So, it was a great read, but I don't like everything about this book. It's definitely worth the read!
But let's concentrate on the book.
What I love about Hugo's books is the writing. It's so beautiful, it flows, it's agreeable to read, and the novel doesn't feel long thanks to it. The reader can find many gorgeous quotes about different topics, be it architecture, books, or friendship, love, family.
The thing I really don't like about Hugo's books is the multiple digressions. It can drive the reader mad, as it cuts the story, sometimes completely, to focus on things the reader often doesn't care about. Don't get me wrong: I loved some of the digressions, mostly the ones about architecture, the one about its "struggle" against printing was my favorite. But all the historical references which have nothing to do with the actual story were sometimes tiresome. I wanted to go back to the characters and what was happening to them!! (they are also introduced quite late in the book I thought!)
The story itself was - I want to say as usual, but I have not read all of Hugo's books, so … - very cruel. All the characters are brokenbefore the book starts, or will be broken along the pages. It's depressing; the reader despairs for the characters. No happy ending, which is not surprising - I was still shocked, I wasn't prepared for this! The ending is heartbreaking, so cruel it seems impossible.
Now, the characters. Oh, I have feelings!!
- Esmeralda: I was incapable to love her fully, and to really grow attached to her because she is so superficial. She only sees and watches the surface of things:
Spoiler
because Quasimodo is ugly, she doesn't seem to feel gratitude, or real pity; she doesn't care about him, and she seems super cold-hearted! She goes as far as to forget his existence! And she can think of nothing but Phoebus!! Because he is handsome!! And, therefore, chivalrous, like a fucking Prince Charming!! And because he swore he loved her!! ARE YOU SERIOUS GIRL?!!!- Quasimodo: a really moving character even if I'm not sure it was what the author wanted. He is described as awfully ugly, and the narrator explains that, because of his appearance, he can't be but an half-formed being, an half-formed soul, an imperfect soul. I thought it was borderline. He broke my heart to pieces. He is my favorite character, without a doubt! Misunderstood, mistreated, despised, he defends himself as best he can, but he is completely submitted to two characters who play with him.
- Frollo: definitely an interesting character. I felt pity for him, but also "hatred" of a kind, aversion. He can't do anything against what he feels, but it isn't really love (or INSTA-LOVE: great negative point of the entire book); it's more like desire, passion. He can't control it; he isn't himself anymore, he is completely lost in the twists and turns of a feeling he wasn't ever suppose to feel, a feeling he is discovering, and one that frightens him. It can leave the reader to think about the priests' chastity in the Catholic Church… Some of my favorite scenes involved him!
- Phoebus: ah! A new addition to the list of my most hated characters! I can't bear him: a seducer, a coward, indifferent to anyone but him.
Spoiler
He knows Esmeralda was condemned for his murder: he is alive, and he knows it was her but the priest he let enter in the bedroom where they were supposed to have sex; he knew the other one would watch it all!!!! Rah, how I hate him!! And how I'm frustrated with Esmeralda, who doesn't understand he is a coward!!So, it was a great read, but I don't like everything about this book. It's definitely worth the read!
I have been in a major reader's funk, I've had trouble becoming interested in one single novel or holding my attention. For me this is very rare! To the point of being concerned. Unfortunately, The Hunchback of Notre Dame had to fall in the period.
Several years ago I had a friend who had applied to Washington University in St. Louis. I was living there at the time and being unavailable she asked me to check it out and videotape it for her. The architecture was outstanding, with a plethora of gargoyles, so much so that every 30 seconds someone would exclaim "Look over here -- gargoyles!" It would have made a fantastic drinking game.
Hugo's novel is very much like this, rich in detail imbedding an exact replica in the reader's head. In fact, I believe Victor Hugo himself, sums it up perfectly: 'quiconque naissait poète se faisait architecte' ("whoever is born a poet becomes an architect")
"In the first place, how one's ears are stunned with the noise!-- how one's eyes are dazzled! Overhead, is a double roof of pointed arches, ceiled with carved wood, painted sky blue, and studded with gold; underfoot, pavement of alternate squares of black and white marble. A few paces from us stands an enormous pillar, then another, then another; in all seven pillars intercepting the hall longitudinally, and supporting the thrust of the double-vaulted roof."
I could go on and on but I would most likely get carpal tunnel.
Like Esmeralda's fate, it is still unclear why I put The Hunchback of Notre Dame aside, the characters were well-developed, and it had a plot that was definitely "going somewhere". Maybe another time, with a different mind-set, I can truly give Quasimodo the appreciation he deserves.
This review was originally posted on First Impressions Reviews
Several years ago I had a friend who had applied to Washington University in St. Louis. I was living there at the time and being unavailable she asked me to check it out and videotape it for her. The architecture was outstanding, with a plethora of gargoyles, so much so that every 30 seconds someone would exclaim "Look over here -- gargoyles!" It would have made a fantastic drinking game.
Hugo's novel is very much like this, rich in detail imbedding an exact replica in the reader's head. In fact, I believe Victor Hugo himself, sums it up perfectly: 'quiconque naissait poète se faisait architecte' ("whoever is born a poet becomes an architect")
"In the first place, how one's ears are stunned with the noise!-- how one's eyes are dazzled! Overhead, is a double roof of pointed arches, ceiled with carved wood, painted sky blue, and studded with gold; underfoot, pavement of alternate squares of black and white marble. A few paces from us stands an enormous pillar, then another, then another; in all seven pillars intercepting the hall longitudinally, and supporting the thrust of the double-vaulted roof."
I could go on and on but I would most likely get carpal tunnel.
Like Esmeralda's fate, it is still unclear why I put The Hunchback of Notre Dame aside, the characters were well-developed, and it had a plot that was definitely "going somewhere". Maybe another time, with a different mind-set, I can truly give Quasimodo the appreciation he deserves.
This review was originally posted on First Impressions Reviews