Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.85 AVERAGE
3.85 AVERAGE
dark
mysterious
slow-paced
Strong character development:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Je n'ai lu que 138 pages, et je puis dire sans la moindre hésitation que ce livre deviendra la plus précieuse de mes possessions. Je suis en amour avec l'écriture incroyablement complexe, précise, fluide et abyssale de Victor Hugo. Je suis en amour avec ses personnages incroyables que l'on apprend à aimer malgré leurs défauts et qui sont une riche et touchante représentation des reclus de la société d'alors et d'aujourd'hui. Je suis en amour avec tous ces détails scrupuleux qui ont tous leur pertinence au sein de ces récits profondément historiques et engagés. Je suis en amour avec l'humour, l'absurdité et la beauté de cette histoire. J'aimerais écrire un tel chef-d'œuvre: c'est du pur génie. Les connaissances générales d'Hugo sont d'une richesse incroyable (ce n'est pas du tout surprenant qu'il ait été sénateur) et malgré les 600 pages, je bois ses mots avec une telle facilité et un tel plaisir que je ne veux plus m'arrêter. :')
The Hunchback Of Notre Dame is a difficult read. Amazing book, beautifully written, but not for the common reader. I feel like if you prefer more mainstream fiction or have seen the Disney adaptation, you will be disappointed.
That being said, I did enjoy at least half of the book. Some parts drag on for what seems like forever and then some parts grip you and draw you in closely, forcing you to read.
That being said, I did enjoy at least half of the book. Some parts drag on for what seems like forever and then some parts grip you and draw you in closely, forcing you to read.
The Hunchback of Notre-Dame by Victor Hugo is another classic tale of love, lust, and tragedy from one of the world's great authors.
Originally titled Notre-Dame de Paris, which translates to Our Lady of Paris, the Cathedral for which this novel is named looms over the book just like it looks over Paris. And its primary residents, Claude Frollo and Quasimodo exhibit all that can exist within a church - someone with worldly knowledge and outward appeal but is utterly corrupt inside alongside a person with no outward beauty and great physical hardships concealing a beautiful soul. And between them, a person of compassion wanting to help the latter while evading the former.
It doesn't end happily, but life seldom does.
This book inspired the peoples of Paris, and Europe in general, to restore the beautiful Gothic architecture that surrounded them to its former glory. For that alone, I laud this book.
Originally titled Notre-Dame de Paris, which translates to Our Lady of Paris, the Cathedral for which this novel is named looms over the book just like it looks over Paris. And its primary residents, Claude Frollo and Quasimodo exhibit all that can exist within a church - someone with worldly knowledge and outward appeal but is utterly corrupt inside alongside a person with no outward beauty and great physical hardships concealing a beautiful soul. And between them, a person of compassion wanting to help the latter while evading the former.
It doesn't end happily, but life seldom does.
This book inspired the peoples of Paris, and Europe in general, to restore the beautiful Gothic architecture that surrounded them to its former glory. For that alone, I laud this book.
One of my favorite things to do back when I taught Lit / English classes was to discuss the real stories of Disney movies and other adaptations of fairy tales. Kids always love getting the truth and The Hunchback of Notre Dame is another great example of an epic book whose darker parts got stripped away by Disney.
I recently read ‘How to read literature like a professor’ and there was a great examination in there on the relationship between physical appearance and morality in lit as in - the witch is ugly, the evil Russian spy will have a scared face etc. Hugo’s novel was mentioned as one of the first to create a physically deformed character with a good heart.
This was a reread for me during a trip to Paris where we stayed right across from Notre Dame so that definitely added a lot... and made the long / dry history of Paris, history if the cathedral, and history of France chapters a little more palatable.
I recently read ‘How to read literature like a professor’ and there was a great examination in there on the relationship between physical appearance and morality in lit as in - the witch is ugly, the evil Russian spy will have a scared face etc. Hugo’s novel was mentioned as one of the first to create a physically deformed character with a good heart.
This was a reread for me during a trip to Paris where we stayed right across from Notre Dame so that definitely added a lot... and made the long / dry history of Paris, history if the cathedral, and history of France chapters a little more palatable.
I have tried to read this book several times in my life. I have liked Victor Hugo since reading the abridged Les Miserables for my sophomore English high school class. I liked that novel so much, that I purchased and read the unabridged story. My parents then gifted me with a hardcover edition that contained both an abridged version of Les Miserables and The Hunchback of Notre Dame. I never could get into Hunchback.
When I saw the book on audio, I was pleased that I would at least be able to listen to some of the book. Overall, in the end, I'm am glad that I did get through it some way, but I did not like the story and did not like the reading of it.
Ms. Christie may be very good at her acting, but I did not like her portrayal of the characters of this book. There were too many male characters that she did not distinguish the voices between. The only female character, La Esmeralda, only seemed to say "Oh" and "Phoebus," both in very breathy, irritating tones. I am hoping that an unabridged or less abridged versions have the only female character saying more than just those two words. I do know had I read it myself, the tones would have been less weak and irritating.
A friend reminded me to remember the book was written by a man several centuries ago. I understand that, but I don't remember Les Mis being like that. Maybe I was just more able to stomach weak, irritating females in high school than I am now as an adult.
I already gave my overall opinion. I don't think I would recommend this particular audio book. It's good to read "classics," and a reading of Hunchback is probably a good thing for a well-rounded reader. This audio book is not worth the pain of it. It only compounds the irritating plot to listen to it read poorly.
When I saw the book on audio, I was pleased that I would at least be able to listen to some of the book. Overall, in the end, I'm am glad that I did get through it some way, but I did not like the story and did not like the reading of it.
Ms. Christie may be very good at her acting, but I did not like her portrayal of the characters of this book. There were too many male characters that she did not distinguish the voices between. The only female character, La Esmeralda, only seemed to say "Oh" and "Phoebus," both in very breathy, irritating tones. I am hoping that an unabridged or less abridged versions have the only female character saying more than just those two words. I do know had I read it myself, the tones would have been less weak and irritating.
A friend reminded me to remember the book was written by a man several centuries ago. I understand that, but I don't remember Les Mis being like that. Maybe I was just more able to stomach weak, irritating females in high school than I am now as an adult.
I already gave my overall opinion. I don't think I would recommend this particular audio book. It's good to read "classics," and a reading of Hunchback is probably a good thing for a well-rounded reader. This audio book is not worth the pain of it. It only compounds the irritating plot to listen to it read poorly.
dark
emotional
informative
reflective
tense
Truth be told, there are large chunks of this novel that could be removed without causing any detriment to the plot - it’s claimed Hugo was paid by the word, so he used a *lot* of them! - but it can not be denied that Hugo knew how to write a damn good story. This tale of the beautiful gypsy La Esmeralda, and the various men who loved or lusted after her, is rightly a classic.
This book is so beautifully balanced between character, plot, and setting. Each one of these elements added to the story in such a memorable way.
Characters
I did not have any neutral feelings about any of the characters, I either loved them and wanted so badly for them to escape the fates I knew were coming (Esmeralda and Quasimodo), or I wanted them to die in a fire (Frollo and Pheobus). The only exceptions to this were perhaps Gringoire and Jehan, who I thought were just mildly annoying but since they were important connective tissue between the goings-on in the church and the Cour des Miracles, I never really minded when they were "on screen."
There were, obviously, racist connotations to many of the characters, and Hugo's consistent use of the g*psy slur and obvious ignorance about actual Traveler culture was problematic to say the least (not to mention his obvious disdain for anyone who was not French and Catholic in the first Cour des Miracles scene). At times this was pretty pronounced, and it became hard for me, in the 21st century, to ignore it- but I did appreciate that both the introduction and the translator's note of this edition addressed these issues and contextualized (but didn't apologize or make excuses for) them. Also, Esmeralda is a pretty classic damsel in distress character who would literally rather die than be without a man that she literally just met. This was particularly disappointing to me, who grew up watching the amazing and bad-ass Esmeralda in the Disney animated film. Again, there were times when this was easier to ignore than others, but overall this is one of those "product of its time" books which should be viewed with a critical lens when it comes to representation of race, ethnicity, and gender.
Plot
It is true, there are times when Hugo kind of trips up the flow of the story-- the large chunks about Paris are perhaps the most egregious example, but you can also see it when, literally in the middle of the climax of the story, we get an entire chapter where the king is going over some receipts and whining about his advisors. Still, the pacing is great and pretty well balanced throughout. The slow burn of the first half really (really) lets you settle into the setting, thoroughly describing time and place, and establishing the city as a character in an of itself. Then the second half hits you with the "murder", the trial, the first escape, Quasimodo's half-crazed and triumphant "sanctuary!", then the siege of the cathedral, the second escape, and finally, the parallel deaths of Esmeralda and Frollo.
Setting
Although the setting is such an important part of the story, and in fact the most important part of the story according to Hugo, I never felt like I was fully appreciating the long chapters on the layout of Paris. I think Book 3, particularly "A Bird's Eye View of Paris" was the worst one for me. I really tried to get on board, but when he starting listing every gate in every wall, giving me the history of each important building and business, and describing in detail how a prince might set up his palace, I was lost. It was such an overwhelming amount of really minute detail that my eyes starting glazing over. It felt like reading a map, and made me feel like Hugo could have saved about 50 pages by just drawing a map of Medieval Paris and including that in the beginning (it probably have even helped me visualize the setting better anyway). I understand that these sections were very important to Hugo, are big part of why this book is what it is, but after a certain point, it started to take away from the story for me.
Conclusion
Overall, I really loved this book and I will probably be returning to it in the future. The dry, overly-descriptive chapters on the layout of Paris, as well as the problematic aspects of Esmeralda's character, will keep this from being a 5 star book for me, but I would still recommend reading it keeping those things in mind.
Characters
I did not have any neutral feelings about any of the characters, I either loved them and wanted so badly for them to escape the fates I knew were coming (Esmeralda and Quasimodo), or I wanted them to die in a fire (Frollo and Pheobus). The only exceptions to this were perhaps Gringoire and Jehan, who I thought were just mildly annoying but since they were important connective tissue between the goings-on in the church and the Cour des Miracles, I never really minded when they were "on screen."
There were, obviously, racist connotations to many of the characters, and Hugo's consistent use of the g*psy slur and obvious ignorance about actual Traveler culture was problematic to say the least (not to mention his obvious disdain for anyone who was not French and Catholic in the first Cour des Miracles scene). At times this was pretty pronounced, and it became hard for me, in the 21st century, to ignore it- but I did appreciate that both the introduction and the translator's note of this edition addressed these issues and contextualized (but didn't apologize or make excuses for) them. Also, Esmeralda is a pretty classic damsel in distress character who would literally rather die than be without a man that she literally just met. This was particularly disappointing to me, who grew up watching the amazing and bad-ass Esmeralda in the Disney animated film. Again, there were times when this was easier to ignore than others, but overall this is one of those "product of its time" books which should be viewed with a critical lens when it comes to representation of race, ethnicity, and gender.
Plot
It is true, there are times when Hugo kind of trips up the flow of the story-- the large chunks about Paris are perhaps the most egregious example, but you can also see it when, literally in the middle of the climax of the story, we get an entire chapter where the king is going over some receipts and whining about his advisors. Still, the pacing is great and pretty well balanced throughout. The slow burn of the first half really (really) lets you settle into the setting, thoroughly describing time and place, and establishing the city as a character in an of itself. Then the second half hits you with the "murder", the trial, the first escape, Quasimodo's half-crazed and triumphant "sanctuary!", then the siege of the cathedral, the second escape, and finally, the parallel deaths of Esmeralda and Frollo.
Setting
Although the setting is such an important part of the story, and in fact the most important part of the story according to Hugo, I never felt like I was fully appreciating the long chapters on the layout of Paris. I think Book 3, particularly "A Bird's Eye View of Paris" was the worst one for me. I really tried to get on board, but when he starting listing every gate in every wall, giving me the history of each important building and business, and describing in detail how a prince might set up his palace, I was lost. It was such an overwhelming amount of really minute detail that my eyes starting glazing over. It felt like reading a map, and made me feel like Hugo could have saved about 50 pages by just drawing a map of Medieval Paris and including that in the beginning (it probably have even helped me visualize the setting better anyway). I understand that these sections were very important to Hugo, are big part of why this book is what it is, but after a certain point, it started to take away from the story for me.
Conclusion
Overall, I really loved this book and I will probably be returning to it in the future. The dry, overly-descriptive chapters on the layout of Paris, as well as the problematic aspects of Esmeralda's character, will keep this from being a 5 star book for me, but I would still recommend reading it keeping those things in mind.
This book was a struggle to get through. I read several reviews that said the first half of the book is harder than the first half. This is true, but the second half of the book was not easy either. The good news is that it's relatively easy to tell when Hugo is writing about something that you won't have to remember to get the story. He even provides summaries and conclusions to some of his longer tangents, such as the chapter on the architecture and layout of medieval Paris.
I did not find any of the characters worth caring about. And despite the American title, this is not a book about Quasimodo. He plays a big part, but maybe not even the biggest part. I was glad when the book was over.
I did not find any of the characters worth caring about. And despite the American title, this is not a book about Quasimodo. He plays a big part, but maybe not even the biggest part. I was glad when the book was over.