You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.85 AVERAGE
3.85 AVERAGE
Amazing story. Just work past the part where Hugo describes every part of Notre-Dame and Paris. In his defense, the internet wasn't available and you couldn't just look up a picture. Just let him do his thing.
dark
emotional
sad
slow-paced
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
It’s an ensemble story in the same way Les Miserables is an ensemble story. With that in mind, I was a bit surprised by how much the story seemed to focus on Frollo. The ending with La Esmeralda was heartbreaking. Hell, the entire ending was heartbreaking. The choice to cut Gringoire from most adaptations… I guess it makes sense if you want to simplify. As with the Disney film, Djali is my favorite character.
Een heel boeiend boek, alleen word je soms gek van alle bijvoeglijk naamwoorden en de manier waarop hij uitweidt over de stad en de Notre-Dame is soms erg slaapverwekkend. Maar het verhaal vond ik heel boeiend zeker wanneer je de achtergrond kent waartegen dit boek zich afspeelt.
I am going to be forever haunted by this book.
first of all, I nearly gave up on it because some of the passages were so dense and I was really confused. but I pressed on. I began to enjoy it a lot more. the prose is so rich, the currents of injustice and persecution still relevant.
this is a story of physical and spiritual prisons for the three principal characters: Quasimodo, Esmeralda, Frollo, as well as Sister Gudule.
I watched a presentation with Tab Murphy, who wrote the screenplay for the Disney movie, and he discussed his process a bit on the film a few days ago. Disney films so often deal with death, tragedy, and evil, but even this novel seems like it couldn't possibly be adapted by the studio. and of course there's so much the movie doesn't and couldn't include. but there was the 1939 film version that the Disney film borrowed from. and these movies have one thing in common: a happy ending, a more compassionate embrace of Quasimodo by Esmeralda. those are the things I prefer too, but this novel is a lot more dark and joy is totally absent.
even the 1939 movie does more with Gringoire (who I love) played by Edmond O'Brien (who I also love) when he actually abandons Esmeralda so he can save Djali instead!!
I'm gonna go rewatch those two movies, watch the others, maybe the ballet too now.
first of all, I nearly gave up on it because some of the passages were so dense and I was really confused. but I pressed on. I began to enjoy it a lot more. the prose is so rich, the currents of injustice and persecution still relevant.
this is a story of physical and spiritual prisons for the three principal characters: Quasimodo, Esmeralda, Frollo, as well as Sister Gudule.
I watched a presentation with Tab Murphy, who wrote the screenplay for the Disney movie, and he discussed his process a bit on the film a few days ago. Disney films so often deal with death, tragedy, and evil, but even this novel seems like it couldn't possibly be adapted by the studio. and of course there's so much the movie doesn't and couldn't include. but there was the 1939 film version that the Disney film borrowed from. and these movies have one thing in common: a happy ending, a more compassionate embrace of Quasimodo by Esmeralda. those are the things I prefer too, but this novel is a lot more dark and joy is totally absent.
even the 1939 movie does more with Gringoire (who I love) played by Edmond O'Brien (who I also love) when he actually abandons Esmeralda so he can save Djali instead!!
I'm gonna go rewatch those two movies, watch the others, maybe the ballet too now.
Not at all what I was expecting, having only really a vague idea of the story from the Disney movie which I saw thirty years ago. The true story is quite different in style, not least because the novel was not originally titled thus, it was Notre Dame de Paris, and that is completely correct because the cathedral is so much more the central character than is the hunchback Quasimodo. In fact the titular protagonist is in many ways a minor character in the novel, and other far more involved persons, Gringoire, Phoebus and Claude Frollo, were new to me entirely.
I got used to the style of Hugo after reading Les Mis, and this, though only half the size (still vast) follows the same pattern whereby we are taken on long side-avenues to the plot which are nonetheless usually fascinating and worthwhile. Thereby, the actual plot which we follow is perhaps only two thirds of the text.
But all this aside, this is a most romantic, gothic and often creepy tale. I very much enjoyed it, but it is sad indeed, be warned.
I got used to the style of Hugo after reading Les Mis, and this, though only half the size (still vast) follows the same pattern whereby we are taken on long side-avenues to the plot which are nonetheless usually fascinating and worthwhile. Thereby, the actual plot which we follow is perhaps only two thirds of the text.
But all this aside, this is a most romantic, gothic and often creepy tale. I very much enjoyed it, but it is sad indeed, be warned.
dark
emotional
reflective
sad
slow-paced
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
challenging
dark
informative
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I had a lot of feelings while reading this book.
1) It was entirely too long winded, which is why I don't really read classics as is. My millennial Pisces brain can't handle something not getting to the point. However, it was amazing when the "story" was at the forefront and not the architecture or the history.
2) I was frustrated by the what felt like unearned love and desire these characters had for each other. Frollo to Esmeralda, Esmeralda to Phoebus, Gringoire to himself...
3) Which leads me to my anger when Esmeralda just said fuck my freedom and called for Phoebus when the guards were looking for her to hang her.
4) I was also angry and sad that Quasimodo didn't know who was helping or hurting his cause in the final battle.
5) I am grateful for Frollo's character, though, because I didn't (and still don't) fully understand him. And that's what will keep me open to this book and any other iterations in the future.
In closing, great book...any Victor Hugo stories I read next will be abridged, though.
1) It was entirely too long winded, which is why I don't really read classics as is. My millennial Pisces brain can't handle something not getting to the point. However, it was amazing when the "story" was at the forefront and not the architecture or the history.
2) I was frustrated by the what felt like unearned love and desire these characters had for each other. Frollo to Esmeralda, Esmeralda to Phoebus, Gringoire to himself...
3) Which leads me to my anger when Esmeralda just said fuck my freedom and called for Phoebus when the guards were looking for her to hang her.
4) I was also angry and sad that Quasimodo didn't know who was helping or hurting his cause in the final battle.
5) I am grateful for Frollo's character, though, because I didn't (and still don't) fully understand him. And that's what will keep me open to this book and any other iterations in the future.
In closing, great book...any Victor Hugo stories I read next will be abridged, though.
adventurous
mysterious
sad
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
N/A
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No