Take a photo of a barcode or cover
ektambo 's review for:
The Hunchback of Notre Dame
by Victor Hugo
reflective
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'm not here to argue historical merit or this book's place in the literary canon. I'm here to argue whether or not this work holds up today. And to that question, I say: holy racism and misogyny, Batman.
Even were you to attempt to disregard the casual bigotry that was baked into those times (it was wrong then; it's still wrong now), Hugo is an absolute windbag who can't stick to a story. Initially, some of his asides were genuinely funny or intriguing, but the longer we went on and the less Hugo comitted to telling any sort of cohesive story, the more my eyes glazed over. My overwhelming emotional response during my time entrenched in this work was boredom.
Rather than taking the time to wade your way through this veritable doorstop, I would recommend watching the 1996 animated adaptation instead. I assert that the animated motion picture does a better job of distilling the wonder Hugo was attempting to impart regarding the cathedral herself, as well as streamlining the story into a far more cohesive and triumphant shape. (There is still some casual bigotry, though it's a lot less.)
If you have to read this for school, good luck and godspeed, my friend. If you're reading classics for fun, I would suggest looking for one that has more pros (read: tight story and consistent voice) to balance out the cons (read: period-accurate bigotry).
(Also, as a quick note, I would like to mention that I read this primarily on audio, and the narrator, Frederick Davidson, did a great job considering the material.)
Even were you to attempt to disregard the casual bigotry that was baked into those times (it was wrong then; it's still wrong now), Hugo is an absolute windbag who can't stick to a story. Initially, some of his asides were genuinely funny or intriguing, but the longer we went on and the less Hugo comitted to telling any sort of cohesive story, the more my eyes glazed over. My overwhelming emotional response during my time entrenched in this work was boredom.
Rather than taking the time to wade your way through this veritable doorstop, I would recommend watching the 1996 animated adaptation instead. I assert that the animated motion picture does a better job of distilling the wonder Hugo was attempting to impart regarding the cathedral herself, as well as streamlining the story into a far more cohesive and triumphant shape. (There is still some casual bigotry, though it's a lot less.)
If you have to read this for school, good luck and godspeed, my friend. If you're reading classics for fun, I would suggest looking for one that has more pros (read: tight story and consistent voice) to balance out the cons (read: period-accurate bigotry).
(Also, as a quick note, I would like to mention that I read this primarily on audio, and the narrator, Frederick Davidson, did a great job considering the material.)