Discover millions of ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more with a free trial

Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

Unavailable
The Hunchback of Notre Dame
Unavailable
The Hunchback of Notre Dame
Unavailable
The Hunchback of Notre Dame
Audiobook22 hours

The Hunchback of Notre Dame

Written by Victor Hugo

Narrated by Bill Homewood

Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

4/5

()

Currently unavailable

Currently unavailable

About this audiobook

In the grotesque bell-ringer Quasimodo, Victor Hugo created one of the most vivid characters in classic fiction. Quasimodo's doomed love for the beautiful gypsy girl Esmeralda is an example of the traditional love theme of beauty and the beast. Yet, set against the massive background of Notre Dame de Paris and interwoven with the sacred and secular life of medieval France, it takes on a larger perspective. The characters come to life: the poet Gringoire, the tormented priest Claude Frollo, the upright, fun-loving captain Phoebus and above all Quasimodo and Esmeralda themselves. It is a tale peppered with humour but fuelled by the anguish which unfolds beneath the bells of the great cathedral of Paris.
LanguageEnglish
Release dateAug 14, 2014
ISBN9781843797920
Author

Victor Hugo

Victor Hugo (1802-1885) is one of the most well-regarded French writers of the nineteenth century. He was a poet, novelist and dramatist, and he is best remembered in English as the author of Notre-Dame de Paris (The Hunchback of Notre-Dame) (1831) and Les Misérables (1862). Hugo was born in Besançon, and became a pivotal figure of the Romantic movement in France, involved in both literature and politics. He founded the literary magazine Conservateur Littéraire in 1819, aged just seventeen, and turned his hand to writing political verse and drama after the accession to the throne of Louis-Philippe in 1830. His literary output was curtailed following the death of his daughter in 1843, but he began a new novel as an outlet for his grief. Completed many years later, this novel became Hugo's most notable work, Les Misérables.

Related to The Hunchback of Notre Dame

Related audiobooks

Classics For You

View More

Related articles

Reviews for The Hunchback of Notre Dame

Rating: 3.9332999111334 out of 5 stars
4/5

1,994 ratings73 reviews

What did you think?

Tap to rate

Review must be at least 10 words

  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    I hadn't read this since I was in high school and had forgotten how good it is. Unrequited love for everyone (except perhaps Gregoire and Djali). Quasimodo is such a tragic character ... it makes your heart ache for him. The only reason I'm not giving it 5 stars is because of a couple of the ridiculously long sidetracks that Hugo gets on. I just skipped right through them, but the story and the characters are so good, I really wish he'd just stuck with that.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    I listened to this classic narrated by David Case who I thought did a fairly good job of narration. I had also listened to Les Miserables which Case narrated and I wasn’t very impressed with him then but for whatever reason this book seemed better. Of the book itself I was suitably impressed once I got over the custom of the time of writing which Hugo emulated in spades i.e. using 10 words where one would have done. This writing style seems well suited to listening to rather than reading as I have also noted with Dickens works.It is the latter part of the 17th century. Paris is still a walled city but the walls have had to be expanded three times. Anyone who is not Catholic is viewed with suspicion and often put to death. The King Louis Eleventh is not particularly well liked but he has the support of the church and the military. A band of gypsies (or Egyptians as they are called in the book although they doubtless have never seen Africa) lives in the heart of Paris. A young gypsy girl called La Esmeralda entertains crowds by dancing and demonstrating her goat’s tricks. She is lovely and catches the attention of many men including a captain of the Guard (Phoebus) a priest (Archdeacon Claude of Notre Dame) and a disfigured bell ringer (Quasimodo). The priest enlists Quasimodo’s help to capture La Esmeralda but the kidnapping is foiled by Phoebus. Quasimodo is tried and sentenced to some hours in the stocks. La Esmeralda takes pity on him and brings him water ensuring that Quasimodo is her devoted servant ever after. In her turn La Esmeralda is hopelessly in love with Phoebus who saved her and when he makes an assignation with her she gladly goes although she had sworn to remain a virgin until she could find her parents. (La Esmeralda had been brought up by the gypsies but not born to them.) When the priest heard of the assignation he was overcome with jealousy and followed Phoebus. He hid in the room where they were to meet and when he saw Phoebus and La Esmeralda embracing he sprang out and attacked Phoebus. La Esmeralda fainted and the priest escaped out the window before the Watch could appear. Thus La Esmeralda was charged with the attack on Phoebus (who did not die although La Esmeralda was told he had) and sentenced to hang. She was brought in front of Notre Dame before hanging and Quasimodo snatched her up and claimed sanctuary for her. Despite this aid La Esmeralda does end up on the gallows and is hung. Her fate is even more tragic in that minutes before she had finally reconnected with her mother who had lived as a recluse in Paris ever since her infant daughter had been kidnapped. The priest and Quasimodo also had tragic ends. Love does not conquer all.Definitely the best person in the book is Quasimodo. His body may be disfigured but his heart is pure. If this were a fairy tale La Esmeralda would have transformed him into a handsome prince with a kiss and they would have lived happily ever after. But Hugo doesn’t do happy endings it seems.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    I knew what to expect but didn't expect it to be quite dark.. Very good listen, narrator was excellent too.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    The Hunchback of Notre Dame by Victor Hugo is a historical fiction novel that was originally published in France during 1831. The story is set in Paris during the 15th century and is centred around Quasimodo, a deformed bell ringer and his unrequited love for the beautiful dancer Esmeralda, who believes herself to be a gypsy. These two originally meet at the Feast of Fools where Quasimodo is elected “Pope of the Fools” and then beaten by an angry mob. Esmeralda takes pity on him and offers him a drink of water. Quasimodo immediately falls in love with the girl and decides to devote his life to protecting her.Esmeralda has other admirers, the evil Archdeacon Dom Claude Frollo and her choice, Captain Phoebus de Chateaupers. Due to Frollo, Esmeralda becomes a suspect in the attempted murder of her love and is arrested, put on trial and sentenced to death after she is forced to falsely confesses to both the murder and to witchcraft. Quasimodo attempts to shelter her in the cathedral but Frollo interferes and Esmeralda is released to the ranting crowd leaving Quasimodo to take his vengeance upon Frollo.This famous tragedy plays out in one of the enduring symbols of Paris, the Notre Dame Cathedral. Hugo paints a vivid story that also shines a light on life in the 15th century. While the author explores what it meant to be labelled a “monster”, the real star of the book is the historic Gothic architecture that Hugo wanted to see preserved. Although this story has been adapted many times, very few adaptations tell the actual story, most revise the ending to give the audience a happy conclusion. I have been reading this book on and off since last November by installments and as happy as I am to be able to say that I have completed this read, I can’t say that I really felt involved in the story. I think I brought too many preconceptions with me, and the disjointed reading also played a part in my disconnection from the story.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    Finished this story set in the 1400s in Paris, France of the story of Esmeralda, Quasimodo, the archdeacon of Norte Dame and of the architectural structure, Notre Dame. The author wrote this book to advance his concern for the lack of care of these pieces of art. His argument that the story prior to the printing press is in these structures and that the birth of the printing press put these structures in peril of being left to deteriorate. Victor Hugo spends a great deal of time on these discourses as he did in his other great work and the sewers of Paris. It reminds me of other books that have themes/settings around architecture such as Hawkmoor and Pillars of The Earth.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    (Note: This review contains some spoilers.)I can't believe this novel is considered a classic. Overall, it's a real mess. In fact, the famous author Goethe, nearly 200 years ago, had this to say about the book:"I have lately been reading [Hugo's book], and required no little patience to support the horror with which this reading has inspired me. It is the most abominable book that ever was written! Besides, one is not even indemnified for the torture one has to endure by the pleasure one might receive from a truthful representation of human nature or human character. His book is, on the contrary, utterly destitute of nature and truth! The so-called acting personages whom he brings forward are not human beings with living flesh and blood, but miserable wooden puppets, which he deals with as he pleases, and which he causes to make all sorts of contortions and grimaces just as he needs them for his desired effects. But what an age it must be which not only renders such a book possible, and calls it into existence, but even finds it endurable and delightful." I think Goethe hit the nail on the head. Sadly, so much of this novel is utterly barbaric, lacking any kind of grace or subtlety.Did Hugo think his readers were naughty or something? He must have, because he sure seems to enjoy punishing them. ;)The first 200+ pages are a real snooze, and some of the digressions are nearly unbearable. Then for the next 100 pages are so, things pick up a bit. Toward the end, things get much more exciting. But even in the last 100 hundred pages, Hugo manages to interrupt the flow by throwing in a tedious 35-page chapter on Louis XI, which is almost unforgivable. As Goethe pointed out, the whole novel feels contrived—not organic. The characters are mostly two-dimensional. Very little about the novel seems realistic. For instance, it's hard to believe that la Esmeralda, who is "hopelessly devoted" to Captain Phoebus, would be so stupid as to sacrifice her own life over her silly infatuation with him. And the evil Claude Frollo lets la Esmeralda be condemned to death for his own crime, then goes to great lengths to "rescue" her, only to abandon her to the gallows once again? Does that make any sense? Unfortunately, Hugo seems to just yank his characters around for effect. Even worse, he is forever going on and on about the most trivial things; but the most important things—like character development—go woefully neglected.Perhaps the worst part of all is the horrific ending. After raising your hopes by accelerating the story, Hugo seems to enjoy just throwing everything to the dogs. As Avril Lavigne once put it: "So much for my happy ending." ;)Today, we frequently hear complaints about needless violence and gore on TV. Well, it's almost as if Hugo just tried to make the ending here as gruesome and depressing as possible in order to improve his "ratings." The whole ending is clumsy and half-baked. It's almost as if he ran out of good ideas, so he decided, "Hey, I know! I'll just throw in a ton of carnage and kill everybody off!!!!" Brilliant, huh? The conclusion just seems gratuitously macabre.Perhaps a better title for this novel would've been Blood 'n' Guts at Notre-Dame. :)What's more, the final two chapters are very strange. Even though the next-to-last chapter is called "Phoebus's Marriage," only the last sentence actually mentions him. And the final chapter is titled "Quasimodo's Marriage." Marriage???? Yeah, right.Of all the characters in the novel, the affectionate goat Djali is probably the most likable. Maybe Hugo should've just called the novel Hello, Djali!!! and made her the star while throwing out most of the other characters. LOL. Oddly enough, Hugo doesn't kill off Djali. And that makes you wonder—was he sick or something when he decided to let her live? ;)In a nutshell, this novel is a long, painful slog. While it does have its riveting moments, too much of it is bogged down in trivia, tedium, and gore. And there's very little depth or meaning. Since there are so many other better classics out there, I would not recommend reading this one. If you want to know something about the story, you might want to watch one of the film adaptations instead, even if it isn't that faithful to the original. Or if you do decide to read this book, I'd recommend going for an abridged version—trust me, you won't miss anything important. ;)
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    A beautiful and tragic book.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    This review originally posted at Christa's Hooked on BooksBefore reading Victor Hugo's classic whenever someone mentioned, The Hunchback of Notre Dame I usually thought of the Disney version. I'm sure I'm not the only one.It's actually quite shocking. These two ideas could not be more different from one another. (Although I would be lying if I said the Disney music didn't play through my head the whole time I was reading).In reality, this book is much more gruesome than Disney would have us believe. There is much more violence than I would have expected. This is not to say that it is too much or that it is gory. But it is dark. There are few (if any really) bright and shiny scenes, where everything work out. In my opinion this makes it much more gritty and much more interesting. The characters are more human, they have more depth.I found this version (i.e the real version) really helped you get to know the “villains” of the story. In particular Frollo. My previous opinion of him was a cold hearted, sadistic man, who cared for no one and nothing but himself. In actuality there is so much more to him than that. You really get to know him and his history. Though not pure by any means, he's not heartless either. He actually ended up being one of my favourite characters in the book.The one tragic flaw of this book, however, is it's repeated history lessons. Be prepared for very long descriptions of French architecture, music, the printing press etc. Hugo spares no detail! These often went on for pages, and a couple of times I was very tempted to abandon the book because of them. But if you can survive them they will add a nice touch to the story, in that all your settings will be much more vivid and the class divisions touched upon will make much more sense.All in all, this is a good book. It's longer than it needs to be, but the story is solid and the characters are well thought out. In true Gothic fashion it is dark and dreary but it's not that depressing. There's action, adventure and mystery. If nothing else it will ensure that visiting Paris and Notre Dame will be added to your bucket list.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    Much more poignant, dramatic and even comical then I had been expecting.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    When I finished this book I said: "Finished tonight (it's 11:45) Hunchback of Notre Dame. There is no doubt: Victor Hugo could write (yet...in way it seems forced: like I would write if I could."
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    Very cool how much research went into making this a learning experience about Paris in this time period, as well as a fantastic story. Learned a lot about architecture and all kinds of things. This is why I love historically accurate fiction!
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    Although I would have preferred that Mr. Hugo's digressions, such as the one about architecture through history, had been stuck in an appendix; I still enjoyed most of the book. The scene where poor Quasimodo was defending Notre Dame was very exciting. Imagine my dismay when I eagerly changed to the next CD and discovered Mr. Hugo had decided to interrupt the action for an annoying-sourly amusing-creepy scene involving King Louis XI, his finances, and some prisoners. Esmeralda's escape attempt left me tense even though I knew what to expect from my late mother's copy of Plot Outlines of 100 Famous Novels. There were times I wanted to scream in frustration at our heroine, but she wasn't even 17, poor kid. There's far more going on than any movie could hope to cover. Speaking of movies, I wonder how kids who grew up on the Disney version are going to react if they have to read the book for school. (One of my sisters read The Hunchback of Notre Dameit in school decades ago and remembered enough of the plot to be able to discuss it with me. That's staying power!)Mr. Guidall's narration was very good, too. I'm sorry that I waited so long to read this classic. While I think I can appreciate it more as a middle-aged adult than I would have in high school or college, I can think of books I had to read then that were much less enjoyable than this one.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    It was interesting to read "The Hunchback of Notre Dame" after reading Victor Hugo's masterpiece "Les Miserables." I really enjoyed "Hunchback" but couldn't help but feel it was like reading "Les Miserables" light.Central to the story is Notre Dame-- around which most of the action takes place. A corrupt priest, a gypsy girl with a counting goat and, of course, the hunchback in the title, are interesting (and at times frustrating) characters. The story moves long aside from Hugo's trademark digressions into French history.I liked this book a lot, but if you're only going to read one book by Hugo in your lifetime, this isn't the one, of course!
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    "The Hunchback of Notre Dame" is my first Victor Hugo, and the comments I had previously heard about the vividness of his descriptive prose were certainly proved by this work. By the halfway point in the book, it seemed as if not very much had happened yet, but once I got used to the style, I didn't really mind. The story has a satisfying ambiguity to it; there is not just a black and white delineation between hero and villain, nor are the moral points of the story overtly spelled out. The reader walks away with lots to think about from the plot alone; intermingled with this are Hugo's interesting ideas about how literature has supplanted the role of architecture in society (in a chapter which, strangely, was almost lost to history). Many have posited the role of Notre Dame itself as a character in the book, but Hugo too almost becomes a character, in that the way this story gets told probably could not have been told the same by anyone else. This is one of those strange books that doesn't take hold as an immediate favourite and yet won't get its hooks out of you.The Barnes and Noble edition features a nice introduction by Isabel Roche, who in the series' featured "Inspired by This Work" section is far kinder to the Disney version of this story than I would have expected. Her footnotes are immensely helpful throughout the book, her endnotes less so. If you are a reader who perpetually gets exhausted by having your pinky finger in the back of a very large volume, skipping the few pages of endnotes probably won't bother you too much.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    My first foray into 1800s literature has not been a bad one. Hugo draws the reader in with a unique narrative style that not only gives a large sense of authenticity to the story with its direct, 4th wall breaking notions to the reader- as if being lectured to on a history lesson in school, but also gives a sense of life to the world in which the story takes place in by changing perspectives constantly and making use of side characters to transition from one scene to another very effectively. Other novels have done this before, I'm sure, but I'd imagine few have done so to this extent. Add to this some wonderful imagery and you have the novel's greatest strength at hand: world building/scene setting. I challenge anyone to bring forth a more living, detailed, and breathing version of Paris than Hugo has done in this novel.

    That said and done, there are a few flaws I have with the actual meat of the story. Some are subjective, such as Hugo's tackling of philosophical and societal issues through characters that are obviously not very good at defending the side they are supposed to be representing. For example, I believe the trial scene with La Esmeralda was supposed to be part of the not-so-subtle on-going critique towards capital punishment as a concept, where he portrays the system as one-sided, quick, and easily manipulated by personal bias on the judges' part. The problem is, in order to do this he makes use of unbelievably moronic characters, such as Captain Phoebus, whom we are to believe cares more about his own lust and pride than the life of an innocent, or the fact that literally no one decides to double check the judge's assertion on the victim's physical condition, or the fact that no one wonders why the priest, of all people and whom La Esmeralda claimed to be the real assailant, visited her alone during her imprisonment. It's just unrealistic, and there are several other philosophical critiques of his that are affected by this, such as his commentary on blind love/loyalty. I mean, it's all fine and dandy to present the flaws of an ideology you're critiquing through one-sided exaggeration in order to get your message across I suppose, but it just comes off as a bit too... Ayn Rand-ish to me.

    Aside from that, the biggest universal complaint of the story is the one-dimensional aspect to about 75% of the characters, to which I would agree. It's not so much that they're uninteresting from a personality perspective, so much as their character development and motivations come off as very contrived across the board in an attempt to shoehorn them into the more melodramatic roles of the story. I also take issue with the fact that the two most interesting characters- the old praying woman and poet, played relatively small roles in the story. All in all though, Hugo has presented some very unique storytelling ideas here and has built a truly authentic Paris. Though the story isn't very good, especially from a character-driven perspective, it is still worth reading if nothing but for the interesting narrative experimentation and metaphorical commentary on cultural revolution by use of architecture.

    TL;DR: Style over substance.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    I was prepared for the novel to be vastly different from the Disney film, more serious and 'grown-up'. In the end the distance was probably less than I was expecting. Although naturally more complex, the novel is comic and carnivalesque in a way that feels somewhat Disney. All the characters are somewhat comically grotesque, and few of their actions feel truly human. I suppose the difference is in the absence of 'good' and 'bad' characters. Esmerelda and Phoebus are as comic and irrationally-driven as everyone else, and Frollo is more screw-eyed than he is evil. The hunchback himself is no protagonist, and to my mind no more interesting than other fringe characters like Clopin, Pierre and the mad mother in the cell.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    The classic tale set against the marvelously detailed description of the city. The story about Quasimodo, but it starts with him being praised. The hatred/prejudice comes only after misunderstandings. The overbearing message- ignorance breeds hatred. Worth the read.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    A great work by one of the world's greatest authors. Complete excitement. It is not like any movie. I was shocked to discover this but it makes a much better read. Far more realistic.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    If I could give this book ten stars I would.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    if it would not be for the long chapters of architecture about the church, this book would get 5 stars. This is really an action book with a highly dramatic ending. Great script for a movie.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    I must admit I don't remember it well, but after seeing a trailer for the Disney movie I decided to read the book. I do remember it was moving and interesting. And since I'm generally pretty disgusted with Disney versions of classics, I won't be comparing the two.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    When one is doing evil 'tis madness to stop half-way.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    It's hard to read this great novel through all the noise created by subsequent adaptions, send-ups and other references. But the essential story is clear enough. The 16 year old Esmerelda has been raised by gypsies and tours with them as a dancer. She is a model of youth, beauty, grace, compassion vitality and innocence. Like her, the grotesque hunchback Quasimodo has lost his parents. He was abandoned as a baby and left to the care of the Church, where he became the bell-ringer in the famous Church. The book tells their interwoven tales. The book can also be seen as a study of males and their faults. Esmerelda stirs interest where-ever she goes, but rarely brings out the best in men. Archdeacon Claude Frollo is a cold intellectual, product of a joyless youth: unattractive in his person, dried-up inside, he is obsessed by his sterile struggle with alchemy, until Esmelda comes along. Once released, his sexual passion flare up within him but emerge out only as cold machinations and wild pronouncements unlikely to appeal to a teen girl. He exemplifies the Church's disconnect between mind and body and between the male and female. Phoebus is a dashing soldier who rescues Esmerelda at one stage, as a more or less routine duty while on patrol keeping the peace, and in doing so wins her heart. But under his gentlemanly polish he is a boor and brute. Gregoire the writer is amiable but weak. Jehan, the only major male character not linked romantically to Esmerelda, has abundant vitality wasted on a dissolute lifestyle.Her mother, tortured by the kidnapping of her daughter as a tot, has had herself walled into a small room with barred windows opening to the public, a concept developed elsewhere in the feminist novel Women in the Wall. Victor Hugo remarks in passing that this sort of self-mortifying behaviour elicited only moderate compassion from the medieval populace, due to their limited sense of personality, of the world stored within each individual. It is strange, for the modern reader, to encounter vast wads of historical description, anecdote and conjecture, sometimes occupying a whole massive chapter. In that way it reminded me of Moby Dick.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    It gets bogged down in the descriptions of Paris in the Middle Ages as well as the Gothic architecture, but when Hugo gets back to the story, it’s a timelessly tragic one.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    This was a fun read. I was unfamiliar with most of the story or the politics, not having seen the Disney version (a lacuna now filled), and came to it mostly spoiler-free. Notre-Dame de Paris was this year’s Big French Classic (following Thérèse Raquin and Le comte de Monte-Cristo), and I’ve enjoyed working my way through this delightfully dark, if melodramatic, Gothic Novel. It felt very filmic in the way it set scenes and gathered momentum for its spectacle through imagery, and I mean that as a compliment. And of course, it featured an awesome villain -- entirely believable in his zealous self-righteousness and post facto rationalisations. Even so, a few portions of this 1831 book were a slog to get through. Not Hugo’s digressions on what 1480s Paris looked like, or his tract on Architecture vs the Printing Press, or the Alchemy subplot that went nowhere -- I was mostly on board with those. The incredibly obvious setups for later “reveals”, on the other hand, did make me check the pagecount. The intervening two centuries or so of media and storytelling do make a difference. I wasn’t too keen on the cheap melodrama, either, or the Manic Pixie Dream Girl -- a trope I tend to shun. Most of what I disliked about the book can be chalked up to its age (melodrama, unsubtle setups for reveals); and most of what I liked (opinionated author, the setting, the spectacle, and the surprising darkness) I feel are good features to have in novels. Two thumbs up!
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    The Hunchback of Notre Dame is a novel written in the name of the preservation of Medieval architecture in general and the Notre Dame cathedral specifically. It was written from 1829-1832 during the period of the Romanticism movement, which has been defined as the love for all things Medieval. The titular character Quasimodo is the Middle Ages personified, a force of man's nature surrounded by superstitions both Pagan and Christian. In the end he must die along with the age and the things that gave the cathedral a soul. Through his death the reader is moved to a sense of justice, and preservation.I greatly enjoyed this important novel, it was one of the first to depict a range of characters from all classes including a begger as a main character. Although parts of the plot seem cliche like genre fiction, it's somewhat excusable given its age, and in a way adds to its fairy-tale quality. The novel doesn't take itself too seriously and indeed has flashes of humor and meta-fiction that lifts it up, unlike the heavier fire and brimstone Les Misérables. The novel reminded me of early Dickens with its large cast, pretensions to theater, humor and themes of social justice. In fact Dickens was influenced by the novel published years before Pickwick Papers. Finally Hugo's skills as a poet are central to the quality of the prose, his metaphors are delightful, unforced and appropriate (at least in this translation by Catherine Liu).I "read" the novel in the audiobook narrated by George Guidall (1991) and he brings subtle but effective characterizations in a way my own inner voice would have missed. The novel is improved by the audio version.. which doesn't always happen but in this case it came together well.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    Victor Hugo once again demonstrates unrivalled mastery over the written word, but the story itself was grievous to experience. Shakespeare has nothing on tragedies in this case. I loved the descriptions, the in-depth details and creative examples that colour both Victor's characters and their emotions in this book. I awed at the author's ability to rend a reader's heart through poetic text. But normally, even in a tragedy, at least one character stands out as piteous—an ill-fated victim entirely deserving of sympathy given his or her altruistic, often heroic nature. These Notre-Dame characters, however, were all hard to pity. Even the hunchback, Quasimodo, who I believe was meant to be the hero in this case, through actions that caused pain and cruelty unbalanced by an attempt to protect Esmerelda, proved upsetting.

    I wonder if this wasn't meant to be a cleverly laid out example of self-seeking, base human nature demonstrated from diverse stations and perspectives. Esmerelda, Claude Frollo, his drunkard brother, Quasimodo, Captain Phoebus, Gringoire, the King, and so on—every character, even the minor players, seemed controlled by selfish interests, none truly praiseworthy! It was difficult to read through these intertwining paths and root for no one. Lives tragically found their end in the same manner in which they elapsed, through spiteful and heartless misfortunes. It was a harsh and sad tale but a seriously insightful demonstration of the end results where selfish obsessions are concerned.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    Before reading, I was struck by the original French title, which makes no mention of the Hunchback of Notre-Dame, but only of the cathedral itself. This makes complete sense, when reading the novel, as one almost feels as though, at points, Hugo is simply writing a biography of the cathedral. He devotes a considerable number of pages describing the building's inner anatomy from the bells to the crypt. This devotion spurred a revival in mid-nineteenth century French architecture, with many Parisians restoring buildings to their former glory. Ultimately, though, Hugo describes the novel as being the victor over architecture. It is the novel which can put civilisations' greatest ideas in to the hands of all people, in a way that only architecture was able to in a bygone age. This Oxford translation was quite stunning: at numerous points I had to re-read a sentence just to grasp a beautiful turn-of-phrase, and wondered at what Hugo wrote in the original French text. There are points where Hugo departs from the central storyline in order to ponder at length over one of the central character's views on philosophy, religion, architecture, or literature. At these junctures in the narrative, it can sometimes be quite tricky to pick the novel back up and return to where you left off. I got the most out of the novel when reading it in huge chunks, as I was able to return to the narrative with greater ease. In hindsight, I wonder, if there were moments where I would have appreciated a deeper insight in to the characters' lives before the novel. Surely Hugo could have pondered much longer on Quasimodo's loneliness, his place in the world, his relationship with the God who had made him and the struggles that he had to face in a world which poured scorn on him in so many ways. Hugo prefers, I assume, to share these nuggets through narrative and subtle association. The depiction of Frollo's lust and demise is so maddeningly described in places, for example, that it makes for gripping reading – at times, it felt like reading a modern thriller. I can only guess at the kind of reaction this novel would have received in the nineteenth century. The way in which Hugo intertwines the theological consequences of his demise with his pursuit of Esmerelda's matrimony, is so superbly done. In the end, his pursuit of her leads him to openly reject God and paradise, in exchange for his vacuous (and fatal) lust for Esmerelda. At one point, Hugo writes about his point of no return: 'I drew myself up; I fled; but alas! something within me had fallen never to rise again, something had come upon me from which I could not flee.' If you like long classic novels, then you may enjoy Notre Dame, although you may be put off by the long passages on architecture – if I was to read this again, I would probably aim to read it while sailing down the Seine! This was my second attempt at getting through the book: this time I got to the end, and it was certainly worth it.
  • Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
    5/5
    After reading the first five pages and realizing I was in the hands of a master story teller, I started over, more slowly.Victor Hugo totally draws readers in - to each plot, location, and to the finest nuances of each character, from wild humor tothe worst human desperations. Most vividly rendered in a few words.Unfortunately, for us tender hearted, he is also the master of horror and does not hesitate to unleash his powersin many directions."The Bird's Eye View of Paris" and Notre-Dame chapters could be greatly enhanced by photographs and illustrations.1/2 Star missing because of the wholly untimely and boring chapter dominated by the King.

    1 person found this helpful

  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    It took a while to get used to Hugo effusive style, and I could have read it happily without the descriptions of the Paris skyline and streets from 600 years ago, but it did capture my attention. I doubted I would be able to read it at all until I was well into it, then it went pretty rapidly. I was inspired to read this by a student who compared the original with the Disney movie of her childhood, which I have never seen, in a capstone presentation. Another classic--read at last!

    1 person found this helpful