Everand Logo

Welcome to Everand!

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

    Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

    The Hunchback of Notre Dame
    The Hunchback of Notre Dame
    The Hunchback of Notre Dame
    Audiobook (abridged)2 hours

    The Hunchback of Notre Dame

    Written by Victor Hugo

    Narrated by Bill Homewood

    4/5

    ()

    Switch to ebook

    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 Esmerelda 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 Esmerelda 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
    PublisherNaxos Audiobooks
    Release dateJun 1, 2006
    ISBN9789629545437
    Author

    Victor Hugo

    Victor Hugo (1802-1885) was a French poet and novelist. Born in Besançon, Hugo was the son of a general who served in the Napoleonic army. Raised on the move, Hugo was taken with his family from one outpost to the next, eventually setting with his mother in Paris in 1803. In 1823, he published his first novel, launching a career that would earn him a reputation as a leading figure of French Romanticism. His Gothic novel The Hunchback of Notre-Dame (1831) was a bestseller throughout Europe, inspiring the French government to restore the legendary cathedral to its former glory. During the reign of King Louis-Philippe, Hugo was elected to the National Assembly of the French Second Republic, where he spoke out against the death penalty and poverty while calling for public education and universal suffrage. Exiled during the rise of Napoleon III, Hugo lived in Guernsey from 1855 to 1870. During this time, he published his literary masterpiece Les Misérables (1862), a historical novel which has been adapted countless times for theater, film, and television. Towards the end of his life, he advocated for republicanism around Europe and across the globe, cementing his reputation as a defender of the people and earning a place at Paris’ Panthéon, where his remains were interred following his death from pneumonia. His final words, written on a note only days before his death, capture the depth of his belief in humanity: “To love is to act.”

    More audiobooks from Victor Hugo

    Related to The Hunchback of Notre Dame

    Related audiobooks

    Classics For You

    View More
    View More

    Related podcast episodes

    Related articles

    • Article

      Spell

      Apr 25, 2018

      Spell
      4 min read

    • Article

      Four Poems

      Sep 4, 2018

      In London. England. Who knows why?Perhaps this rumpled guyFrom central casting or a page of Dickens.He’s taking ordinary usTo haunts of the illustrious,Where even dull pulse quickens. A red felt hat’s dark fingered brim,Food-spotted vest are—him.A mo

      4 min read

    • Article

      Two Poems

      Jul 1, 2022

      After centuries of deferralto the white sky cloud cover God, who kept me on orange alert,babbling for mercies that were batted away sloppilylike dustballs in the wake of a sock, I turned to the Divine Creatrix,who built the short night, I was convinc

      2 min read

    • Article

      Robert Thicknesse on Opera

      Apr 27, 2023

      I WAS AS EXCITED AS everyone else to learn that opera actually exists in New Zealand — two things surely linked before only by their joint gold for the world’s least fashionable phenomena. Not only that, but it turns out that Kiwis have a thriving ne

      3 min read

    • Article

      My Glorious Dog Days

      Nov 16, 2022

      My Glorious Dog Days
      3 min read

    • Article

      A Refusal To Mourn The Deaths, By Gunfire, Of Three Men In Brooklyn

      Jan 1, 2019

      And at times, didn’t the whole countrytry to break his skin?—Tim Seibles You strike your one good match to watch its bloomand jook, a swan song just before a nightwind comes to snuff it. That’s the kind of dayit’s been. Your Black & Mild, now, useles

      7 min read

    • Article

      Hook, Line And Sinker

      Oct 18, 2018

      Hook, Line And Sinker
      4 min read

    • Article

      Ship Of Fools

      Sep 29, 2022

      AS A SIMPLE GLANCE at most of them will tell you, there’s not a whole bunch of fun in being an opera critic — so we tend to greet the faintest prospect of joy with breathless hope. Imagine, then, the bitter gall we had to drink when the summer’s inco

      3 min read

    • Article

      Two Poems

      Nov 1, 2018

      Our house in the 100-year flood plainflooded. They say thatfor another 800 years a hurricanelike this will not come. My internetis down and my smart phone hurts my thumbsarthritic. I’m running out of data.All my books are in boxes. Please referto my

      3 min read

    • Article

      La Otra Historia

      Jun 30, 2022

      La Otra Historia
      14 min read

    • Article

      Hot Valks live!

      Oct 28, 2021

      ● WHO SAID CLASSICAL MUSIC IS dead? Well, catch yerself on, because Serj Tankian, lead singer of Armenian-American metalheads System of a Down, is coming to park his love guns on your lawn. The guy who brought you Genocidal Humanoidz (Azerbaijanis? I

      3 min read

    • Article

      Three Poems

      May 1, 2020

      We came here to fondle the glassoctopi. Rosy crystal dragons, psychedelic phalluses in jewelry cases. Eyeglasses, butterflies.Black market rocker leather; Do ItIn Muscle Beach tees. The indecisive sea.We ate a slice of boardwalkpizza topped with anch

      1 min read

    • Article

      Three Poems

      Sep 1, 2022

      1. Here there’s no rainy season.Sun scalds my forehead,yet the pool is empty. Beside it,a toppled table, its glass surface shattered.The asphalt is too hot for bare feet. 2. Far away: white hillocksand white dunes under a deepblue sky. Swirling winds

      5 min read

    • Article

      In the Name of Notre Dame

      Apr 17, 2019

      In the Name of Notre Dame
      11 min read

    • Article

      No Man Is An Island

      Sep 15, 2017

      No Man Is An Island
      9 min read

    • Article

      Peace Comes With A Smile

      Nov 11, 2019

      Peace Comes With A Smile
      8 min read

    • Article

      Roger's PROFANISAURUS

      Nov 19, 2020

      Roger's PROFANISAURUS
      8 min read

    • Article

      In Search Of Sanctuary

      Jan 5, 2024

      In Search Of Sanctuary
      16 min read

    • Article

      Commonplace Book

      Sep 1, 2021

      If any question why we died, Tell them, because our fathers lied. —Rudyard Kipling, “Epitaphs of the War,” The Years Between, 1919 She consulted me, a glance, and said: “I think not anything off the wagon. It arrives too quickly. Let’s have somethi

      4 min read

    • Article

      The Devil’s Taxi

      Oct 6, 2022

      The Devil’s Taxi
      26 min read

    • Article

      The Week In Theatre: The Walk; Wuthering Heights – Review

      Oct 31, 2021

      In Arabic, Amal means “hope”. And hope is embodied in each step of The Walk, the journey across Europe, begun in July, made by the three-and-a-half metre-tall puppet called Little Amal. By the time she arrives in Manchester on 3 November, she will ha

      3 min read

    • Article

      Too Much, Magic Bus

      Dec 9, 2019

      Too Much, Magic Bus
      8 min read

    • Article

      Commonplace Book

      Jun 4, 2018

      I like long walks, especially when they are taken by people who annoy me. —Fred Allen I have always wondered, in reading travels, at the childish joy travellers felt at meeting people they knew, and their sense of loneliness when they did not, in

      4 min read

    • Article

      Philippe Petit, Artist of Life

      Jun 3, 2019

      Philippe Petit, Artist of Life
      13 min read

    • Article

      John Ashbery

      Mar 15, 2019

      He could understand the things at home.—Wallace Stevens, “Things of August” Scribbled on the expansive mist, the desireof many dwindles to usand our “activities,” wholesomeor otherwise. Soon it becomes apparentthat neither they nor I have any prise o

      4 min read

    • Article

      How I Got The Horn

      May 3, 2023

      How I Got The Horn
      3 min read

    Related categories

    Reviews for The Hunchback of Notre Dame

    4/5

    88 ratings71 reviews

    What did you think?

    Tap to rate

    Review must be at least 10 words

    • 2/5
      This would be my advice to Victor Hugo. If I had a time machine I would travel to a time just before he published this book, and give him an intervention.

      Dear Mr. Hugo,

      Firstly, may I say that I am a big fan of your future work, Le Miserables. And because of that, I cannot accept The Hunchback of Notre Dame as you have written it. If it were written by a different author, I would dismiss this as a three star novel, not terrible, but not a book I would read again if I had the chance. But in the future you will write a masterpiece, and so I rate this a two star novel, for failed potential.

      The plot is magnificent. But you have written this story all wrong. You destroyed the mysteries- Esmerelda's enemy, and her mother, by revealing the information too soon, and not using the early revelation to create tension and anticipation in the reader to be sustained throughout the story. Leave things unexplained- it gives you the chance to surprise us later on. Readers love to be surprised.

      You made the story less fun to read, by woefully neglecting Esmerelda and Quasimodo (the only sympathetic characters) perspectives. By all means, give us glimpses of the perspective of the villainous archdeacon (no, DON'T! Frankly his perspective disturbed me greatly), use Gringoire's perspective to introduce the book, and show how the mysterious Esmerelda looks to a stranger, give Jehan a few lines to add some wit. But all of that should come to less than a quarter of the book. YOU CREATED TWO AMAZING, SYMPATHETIC, UNIQUE CHARACTERS. GIVE THEM THE VOICE THEY DESERVE!

      I admire your story, but the story telling in this novel is incredibly disappointing. I sincerely wish you could have a do-over, rewrite this story with the wisdom and genius you will accumulate by the time you write Le Miserables.

      Thankyou for listening,

      Goodbye from,
      An admirer and well-wisher, a friend.

      1 person found this helpful

    • 4/5
      Historian, Philosopher and Poet

      If I can quote one passage from Hugo's books that best reflects the author, the focus of his passions, the style and architecture of his novels, it would be the following:

      "There he was, serious, motionless, absorbed - all eye, all ear, all thought. All Paris was at his feet, with the thousand spires of its buildings, and its circular horizon of gentle hills, with its river winding beneath its bridges and its people pouring through its streets, its cloud of smoke, and its mountain chain of roofs crowding close to Notre-Dame with their double slopes of mail. In this whole city the Archdeacon's eye sought just one point of the pavement, the Place du Parvis, and among the whole multitude just one figure, the Bohemian."

      Hugo referred to himself as a historian, philosopher and poet. He studied history, contemplated human destiny, and expressed his ideals through his writings, i.e., through the struggles and voices of his heroes, for whom he prepared the whole world and history as the grand stage.

      Ecce Notre-Dame, Ecce Homo

      This book can be divided into four Parts, like four movements of a symphony, with mini climaxes in the second and third movement.

      Part I: Festival of Fools (Book I-II)

      Hugo introduces all the main characters in the dramatic setting of a festival in the streets of Paris in 1482. It's in the late Middle Ages, a year before the birth of Martin Luther. One of the characters is a poet, who is the thread that runs through the entire novel and at whose expense Hugo showcases his self-deprecating humor.

      Part II: Ecce Notre-Dame (Book III-V)

      The view zooms out, so to speak, and Hugo describes a bird's-eye view of Paris and its history as immortalized in its architecture, the centerpiece of which is Notre-Dame de Paris. Here is the most beautiful chapter of the book, a symphonic description of the life and architecture of Paris.

      To paraphrase Hugo, Notre-Dame is the expression of the world. Its architecture, a transition from Roman style with its low circular arches and heavy pillars to Gothic style with its pointed arches, is a reflection of the progress of society since ancient times, from unity and hierarchy to democracy and freedom.

      Hugo proclaims, "Architecture is dead". Architecture, as a means of expression for mankind, will be replaced by printing, which is cheaper and more convenient, and therefore provides more freedom of expression. If Hugo were alive today, he would perhaps predict that digital media would replace their analog counterpart, e.g. electronic books would replace printed books, and something like Wikipedia would be the new Tower of Babel.

      Part III: Ecce Homo (Book VI-VIII)

      After setting the historical stage, Hugo zooms in on the main character of the novel, i.e., the human face of Notre-Dame, the Archdeacon and the bell-ringer. To me, they are one person. The physical deformity of the latter illustrates the spiritual deformity of the former, and the residual tender loving-kindness in the former is magnified in the latter. (If I might add, a similar device is used in Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde and The Picture of Dorian Gray.)

      The conflict is unrequited love. The Archdeacon's passionate but deadly lust for the Bohemian girl, the bell-ringer's tender but primitive devotion to her, and the Bohemian girl's love for her idol. In contrast, there are also exhilarating moments when love triumphs over lust, over baseness and over the condemning laws. When the ugly and pitiable becomes august and beautiful.

      However, there is a deeper meaning underneath the conflict of unrequited love, and that's the reason, I think, why the book was once banned by the Catholic Church.

      The Archdeacon represents the Church, more specifically, the religious hierarchy and laws of the Church, and the Bohemian girl, the unbeliever. The Church pursues the unbeliever, but because the religious laws bring nothing but shackles and death, the latter shrinks from him and pursues her own idol, Phoebus "the Sun god". This is made poignantly manifest when the Archdeacon claimed that only he could save the Bohemian from death and demanded her to choose between him and gallows, and she chose the latter.

      Part IV: The Siege of Notre-Dame (Book IX-XI)

      Finally, the view returns to the bigger stage, when the tension between hierarchy and freedom mingled with lawlessness becomes unbearable, there broke out the siege of the Notre-Dame, a figure of the siege of the Bastille. Ironically, the siege was instigated by the Archdeacon himself and the poet, signifying that revolts against the Church have their roots in its own corruption through lust. Alas, there was no freedom or deliverance except through death.
    • 4/5
      I became very tired of the architecture and culture of 14th century Paris before I finished this book. It was good reading when Hugo got down to the business of the story. I was so disappointed in the heroine, Esmeralda, that I didn't mind the ending so much. All in all, a pretty depressing cast of characters. Apparently, Hugo didn't think much of mankind. He did however, make the entire 15th century come alive. Something I think was unusual in the early 1800's when this was written. It made me glad to be alive now and not then.
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • 4/5
      “Notre-Dame de Paris”, the actual title of this book, is from Hugo’s early phase; it was published in 1831 when he was only 29. Quasimodo the hunchback, La Esmeralda the gypsy dancer, and Claude Frollo the archdeacon are all unforgettable. Bear with it in the beginning, as Hugo takes his time setting the stage of Paris in 1482. Less philosophical and learned than his later works, but enjoyable nonetheless.Just one quote, on love:“That little brother, without father or mother, that infant which dropped all at once from the sky into his arms, made a new man of him. He perceived that there was something in the world besides the speculations of the Sorbonne and the verses of Homer; that human beings have need of affections; that life without love is but a dry wheel, creaking and grating as it revolves.”
    • 3/5
      A little dry in parts, I would probably have enjoyed an abridged version more.
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • 2/5
      This novel was a disappointing read. Disappointing because Les Miserable was so good. The tragic story is in itself a good one - and of course with the tragic hero climbing around at the top of Notre Dame as it's main imaginative creation. The other characters are deeply flawed characters: One enormously proud priest - a pompous poet - an angry hysterical poor woman, a violent captain and of course the irritatingly vain Esmeralda. The writing is full of over-the-top emotions, theatrical outbursts en masse and the characters remain very stereotype. It's very difficult to take serious in any way. To make matters worse, Hugo decides to insert long chapters on the history of Paris and a detail description of Notre Dame and other historical stuff. Come on, Hugo. Do we have to inspect every single corner of that church?The Huncback have been retold many times, and it might work very well as an opera or in an very abridged retold version for children. As it is read here - the original story - it's a no go.
    • 5/5
      One of my all-time favorites. Sadly underrated and overlooked. I think it's Hugo's best, most full work.
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • 4/5
      A difficult book to love -- almost as difficult as it is to hate. Hugo _knows_ his setting, all the more impressive when one considers how 'disreputable' the 15thC was considered to be during the 19th -- how little scholarship was being done on it. His characters are impossible to forget, and inspire very strong emotion for good or, in a few cases, ill (particularly Captain Phoebus, the ancestor of all jocks everywhere...); his writing style is splendid in every translation _I've_ ever read...And his plot is up to 19thC novel standards, that is to say, idiotic -- one could say that the book is a masterpiece if you ignore the things that happen in it, particularly at the end. Exactly what are the odds against the sequence of utterly implausible and contrived events that put you-know-who, who just so happens to be you-know-what-relation to Esmerelda, at you-know-where just in time for you-know-when and in order to foul up you-know-what? Or, for that matter, you-know-which-tortured-cleric just _happening_ to fall in with you-know-which-jock and you-know-which-brother just in time to hear you-know-who planning to you-know-which-reproductive-act with you-shouldn't-have-to-be-told-which-female-lead?The net result is that an otherwise great book is saddled with a plot worthy of a soap opera (or _Return of the Jedi_, as I mentioned in my review of _Tale of Two Cities_, which has the same problem for the same reason), and anyone who tries to describe said plot to anyone who hasn't read the book yet ends up looking and feeling like sixteen kinds of stupid. Blasted 19thC narratological conventions...(But hey, at least there aren't any killer albinos.)
    • 3/5
      A bit tedious. The book seems to have had some sort of alternative agenda, but I'm a little unsure about what this was supposed to be. It hasn't aged well in my opinion, and I'm sure it would have been better received by Hugo's peers than by me.It took me a long time to read through the book and I found my thoughts wandering off quite a lot. The author has spent more time describing the architecture of 15th century Paris than his characters. This seemed to have been a dig at the architects of the 19th century, but was a little contrived and not particularly relevant for the rest of the story.
    • 3/5
      Zeer onwaarschijnlijk verhaal, maar wel zeer sterke sfeerschepping en tot op grote hoogte meeslepend. Figuren:-Frollo: soort van Faust (zelfs uitdrukkelijke verwijzing)-Quasimodo: het menselijke monster-Esmeralda: intrigerend, sterke vrouw, maar toch niet goed uitgewerkt-Gringoire: praatvaar en opportunistVooral het einde is zeer ongeloofwaardig.Duidelijk snelschrijverij, maar niettemin krachttoer
    • 4/5
      When one is doing evil 'tis madness to stop half-way.
    • 5/5
      If I could give this book ten stars I would.
    • 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.
    • 5/5
      This was a re-read, prompted by a recent viewing of the very good 1982 film version starring Anthony Hopkins and Derek Jacobi. This is of course a Gothic classic, with some amazingly descriptive passages about the Cathedral and the streets of Paris, and a stunning, dramatic and tragic last few chapters (Book 11). Hugo being Hugo, there are also some slower and frustratingly distracting sections, particularly towards the beginning of the novel in the first three chapters of Book 1 and in Book 3. According to a note at the end of this edition (part of Delphi Classics Complete Works of Hugo on Kindle), some of these chapters were originally "lost" and restored in an edition published much later in Hugo's life. The novel would be better paced without them, frankly, or they could have been included in an appendix (as some of the equivalent chapters are in the Penguin paperback edition of Les Miserables, for example). Deservedly a classic for its timeless story of how one shouldn't judge character by appearances. 4.5/5
    • 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.
    • 4/5
      Some parts were tough to get through, especially the chapter called "Bird's Eye View of Paris". Good, compelling story. How it was made into a Disney movie is beyond me though. It's about "forbidden love" of a priest for a 15 year old girl who he kills for. The emotions of the characters could have been pursued farther, but a good story.
    • 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.
    • 4/5
      Several years ago I both read this book and saw an adaptation of it for the stage as a musical! They were both great productions. The original began appearing in the bookshops of Paris on March 16, 1831 as a new novel from the pen of Victor Hugo, Notre-Dame de Paris. This novel, which is now popularly known as "The Hunchback of Notre Dame", tells the emotionally exhausting tale of the penniless poet, Gringoire the demonic, lecherous priest, Frollo, the handsome, empty-headed, guardsman, Captain Phoebus, the deaf bell-ringer, Quasimodo, with his hump and his wart-obscured eye, and the beautiful gypsy girl they all fall in love with: Esmeralda, whose only friend in the world is her performing goat, Djali (the name Emma Bovary gives to her lap-dog twenty-six years later). The epicenter of the novel is the Gothic cathedral. In the minds of progressive Parisians, it was a shabby relic of the barbarian past. Hugo himself explored the cathedral climbing the bell-towers and it is there that he discovered his inspiration for the story. The story is sited in 1482 at the historical crossroads when the modern world was struggling to be born and when the printed word began to dominate and annihilate that older form of writing--architecture. Hugo's own "basketful of rubble" is reminiscent of the Renaissance novelist whose tale, though gargantuan, was also thought by some to be no better than rubble (The opposite is true and the wise reader should explore the beauty of Rabelais if he has not already done so). Hugo's novel is one of the great historical romances of all time with characters in the Hunchback Quasimodo, Esmeralda and Frollo who you will never forget. The City of Paris and the Cathedral of Notre Dame also come alive in Hugo's story and you see the power of love and loyalty that can persevere in the face of evil. The theme of justice also resounds in this novel almost as much as in Les Miserables. It is clear that this was an important concept for Hugo. For lovers of romantic historical literature this is a great read.
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • 4/5
      A hunchback, a gypsy, a mad priest. A church and a scaffold. Paris is not exactly the city of lights. Peopled by colourful characters, depraved creatures, hopeless beings, the architecture of the city, however, is a sight to behold. And the church of Notre Dame is the most magnificent of all.I enjoyed very much Hugo's writing, including the digressions on the evolution of architecture as a form of “writing” and immortality, as well as the portrayal of the center of the city, street by street. I didn't enjoy the story very much, though – it was carrying martyrdom too far. The priest was vile, the soldier petty, and Esmeralda not just cloying but downright foolish, too. Quasimodo, however, made up for all that – pity he didn't live a happier life. Though it doesn't hold a candle to Les Mis, I'm still glad to have read this, as I greatly admire Hugo's ability to paint images with words.
    • 2/5
      I liked it, but it didn't leave much of an impression on me. Might reread.
    • 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. ;)
    • 2/5
      A good classic but somehow drifted off away from the real plot. I know that the descriptive language was suppose to make you imagine that you're in that place but somehow I find that less enjoyable.