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
    Audiobook18 hours

    The Hunchback of Notre Dame

    Written by Victor Hugo

    Narrated by David Case

    4/5

    ()

    Switch to ebook

    About this audiobook

    Set in medieval Paris, Victor Hugo's powerful historical romance The Hunchback of Notre Dame has resonated with succeeding generations ever since its initial publication in 1837. It tells the story of the beautiful gypsy Esmeralda, condemned as a witch by the tormented archdeacon Claude Frollo, who lusts after her. Quasimodo, the deformed bell ringer of Notre Dame Cathedral, having fallen in love with the kindhearted Esmeralda, tries to save her by hiding her in the cathedral's tower. When a crowd of Parisian peasants, misunderstanding Quasimodo's motives, attacks the church in an attempt to liberate her, the story ends in tragedy.

    An epic tale of beauty and sadness, The Hunchback of Notre Dame portrays the sufferings of humanity with compassion and power.
    LanguageEnglish
    PublisherTantor Media, Inc
    Release dateJan 19, 2009
    ISBN9781400179039
    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

    General Fiction For You

    View More
    View More

    Related podcast episodes

    Related articles

    • Article

      Seven Books I’ll Never Read

      Aug 7, 2018

      Seven Books I’ll Never Read
      6 min read

    • Article

      Play At Crystal Palace

      May 14, 2020

      Play At Crystal Palace
      8 min read

    • Article

      The Greatest Show On Earth

      Jun 11, 2020

      The Greatest Show On Earth
      4 min read

    • Article

      Admiration And Intimacy

      Sep 1, 2021

      Admiration And Intimacy
      7 min read

    • Article

      A Tale Of Three Peters

      Aug 30, 2023

      A Tale Of Three Peters
      4 min read

    • Article

      Open FOR Pleasure

      Jun 29, 2021

      Open FOR Pleasure
      5 min read

    • Article

      Finders, Keepers

      May 5, 2022

      Finders, Keepers
      3 min read

    • Article

      Windows On To History

      Sep 30, 2021

      Windows On To History
      6 min read

    • Article

      Time Tamed

      Jan 17, 2020

      Time Tamed
      8 min read

    • Article

      History

      Jul 28, 2021

      In the summer of 1851, 170 years ago, there was only one destination for the holidaymaker: London, and in particular Hyde Park, where the Great Exhibition was in full swing. Joseph Paxton’s astonishing Crystal Palace – doodled on a blotter when the o

      3 min read

    • Article

      A King Of Fire And Light

      Dec 28, 2021

      A King Of Fire And Light
      10 min read

    • Article

      Viveur Pitch

      Dec 1, 2023

      Viveur Pitch
      3 min read

    • Article

      Thriving Trier

      Sep 1, 2020

      Thriving Trier
      3 min read

    • Article

      The Stag On The Rooftop

      Jan 9, 2020

      The Stag On The Rooftop
      3 min read

    • Article

      Where East Meets West

      Mar 13, 2020

      Where East Meets West
      5 min read

    • Article

      Belfast’s Titanic charms

      Nov 17, 2021

      Belfast’s Titanic charms
      4 min read

    • Article

      Journeys Without Borders

      Feb 7, 2020

      Journeys Without Borders
      11 min read

    • Article

      International Velvet

      Feb 9, 2022

      International Velvet
      4 min read

    • Article

      The Field of Cloth of Gold

      Jun 10, 2020

      TO the roar of gunfire in the late afternoon of June 7, 1520, the Feast of Corpus Christi, Henry VIII rode through the gates of Guînes in the Pas de Calais with a great retinue of 3,500 men on foot and horseback. He was travelling to meet Francis I,

      2 min read

    • Article

      Strange Streets

      Nov 6, 2020

      Strange Streets
      5 min read

    • Article

      Garden of Plenty

      Jan 8, 2021

      Garden of Plenty
      5 min read

    Related categories

    Reviews for The Hunchback of Notre Dame

    4/5

    90 ratings71 reviews

    What did you think?

    Tap to rate

    Review must be at least 10 words

    • 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.
    • 5/5
      Extremely underrated. Hugo's most famous work is without a doubt Les Mis but I can never figure out why. Hunchback is beautiful and tragic and lovely and heartbreaking. Richly detailed but not to the point of tedium. Dramatic characters but still beleivable. It's a kaleidoscope of emotion and fulfills everything you could want in a book. My all time favourite.
    • 3/5
      Yikes. I didn't know what I was signing up for when I invited people to join me in a buddy read of what is more commonly known as The Hunchback of Notre Dame. Part of me wishes to apologize even (we were all so excited and then it turned out the way it did). It started out good, funny even, and then it turned ugly really quickly. I don't know that there was one honorable male character in the whole book, but at least the pet goat didn't die, and we'll always have that. Was it a valuable reading experience? Yes. Will I ever pick it up again? Nope.
    • 4/5
      In some ways, this reads like an odd book. If you read it for the story involving Esmeralda, the beautiful young gypsy girl, Quasimodo the hunchback bell-ringer and Frollo the archdeacon, you may be put off or annoyed by the digressions into the layout of Paris, or the architecture of Notre Dame, or a treatise on architecture in general and why newer isn't always better. For me, I found it created some odd pacing and I wondered if perhaps at one time it was more common to set a scene in such minute detail. But in reading about the book after the fact, I see that in many ways, the story about Esmeralda and company are actually the digressions from the main text, which was Hugo's views about Gothic architecture. Well, it's probably a good thing he put a story around all of that, or it probably would have been a hard sell. (His views, by the way, boil down to "Kids these days! Get off my lawn!")So all right, back to the story that people actually want to read - the gypsy, the bell-ringer, the handsome captain, the archdeacon, and of course, the goat. While reading, I was a little surprised by how few good guys there were - it was very interesting to see that beauty didn't equate to good in Hugo's world. In fact, the moral of the story might be instead of "all that glitters is not gold," "all that glitters is not only not gold, it's got a sharp edge that was probably dipped in poison." As far as the writing goes, for a novel written in the early 1800s, the story skipped along quite quickly, and although some twists were telegraphed far ahead of time, others weren't at all. Well worth the read.Recommended for: people who only know the Disney version of the story, those intimately familiar with Paris, people who prefer animals to humans.Quote: "And then, from morning till night, I have the happiness of passing all my days with a man of genius, who is myself, which is very agreeable."
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • 3/5
      A little dry in parts, I would probably have enjoyed an abridged version more.
    • 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.”
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • 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
      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.
    • 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
    • 3/5
      Much more poignant, dramatic and even comical then I had been expecting.
    • 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.
    • 2/5
      I think I pointlessly ruined my enjoyment of this book by reading this abridged version. Anyway what I've read is barely a good book. I can't help suspecting it didn't help reading it in French, of which so many words I ignore. I'll count it as part of my growth; and I can always give a shot at the complete version a couple of years from now.

      That said, the art of Hugo shines nevertheless. The characters, the descriptions of the place, the plot, heck, the whole idea of this story is genius. But the events seem sometimes juxtaposed, piled one on top of the other by force, rather than by grace. I would suggest anyone to go for the complete version; I doubt that Hugo would be capable of this.
    • 5/5
      If I could give this book ten stars I would.
    • 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.
    • 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
      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.
    • 5/5
      Welp, *that* was different from the Disney movie. And I loved it. I found the details about the cathedral and the city of Paris both lovely and a bit of a slog, if that's possible, but the story itself was fantastic, with an ending that I both loved and hated and loved to hate. The dark humor sprinkled throughout was wonderful and almost all the characters were excellently well-drawn. Esmeralda herself, funnily enough, is the only exception here, whose one-sidedness was doubly annoying - annoying for being one-sided, and also that one side of her character was itself frustratingly simple and meek. Overall, though, I'm thoroughly happy that I read this one, finally.
    • 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.
    • 2/5
      I liked it, but it didn't leave much of an impression on me. Might reread.
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • 5/5
      Contrary to popular opinion the novel Le Notre Dame de Paris by Victor Hugo is not primarily about the deformed bell-ringer Quasimodo. Quasimodo's role is actually surprisingly small in the story, which makes you wonder why the English translater's chose "The Hunchback of Notre Dame" as the translation for the title. Actually, as the original French title would indicate, it is the cathedral itself that is the focus of the book. This is why in the unabridged editions of this book you will find numerous chapters that seemingly have nothing to do with the plot of the story. This is the books weakest point, and it may turn many people away from the book. Once you get into the plot, however, it is iimpossible to put the book down. The characters are intriguing: composer Pierre Gringoire, archdeacon Dom Claude Frollo, once a paragon of virtue now tormented by his corrupt love for a gipsy girl, L'Esmerelda, the naive gipsy dancer, Phoebus, the selfish, egotistical captain of the guards, and of course Qausimodo, a deaf, deformed bellringer. The relationships between these characters are complex and dark but they make an unforgettable story. The story is never, from front to back, a happy one, so if you are looking for a book that makes you "feel good" this is not the one for you. If, on the other hand, you are looking for a good book to read, that is unafraid to deal with the darker side of reality, I highly recommend "The Hunchback of Notre Dame."