Sign in with Facebook
Piyangie's Reviews > The Hunchback of Notre-Dame
The Hunchback of Notre-Dame
by
by
I'm now quite resigned to being disappointed in books that are written by my favourite classical authors. It looks like I'm in the process of discovering at least one book by each of them to my dislike. The Hunchback of Notre-Dame is Victor Hugo's contribution to that lot. But it is still disheartening when a book you liked as a teen becomes a total nightmare as an adult. Perhaps it is not fair for me to draw a comparison like that, for I understand now that what I've read and liked as a teen was an abridged version of the book. And of course, I loved the Disney movie too. But the complete unabridged book is unlike either of them.
I have many grievances against this book; the first is the length. This story could have been told in half of the words than that he had used. There were too detailed descriptions of the Notre-Dame architecture and the medieval society and politics in general. It was important for Hugo to describe medieval society and politics and the general architecture of Notre Dame, but it needn't be painfully detailed. A succinct description would have been ample to serve the purpose. The irrelevant and excessive details made the story secondary, and the story proper didn't begin until half the book is gone.
The second is the tone of Hugo's writing. It didn't suit the tragic side of the story. There should be some gravity to carry the idea of tragedy in a tragic story, but instead, the writing was light and impassive for the most part. There was also some satire which I thought most unsuited. The whole tone of the book made me devoid of emotion. I couldn't pity the innocent persecuted Esmeralda nor Quasimodo, a victim of a different sort. If I felt anything, it was only the utter loathing for the antagonist, Dom Frollo, and anger toward Phoebus whom I also considered an antagonist.
The third was my dissatisfaction with the flow of the story which was time and again disrupted by Hugo's love for description and explanations. Because of this, the pace of the story was quite disturbed. Likewise was my reading experience. Instead of being taken on a smooth straight road, I was taken on a rough road with many a bend in which I jostled this way and that way till my head was swimming. It was tiring and to be quite honest I had to resort to a chapter or so of another book just to feel alright.
This doesn't mean that the book was flawed. I still liked the story. My venting here rises from my being unable to enjoy it as I wished. I felt Hugo has robbed my pleasure with his Dickensian style of verbosity and his impassive tone.
I have many grievances against this book; the first is the length. This story could have been told in half of the words than that he had used. There were too detailed descriptions of the Notre-Dame architecture and the medieval society and politics in general. It was important for Hugo to describe medieval society and politics and the general architecture of Notre Dame, but it needn't be painfully detailed. A succinct description would have been ample to serve the purpose. The irrelevant and excessive details made the story secondary, and the story proper didn't begin until half the book is gone.
The second is the tone of Hugo's writing. It didn't suit the tragic side of the story. There should be some gravity to carry the idea of tragedy in a tragic story, but instead, the writing was light and impassive for the most part. There was also some satire which I thought most unsuited. The whole tone of the book made me devoid of emotion. I couldn't pity the innocent persecuted Esmeralda nor Quasimodo, a victim of a different sort. If I felt anything, it was only the utter loathing for the antagonist, Dom Frollo, and anger toward Phoebus whom I also considered an antagonist.
The third was my dissatisfaction with the flow of the story which was time and again disrupted by Hugo's love for description and explanations. Because of this, the pace of the story was quite disturbed. Likewise was my reading experience. Instead of being taken on a smooth straight road, I was taken on a rough road with many a bend in which I jostled this way and that way till my head was swimming. It was tiring and to be quite honest I had to resort to a chapter or so of another book just to feel alright.
This doesn't mean that the book was flawed. I still liked the story. My venting here rises from my being unable to enjoy it as I wished. I felt Hugo has robbed my pleasure with his Dickensian style of verbosity and his impassive tone.
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read
The Hunchback of Notre-Dame.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
February 3, 2020
– Shelved
February 3, 2020
– Shelved as:
to-read
February 3, 2020
– Shelved as:
french-lit
February 3, 2020
– Shelved as:
my-library
May 28, 2020
–
Started Reading
June 15, 2020
–
Finished Reading
Comments Showing 1-44 of 44 (44 new)
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Luffy Sempai
(new)
Jun 16, 2020 07:36AM
Did you love Les Miserables? I hate that one!
reply
|
flag
Luffy wrote: "Did you love Les Miserables? I hate that one!"Yes, I loved that. :) :) :)
I too disliked this book! I started to read it the day Notre Dame burned and had to make myself finish before the 1 year anniversary. I had all the excitement in the world but it was just excruciating. To say he could go off on a tangent is mild. LOL I think The Hunchback title is for the translation, the French title is Notre Dame de Paris which is Our Lady of Paris. With that, I wonder if reading it in the language written would have been a better experience. Unfortunately, I'm absolutely not that fluent.
Brenda wrote: "I too disliked this book! I started to read it the day Notre Dame burned and had to make myself finish before the 1 year anniversary. I had all the excitement in the world but it was just excruciat..."Ah, that makes sense. I didn't check on the original title. :) I also think reading in French would have produced a different effect at least on the tone and writing. But still one has to battle through his verbosity.
Kimberly wrote: "Victor Hugo does seem to be a very wordy author. I got seventy page into Les Miserables before I gave up."He certainly is. But I didn't quite mind it in Les Misérables as I did in The Hunchback of Notre-Dame. I think it is because, in Les Misrables, most of the descriptive chapters were separate and could be avoided if one wants to. But here they were all quite mixed, so no avoiding.
You know he wrote these stories in serial form for the newspapers and was paid by the episode, so the more he writes the more income he would generate. Dickens was the same.
I love Hugo's work, as a person he was a bit mad though.
Jazzy wrote: "You know he wrote these stories in serial form for the newspapers and was paid by the episode, so the more he writes the more income he would generate. Dickens was the same."Oh, I didn't know this was serialized. It is ok when it appears in installments I suppose but in book form, it is quite tiresome. Les Miserables is one of my favorites. But after this disappointment, I'm not too keen to read him more.
Greta wrote: "Thank you for your wonderful review Piyangie! I haven't read it yet, but I read les miserables, which I loved! The length and his very detailed descriptions of the societal and political structures ..."Thank you, Greta. I too think reading the original edition can be more enjoyable. I can't read French much yet (I'm learning :)), so I have to be satisfied with a translation. But I've found that certain translations can change your perspective.
I agree with you about the importance of detail. It is how he mixed them with the story that I was at row with. Les Misérables is one of my favourites - I loved it. I had no issue with Hugo's inclination to detail there because it was so well blended with the story.
Apparently, at the time Hugo wrote this book, Notre-Dame was in pretty bad shape and in bad need of restoration. This book was meant to be a tribute to the cathedral and also to inspire serious commitment to restoration. That's why there are so many wordy passages about its architecture.
Elizabeth wrote: "Apparently, at the time Hugo wrote this book, Notre-Dame was in pretty bad shape and in bad need of restoration. This book was meant to be a tribute to the cathedral and also to inspire serious com..."Thanks for that tidbit, Elizabeth. There is a wonderful account on the history and architecture of Notre-Dame there that was very interesting and informative that I thought he could have published a nonfiction work with them separately.
Haha, indeed, it's frustrating the way it breaks up the story; however, I'm not sure I would have read all that architectural information if I hadn't been reading the novel. ;)
Elizabeth wrote: "Haha, indeed, it's frustrating the way it breaks up the story; however, I'm not sure I would have read all that architectural information if I hadn't been reading the novel. ;)"You have a point there :). Notre-Dame is my favourite cathedral for personal reasons, so I would have loved to read a book about it. But I know what you mean; it wouldn't have served Hugo's purpose. :)
It's a beautiful cathedral & I think it's the first one I visited. I feel lucky that I got to see it before the fire. :'(I don't know which one is my favorite, though! I'm also rather partial to Ely (in Cambridgeshire).
Piyangie, I tried this one too and it didn't pull me in. Have you tried Hugo's "Toilers of the Sea"? I really enjoyed that one.
Elizabeth wrote: "It's a beautiful cathedral & I think it's the first one I visited. I feel lucky that I got to see it before the fire. :'(I don't know which one is my favorite, though! I'm also rather partial to ..."
That's something. I've been there twice. It is so sad to think it may not be the same again.
Eileen wrote: "Piyangie, I tried this one too and it didn't pull me in. Have you tried Hugo's "Toilers of the Sea"? I really enjoyed that one."No, Eileen. The only other I've read is Les Misérables . I'll check on this one, thank you.
Piyangie, evidently somebody needs to write a new book to promote another restoration.
Elizabeth wrote: "Piyangie, evidently somebody needs to write a new book to promote another restoration."Very much needed I would think too.
Perhaps the translation was subpar?
Interesting review, Piyangie, and one that also compels some equally intriguing conversations and thoughts. Can I write to you a personal message to discuss some of my own thoughts about classics?
Haaze wrote: "Perhaps the translation was subpar?"Very possible, Haaze. The edition I read doesn't say who the translator is. I've had this problem in most french translations.
Zoeb wrote: "Interesting review, Piyangie, and one that also compels some equally intriguing conversations and thoughts. Can I write to you a personal message to discuss some of my own thoughts about classics?"Thank you, Zoeb. You can surely, yes.
Piyangie wrote: "Very possible, Haaze. The edition I read doesn't say who the translator is. I've had this problem in most french translations."Hmm, yes, me too. The Dumas novels I'm reading right now are not mentioning the translator either. It seems like they grabbed the mid/late 19th century translations, edited them and added commentary. It is Oxford UP! However, I'm quite happy with them. Compared to the Kindle versions (Delphi) there are slight awkward variations (Delphi). I just wonder if word choices and syntax can mess up the flow and the overall impression for the reader. I was reading a Hugo novel a couple of years ago and I felt like I was eating grape nuts. Ha ha!
Kimberly wrote: "Victor Hugo does seem to be a very wordy author. I got seventy page into Les Miserables before I gave up."Hmm, like "too many notes"? ;-)
Kimberly wrote: "Victor Hugo does seem to be a very wordy author. I got seventy page into Les Miserables before I gave up."In my edition of Les Miserables, the editors have taken two whole chapters and have put it in the appendix, because they had no direct bearing on the story. :)
Haaze wrote: "Piyangie wrote: "Very possible, Haaze. The edition I read doesn't say who the translator is. I've had this problem in most french translations."Hmm, yes, me too. The Dumas novels I'm reading righ..."
Ha ha. :) I had a time with some of the Dumas's works I read, especially The Man in the Iron Mask. At present, I'm resolved not to read him anymore, except if a group read pops up. :)
I think I had found the abridged version of the book sad and tragic enough to never want to give the full length novel a try.
Tahera wrote: "I think I had found the abridged version of the book sad and tragic enough to never want to give the full length novel a try."Wise of you, Tahera. I liked the abridged version, though tragic, and I thought it was such a fine novel until of course this experience.
These stories as you put it were paid by the word and were serials in the newspapers. It wouldn't have done to steal money from yourself by shortening the story.
Jazzy wrote: "These stories as you put it were paid by the word and were serials in the newspapers. It wouldn't have done to steal money from yourself by shortening the story."Haha. You've got a point there, Jazzy! 😊
I thought it was such a beautiful ode to the cathedral as one of humanity’s greatest achievements. It made me understand the interest and beauty of architecture. And the chapter entitled “ceci tuera cela” (“this will kill that”) about books and buildings was mind blowing (at least for 15 year old me). I agree with some points, but two stars feels so harsh T-T
I can imagine all the people getting the papers in anticipation and saying aw, the story is not continuing yet we're reading about something else...!
C wrote: "I thought it was such a beautiful ode to the cathedral as one of humanity’s greatest achievements. It made me understand the interest and beauty of architecture. And the chapter entitled “ceci tuer..."It's not a reflction on the quality of the book. It's only a reflection of how I perceived it and my inability to connect and enjoy it. But I did learn a lot about Notre-Dame and enjoyed its history. It's one of my most loved cathedrals in the world.
Jazzy wrote: "I can imagine all the people getting the papers in anticipation and saying aw, the story is not continuing yet we're reading about something else...!"I would have said so for sure. :)
I read this book a long time ago. Long before I ever had a Goodreads. I liked the book fair enough, but I don't think it would be a five star read, either. I will forever hold a grudge against Hugo for writing that chapter all about gothic architecture. I want to do a reread of Notre-Dame de Paris so I can see if I like it today as a somewhat older reader.
All the best, Tiffany! I hope you'll enjoy your reread.
Great review, Piyangie. You and I certainly see eye to eye on this one. I thought it was pretty dreadful as well.
Paul wrote: "Great review, Piyangie. You and I certainly see eye to eye on this one. I thought it was pretty dreadful as well."Thanks, Paul. Glad to meet a fellow comrade even though we are in the minority. :)
Piyangie wrote: "All the best, Tiffany! I hope you'll enjoy your reread."I am curious to see if my initial opinion of the book is the same as when I did pick up and read the book. I still have my copy on my shelves, so I might just pick it up one of these days.
I was led on by a similar curiosity, Tiffany. But I was bitterly disappointed. So sad.
I complety understand that many readers dont like too much detailes, but some books, just like this, they are fundamental. This book was written to be an ode to Notre Dame, because in the time that was published there had been a great fire which had destroyed much of the cathedral.
Actually, I enjoyed the details more than the story. But I felt the story and the history went side by side on a separate path. And one didn't have any significant impact on the other.
It is natural, at times, to be disappointed in certain books at adulthood which we had enjoyed back in our childhood. The adapted version of this novel was one of my favourites back in boyhood but I have often realised that some authors and books don't just age well with time. Thankfully, the classics that I have revisited - by Stevenson, Wells, Doyle and now with Dickens are really worth admiring.
