The Hunchback of Notre Dame

By: Victor Hugo

Narrated by: Bill Homewood

Length: 22 hrs and 28 mins

Publisher's summary

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

Download the accompanying reference guide.

Public Domain (P)2014 Naxos AudioBooks

More than I bargained for...

Hugo's level of detail and backstory development are more than I am used to. The story is extremely detailed and exquisitely presented. It was well worth the time, and I am glad it did the audiobook version because the printed book would have been more difficult to get through.

Great classic.

Not having read this book in school, I did not know what to expect. The story started out a bit slow, with a lot of establishment, but became intensely interesting. The narration was fantastic and carried the story along. The narrator's accents and inflections were perfect and a pleasure to listen to. This was the second book I have listened to narrated by Bill Homewood (the other was The Count of Monte Cristo) and he is wonderful at the French accent and giving each of the characters their own voice. Now that I have listened to The Hunchback of Notre Dame I am interested in the theater production. Thank you for for an excellent audiobook.

Much Love, with Caveats

I'll be honest. I thoroughly enjoyed this story. Historical fiction is rarely anywhere near my wheelhouse, but when it’s a revered classic—or, like the Aubrey/Maturin series, so historically accurate that it almost is history—I make an exception. And I’m glad I did. One of our iconic stories is now safely ensconced in my mental arsenal. And I no longer have to look puzzled when friends refer to me as “Quasimodo”. I now know what they mean.

But as much as I enjoyed the story—with two exceptions we’ll get to later—there was something that bugged me throughout the telling. I couldn’t put my finger on it so I started perusing critical essays online. And I found this:

“Hugo was determined to trace current social and political problems back to their medieval roots, and to achieve the maximum effect he must carefully embed his tale within a painstaking reconstruction of medieval Paris, its buildings and its public.”

(From: Medievalism and Modernity in Victor Hugo’s Hunchback of Notre Dame, Alex J. Novikoff, Rhodes College)

That’s the nub. Every author should have a point of view; but Hugo has an agenda. Whether he was right to trace every social ill to the Middle Ages is neither here nor there. I could sense I was being manipulated, and that sense only grew stronger when I read in the same essay, “…Hugo freely admits that he strives for imaginative reconstruction rather than historical accuracy”. That’s fine if, as in other Gothic literature, you’re employing medieval mystery and mysticism to create atmosphere and suspense. The problem comes in when you use imagination to make historical—and, by extension, political—points.

Yes, I know the novel was conceived and written in the turmoil of the 1830 Revolution; yes, I know Hugo was disappointed with the constitutional monarchy that resulted, feeling reform had not gone far enough. I understand why the soapbox is there; all I’m saying is that it becomes a stumbling block in a work of fiction. As a result, I never really grew to like or trust Hugo as a guide, as I like and trust Dickens, Thackeray or Fielding.

This didactic streak runs strongest in the two exceptions mentioned earlier, comprising the entire Third Book of the novel. The first is a long discourse on Gothic architecture, a critique of the new construction that is gradually replacing it in 1830’s Paris, and an impassioned plea to restore and preserve the fine examples that are left. We owe much to Hugo for his advocacy of course, but I’m not so sure the novel is better off for it. To this listener, at any rate, it seems to be a series of personal opinions and unsupported assertions wrapped around an ingenious (I said “ingenious”, not “correct”) thesis that the printed word replaced architecture as the chief medium through which civilizations express themselves. If he’s right, then this represents a shift from enshrining corporate beliefs in stone to expressing personal viewpoints (like the essay/chapter under discussion) ad nauseum. Hugo celebrates this shift, possibly because he didn’t have the benefit of a 21st Century perspective. With our Twitter, Snapchat, blog and even this forum you’re reading right now, we can see both the up- and downsides of the thing.

The second part of the Third Book is a long (just over an hour) description of late 15th Century Paris as seen through the eyes of a bird. This is what Novikoff meant when he wrote of Hugo’s need to “carefully embed his tale within a painstaking reconstruction of medieval Paris”. It is painstaking indeed. His intimate knowledge and love of the city—from its geography to its history—shines in every sentence. In that sense it is touching. On the other hand, for one without Hugo’s knowledge of every byway and landmark, it can get tedious. I endured it much as I let Verne’s endless catalogues of fish wash over me in 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea.

But then Book Four opens, the story is back on track and we’re off. And it is a smashing story, for me somewhat marred by that lurking didactic note—yes, I get it, the Middle Ages weren’t as enlightened as we are—that is near the surface in just about every scene. Still, there is good comedy here. It stood out for me especially as I wasn’t prepared for it. The pathos, which I was fully prepared for, can get a little cloying. I don’t know whether it’s the fault of Bill Homewood’s reading or not. Probably not, because I don’t know what else he could have done with the words that are on the page. Consider, for example, the scene of the two bouquets.

Esmeralda wakes to find Quasimodo has left her two bouquets, one of fresh flowers in a fragile, cracked vase incapable of holding water, and a withered bouquet in a sturdy, watertight earthen vessel. The implicit comparison is between the fresh, young and handsome Captain of Archers on whom Esmeralda dotes—and who cares nothing for her—and the ugly but sincere Quasimodo. For all her hopeless love for the soldier, Esmeralda chooses to wear the withered flowers that day. It’s an odd scene, ham-handed in its symbolism and inconsistent with the characters as they have been drawn up to this point in the story. I had no idea Quasimodo was so clever; I can’t quite see the young, romantic gypsy girl, so smitten with her soldier, accept the bouquet that symbolizes his misshapen rival.

There’s a lot more pathos than that, but you get the idea. After all this damning-with-faint-praise, you may find it hard to believe that I enjoyed the book, but I did. It just bugged me that the work didn’t quite sit right with me and I had to figure out why. I think I have. I’m better now. Thanks for listening.

Tragic story, touching

The story is tragic, interesting, many touching moments, some particularly evocative passages. But I can't rave. I listened to an audio version of Les Miserables and that book is so superb that I had hoped I would find gThe Hunchback somewhere "up there", though I knew and did not expect another book so awesome as that. But, alas, this book, though good, is not in the same league. The reader, however, was superb.

incredible narration interesting story

the author tells a great story of love and crime and passionate motivations. the story however, would have been a mere one third of its current length if he had not frequently veered away from the plot and engaged in such lengthy exposition of descriptions and monologues of the architecture of old paris. there were times when the reader forgets completely the story he or she is engaged in and begins to think they are enduring a survey of historical edifice work.

the narration, on the other hand is absolutely brilliant. hands down the best and most engaging voice actor i have yet had the pleasure of hearing. it was for the quality of the narration, and for no other reason, that i endured the hours of irrelevant details that the author forced into the tale.

i highly recommend the narrator and for the sake of the book being a classic and for the sake of redeeming the story from disney's butchery, i do also recommend the book.

Never realized…..

This is a long hard read. There is a lot of French and a lot of history about architecture and Paris. I’d you stick it out it is still a great story. Had no idea the ending was what it was. Well worth the time

Way too many characters that you don't get to know

Struggled to finish. You aren't missing anything with this one. No need to bother

A fantastic story

A story that is outstanding and really well written. I notice so much because of this story and I highly recommend it.

Victor Hugo is a relentless Master.

Amazing story. Masterfully read. Encapsulates all one needs to know about virtue and passion.

Five stars are much too few!

I pointedly chose to listen to HoND subsequent to the April 2019 fire.
The book is magnificent! Hugo develops each of the characters meticulously, So, too, the setting: Paris in her architectural entirety - left and right banks, and the two small islands, Ile de la Cite and Ile de Saint Louis, in between - and of course the glorious cathedral. The story is heart-wrenching; (medi)evil pervades throughout and from all quarters, bearing down on two small islands of goodness - Quasimodo and La Esmeralda. Hugo didn't write this book for Disney's audience.
I had previously listened to another of Bill Homewood's narrations - Around the World in Eighty Days - and while I certainly enjoyed his performance then, this time around he so blew me away that I looked him up, and learned of his wealth of talents and accomplishments, and of the four or more rich lives he lives within the space of one being. You will do very well by choosing to listen to any audiobook that Homewood has considered worth his precious time to narrate.

amazing and thorough

like Don Quiote it is a very thorough book, by the end you have lived this story and have a deep understanding of how and why it all happens, I enjoyed this book more and more as it progressed I was entranced more.

beautiful classic everybody should listen to

If you could sum up The Hunchback of Notre Dame in three words, what would they be?

Enchanting, moving, thought-provoking

What was one of the most memorable moments of The Hunchback of Notre Dame?

Esmeralda's death and Quasimodo's reaction to it.

Have you listened to any of Bill Homewood’s other performances? How does this one compare?

I had not this pleasure, but I'm looking forward to listening to other books read by Mr Homewood.

Did you have an emotional reaction to this book? Did it make you laugh or cry?

This book is rather dark. The brief moments of happiness any of the characters has are quickly ruined. There is cruelty and betrayal one feels passionately about and some deeply sad moments, where your heart is breaking. I listened to the end of the book while driving home and stayed in the car until it finished playing and for about half an hour after. I need time to process.

Any additional comments?

It's a timeless masterpiece anybody aspiring to be called well-read should familiarize themselves with. At times one can get lost in the maze of different characters, but in time it becomes clear who is who, and what motivations stand behind each of the characters. It's a romance in its Gothic variation, without a happy ending, filled with pain, rejection and youthful dreams being crushed. Yet, deeply moving as one will certainly find a character he or she will root for through their ups and downs towards a bitter resolution.

A masterpiece

Beautifully written, a little slow about a third in but when it takes off there is no way to stop. The characters, the language, the story...all just amazing.

Morbid Curiocity

What would have made The Hunchback of Notre Dame better?

Discard two thirds of it! Seriously; Victor Hugo could have written the plot in a fraction of the space and included a supplementary book to explain his love of architecture without boring the audience to death. He would never get published today.

Would you ever listen to anything by Victor Hugo again?

No. I only wanted to understand the story of Quasimodo from its original roots given that I like the Disney movie so much. Given what I got; I couldn't survive another of his books!

Would you listen to another book narrated by Bill Homewood?

Depends on what he's narrated. I don't doubt he's a good narrator, but this book bored me to death.

You didn’t love this book--but did it have any redeeming qualities?

It's clear that Victory Hugo is passionate about architecture and wants us to understand as much as can be understood about his story, setting and characters. Quasimodo is interesting and well developed once we get to know him, and Frollo is a more tragic figure than he is in the Disney film. Mr Hugo also belongs to a tragically lost period of writers that prefers their poetic prose, giving his text a unique flavour. The issue is there's WAY too much of it!

Any additional comments?

Listen only if you have a love of architecture, multi-lingual expressions of poetic prose, are interested in the origin story of the movie adaptations, and a LOT of patience.

Disappointing

I gave up listening to this because the highly eccentric and mannered reading was getting between me and the story.

A masterpiece

A fantastic book brilliantly narrated and with one of my favourite endings in literature.

Not the story I thought it was

Not the story I thought it was. For every 20mins of actual story there are 40mins of discription of this street or that building.

Victor Hugo don’t arf go on at times but . . .

The narrator was perfect and a pleasure to listen to and to my untutored ear sounded like he really knew his French (and Greek, Latin what might have been Hebrew and perhaps some Alchameic runic). He sounded like he loved reading this and neither his stamina nor his enthusiasm waned even whilst reading Louis II’s turgid shopping list. Alas, unlike the narrator, I nodded off during some of the lengthy digressions into Medieval French architecture. My wife assured me they were very evocative. When Victor H returns from Gothic architecture to Gothic horror the results are captivating, moving and, well, horrific! The denouement is powerful, haunting stuff! Next up I am keen to hear this excellent narrator present The Three Musketeers.

A classic

Loved this! Bill Homewood really brings the story to life. It's a tale that leaves you sad at the end, but, there's so much humour dotted throughout.

Extremely long-winded

The performance is fantastic, but the writing demands ultimate patience and tenacity to get through it.