Talk:The Hunchback of Notre-Dame

Update to WikiProject Novels standards
I am in the process of updating this page per the template. I will get it out as soon as possible and pick up any updates between now and then in content. Portia1780 00:55, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, this is done. It's been rewritten per the WP:N standard template.  I also added links to film adapations, some quotes, and reduced the length of the horrific summary.  Someone else can take over from here! Portia1780 05:10, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Spelling and Grammar
Ugly. Needs desperate revision. Jachra 08:22, 19 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Fr 98.57.173.165 (talk) 03:28, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Plagarism
The summaries of the different books were obviously plagarised. Look at http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/hunchback/ and all of the different sections and compare them to this page.toaster 19:45, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * fixed63.215.29.113 21:42, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Title
Does anyone have any information about how it was decided that the English title would be The Hunchback of Notre Dame instead of Notre Dame de Paris, Notre Dame of Paris or what have you? I especially think its odd considering Hugo's other major work is known here as Les Miserables,nmmn...Butterboy 12:14, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I think the disney adaptation played a big role in this. The hunchback is juste a minor character in the original story — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:A03F:6B8E:EE00:1C39:C573:91FE:F28E (talk) 09:48, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Hugo's "neo-Gothic" = Gothic Revival architecture?
"Book three. Hugo digresses in two long descriptions, ... His neo-Gothic viewpoints and criticism of "modernization" are explained." -- Made links. neo-Gothic currently redirects to Gothic Revival architecture. I believe that this is the correct article to link in the context of Hugo's ideas, but if not, please correct. -- Writtenonsand 12:19, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I think that you may well be correct. I just added information in the Background section to emphasize more that Hugo's main purpose in writing this book was to save Paris' medieval architecture from deliberate destruction (often to build in newer styles). This was clearer in the French versions of various Wikipedia sites than in the English versions. Michel Laurin (talk) 11:17, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Reverting apparent vandalism re "thieves' quarter"
On 18:03, 19 March 2007, 66.35.162.19 changed "Book two. ... Gringoire wanders the streets and finds himself in the thieves' quarter" to "Gringoire wanders the streets and finds himself in the thieves' pursey." This was apparently simple vandalism and I'm reverting it. -- Writtenonsand 12:38, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

So how did she die?
Reading the plot, I still am unsure how Esmerelda died. Did she dash her head on a stone, or get hanged? The text is unclear unless you already know. Wrad 01:13, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

She was hanged. The police found her. In the struggle, and old lady hit her head and died. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yaminoeyes (talk • contribs) 04:40, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

la Sachette
Who is la Sachette? Th ename is brought up once in the summary for book 11 but that's it.
 * Her name has been standardized in the summary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Portia1780 (talk • contribs) 05:12, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Other Comments
I recently saw another ballet version of The Hunchback of Notre Dame on a DVD - Notre Dame de Paris - and this was by Opéra national de Paris, choreographed by Roland Petit and the composer was Maurice Jarre.Tuokkan (talk) 21:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Isn't the book called The Hunchback of Notre-Dame?

That's the English version. Many other countries exclude 'hunchback' from their titles. The German version translates to 'the bellringer of Notre Dame.'

More description is needed in the opening concerning the summarized plot and what it's all about.

Who keeps changing the plot summary to some big mess? First, Claude Frollo wasn't 'evil' and Quasimodo loved him as a father. Second, her name is Esmeralda, not La Esmeralda. Third, she was not nice to Quasimodo after he saved her from the gibbet. Fourth, Claude never told her 'love me or be hanged.' Fourth, a gravedigger did not find Esmeralda's remains, executioners looking for a body of a man they falsely killed found her remains. She had no grave.

It wasn't falsely killed, it was a body that the king allowed to be buried in a different cemetery. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.22.217.159 (talk) 22:24, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I just read the Hunchback of Notre Dame yesterday and changed the plot summary around a little bit. You are correct about the inaccuracies of the original summary. Although, I wouldn't complain about it on the comment section, it's disrespectful to the ones who take the time to write it. If you think something is wrong with it, by all means, take the time out of your OWN day and edit it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cherokee1002 (talk • contribs) 22:44, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Who keeps adding in fake 2005 and 2009 adaptations, on both the novel's main page and the character pages? Neither of these adaptations exist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Going fortheone (talk • contribs) 01:42, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Publish/Story Date Problem
How could The Hunchback of Notre-Dame take place 11 years after it was published? This being possible doesn't seem true.

Main Antagonist
So, who is the main antagonist? Claude or Phoebus? I know how the Disney film and source material are very different from one another, but Claude's page says he became the main antagonist, yet here it gives that role to Phoebus. Which is it? 24.187.168.103 (talk) 02:49, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Cut-and-paste/OR?
The large section on themes looks like a cut and paste job from an unreferenced source. That's indicated by the paragraph starting "In his classic novel The Hunchback of Notre Dame...," which is redundant. It was inserted in pieces Nov. 13-18 by 8 users all of whom have no other contributions except to this article, which suggests they're all the same person and were created for this purpose. However, by now the WP page has been replicated so much that there are no search engine hits for it. Any suggestions on what to do about this? If it's not copyvio, then it sounds like it was pasted from someone's term paper. Has anybody reviewed it for accuracy? KarlM (talk) 04:30, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

The book vs actual time period
Im trying to find examples in the book where the events in the book don't really match the time period and have been revised to make the book flow, but I'm having no luck. Has anyone noticed any situations in this book? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Llove11310 (talk • contribs) 23:27, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Esmeralda and Frollo "human kindness"
The text had Esmeralda as being the only one "to show the hunchback a moment of human kindness". I changed this to "one of the few", because at least one other person, Claude Frollo, has showed moments of kindness much larger than the one Esmeralda had with Quasimodo. Frollo took the hunchback baby when he was rejected by all the others, including the gypsies who abandoned him. The character of Frollo is so kind with the hunchback in the begining that, in order to make him a proper villain, many adaptations of the novel omitted or adulterated this part of the story. Some might say that Frollo wasn't so kind with Quasimodo at the end, but neither was Esmeralda, who was actually ungreatful with all he did to her. 177.182.25.248 (talk) 03:40, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Gypsy?
There seems to be some disagreement re. Esmeralda's ethnicity so I'll open it up so folks can state their case. In the French text I have she is described as "l'égyptienne" (Egyptian), and my English text also says "Egyptian". Neither the words "gypsy" or "Romani" appear anywhere in either version. Mediatech492 (talk) 07:04, 11 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I realize I'm saying this eight years later, but I actually made an account just to fix this in the lead and now can't figure out how to do it. The English text on Project Gutenberg does use the term "gypsy." However, I also feel it would be significantly more appropriate if the lead used the correct name, Romani. The fact that she's referred to by a pejorative (which does actually come from "Egyptian," hence GYPsy) in the text should be noted, but there's no reason to be using it in the lead when it's recognized today as a slur. NinaEdits (talk) 18:38, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

"First novel to have beggars as protagonists"?
Nope. Wikipedia's own article on the Picaresque novel states that this distinction belongs to Lazarillo de Tormes, which, I believe is generally accepted.2601:648:8501:EF94:4196:51E4:A845:22D9 (talk) 20:51, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Quasimodo's death ... by starvation?
The plot synopsis of this novel says that Quasimodo died of starvation; is this specified in Hugo's original French? I've ready a couple of different English translations and neither of them says that. They say only that he was not hanged and therefore must have come to that grave of his own volition. But that alone doesn't mean he must have lain there until he literally starved. He might well have done something like ingest a fatal dose of poison. I would be bold and change the synopsis myself, but since I cannot read French, I'm concerned that perhaps Hugo's actual writing does say something that really does indicate starvation. 69.75.90.210 (talk) 03:12, 16 February 2017 (UTC)


 * In the last paragraph in the book it says that a skeleton is found, and implies from the condition and shape of the bones that it could have been Quasimodo; but does not state that it is. No cause of death is given, or even hinted at. Mediatech492 (talk) 06:48, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

I read 'Hunchback of Notre Dame' a while back and I thought he was found inside one of those hanging cages. Correct me if you think I'm wrong.-Thanks Ooh Saad (talk) 09:12, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Satire? Rmance?
I would think 'The Hunchback of Notre-Dame' would be more of a satire or romance rather than a 'gothic' novel? Great article by the way! Ooh Saad (talk) 09:15, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Lead
@MCarlos I think ur newest revision needs improving cos it is vague and doesn't say what the book is about Stephanie921 (talk) 14:52, 30 August 2022 (UTC)


 * I think the people wanting a deep-dive about the book plot and themes can read the plot section of the page, the rest of the page is extremely rich in information about the book, including the major themes.
 * plus, a summary of the book should not be a full blown spoilers, the new introduction actually tells you what the book is about, the focus characters and antagonist, impossible love and marginalization, if someone reading the page needs more information about themes and the plot of the book, they will read beyond the first 5 lines of the introduction. I don't think we should consider readers to be "dumb" that need to be spoon-fed everything.
 * plus, I'm keeping the introduction style of all other pages for Victor Hugo works MCarlos (talk) 15:21, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't think it was a deepdive. It just says the setup of the story. It didn't have spoilers. Take The Godfather summary:


 * "The story, spanning from 1945 to 1955, chronicles the Corleone family under patriarch Vito Corleone (Brando), focusing on the transformation of his youngest son, Michael Corleone (Pacino), from reluctant family outsider to ruthless mafia boss."


 * This is basic info about the narrative. It doesn't explore this further, cos the body does that. The Hunchback summary doesn't say how Esmeralda and Quasimodo fall in love and it doesn't say how Quasimodo's feelings change to Frollo. This is standard practice. Your introduction just tells me the characters and is in my view vaguely worded. I never said I consider anyone to be dumb, and I don't know why you put that in speechmarks. Stephanie921 (talk) 15:40, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
 * if you wish we can put both introductions up for debate in the Novels wikiproject and maybe ask for a second opinion and consensus, since being mature and honest, this will be a mine opinion vs. your opinion war and extremely pointless
 * just put both to debate and let other people decide whichever sounds better in a matter of style
 * plus, I don't know why you are referencing the godfather instead of another Victor Hugo work, for example Les Miserables
 * "Examining the nature of law and grace, the novel elaborates upon the history of France, the architecture and urban design of Paris, politics, moral philosophy, antimonarchism, justice, religion, and the types and nature of romantic and familial love."
 * it doesn't mention anything about Valjean imprisonment or the moral pressure Javert imposes on him. It just gives you a taste of the major themes of the book MCarlos (talk) 15:58, 30 August 2022 (UTC)


 * What did u mean by "since being mature and honest, this will be a mine opinion vs. your opinion war and extremely pointless". And why it does it matter which one I use? An artwork is an artwork. And Lés Miserables article is an exception, most artwork articles are not like that Stephanie921 (talk) 16:01, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
 * ok, from other Victor Hugo works
 * Ninety-Three
 * "three years after the bloody upheaval of the Paris Commune that resulted out of popular reaction the failure of Napoleon III to win the Franco-Prussian War, the novel concerns the Revolt in the Vendée and Chouannerie – the counter-revolutionary revolts in 1793 during the French Revolution."
 * The Man Who Laughs
 * " It takes place in England beginning in 1690 and extends into the early 18th century reign of Queen Anne. It depicts England's royalty and aristocracy of the time as cruel and power-hungry. Hugo intended parallels with the France of Louis-Philippe and the Régence."
 * and so on and so on, seems to be a very common exception, I'll create the discussion in the WikiProject Novels and tag you there and we can settle this, because we are on different pages with this and I prefer the peer opinion and consensus over a black-white discussion MCarlos (talk) 16:13, 30 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Okay ty. But in my view those descriptions are in more in line with The Godfather description than the Les Misérables one. Like they detail the basic narrative like I wanted, I don't understand why you think they're similar to ur Hunchback description? Stephanie921 (talk) 16:26, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry but I won't say it's valid to say you edited something the way you wanted, since you don't own the page, please don't take offense in that, but you should not be editing pages based on your personal view or want.
 * that aside, because they point the major global topics of the novel over the specific, the new descriptions tells you, it's a renaissance setting in France, it's about impossible love, and marginalized groups; it covers location, theme and what the author wanted to highlight, it's about theme versus plot opinion, the old introduction read as if I asked somebody their take on the book, more than the book itself.
 * different people can take different takes on the book, I can say that the story is about Frollo trying to kill all the Romani because Esmeralda rejected him. I believe, it's better to leave the major topic neutral and let the readers create their own opinion about the book, and saying the book is about impossible love and marginalized groups in 15th century Paris is not a factually wrong and it's open enough for anyone that read or is planning on reading the book to get a head start, and if you are a person searching the wikipedia page because you don't want to read the book, the plot section is a good summary.
 * compared with other examples:
 * Les Miserables, you have the location, theme and what the author wanted to highlight/criticize, etc MCarlos (talk) 17:20, 30 August 2022 (UTC)


 * I didn't say that I own the page. I edited the page to my want and u edited it to your want. Neither of us did it to our personal view, we're both trying to be constructive Stephanie921 (talk) 17:42, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

, I am glad the words "ableist" and "genocide" were deleted from the lead. They are not used in the article, and are so far from the meaning of the author in this novel that neither word belongs in the lead. The version of the lead here is a concise lead for this major novel of French literature. Keep in mind that the lead is meant to highlight what is written in the article; it is not an introduction to the topic nor a "blurb" to advertise it nor the lede used in news articles to give the essentials quickly for a reader. The article correctly states that Hugo wanted to stir interest in Gothic architecture with his novel. In the article in French Wikipedia, the lead is even shorter, and it remarks that the cathedral is a principal location of the novel. -- Prairieplant (talk) 04:32, 1 September 2022 (UTC)