Notre-Dame de Paris part.1

Notre-Dame de Paris 1

Author

Victor Hugo

Publisher

Minumsa | published 2005-02-23

Category

Novel

Book introduction

Better known as 'The Hunchback of Notre-Dame,' a representative work of Victor Hugo. 183...

This book is not 'The Hunchback of Notre-Dame.' People keep saying hunchback, hunchback, and in nearly all of popular culture and art, from the story, film, musical, to even the opera of The Hunchback of Notre-Dame, they speak with the focus on the 'hunchback,' but this book is not a hunchback story. It is a story of Paris. And specifically a story about Notre-Dame Cathedral and Paris. Of course, that's not all that appears; many characters also appear, such as Gringoire, Father Claude, Quasimodo, and La Esmeralda. But I think it's not right to tell the story with the focus only on Quasimodo. There is also a 'section' explaining the urban structure of Paris, it begins with the story of Gringoire's play performance, and doesn't the Bohemian girl appear too, if only briefly? Who would think anyone would talk about the Left Bank and Right Bank of the Seine and the Île de la Cité? I begin this review by once again driving home the point that the title 'The Hunchback of Notre-Dame' is not appropriate.

The 'premiere' of Gringoire, a poet and playwright, is not very successful. His failure, in a way, indirectly expresses that he has already tasted all the many bitter experiences of his life. The narrator says Gringoire is pitiful. There are several parts that could be called pitiful, but the very first one worth calling pitiful is when, as the 'entrance' begins, the cardinal and other dignitaries arrive, and no one pays attention to the play he created and he is simply 'ignored.' From the very beginning of the book, I felt it starts in a quite confusing way; it's telling Gringoire's story, but I've never read writing of this kind, and I suppose I couldn't quite adjust to it openly declaring that Gringoire is pitiful. Well, whether Victor Hugo's writing was originally like this can only be known by reading the original, but apart from that, it's hard to say the translator didn't take this into account, and there was no helping that I couldn't concentrate.

Claude Frollo, the archdeacon and the person who took in and raised Quasimodo. Claude Frollo, another master of Notre-Dame Cathedral, is, in his own way, an 'intellectual' who is very thoughtful, studied a great deal, loved books, and even studied alchemy, which was the trend of the time. Since the very profession of priest at that time was one of those that required tremendous study, his expertise is beyond description. However, I think the gloominess of his upbringing was an occasion that made him an even more brooding person. To him, who lived at school from a young age by his parents' command and only studied at school, one day his parents died, and as he looked at his only remaining younger brother and transferred the love for 'scholarship' he had devoted himself to until then onto his family, he became a Claude Frollo who fell even more into thought and anguish. And it is also Claude Frollo who, in the meantime, picks Quasimodo up off the street and raises him, makes him a bell-ringer, makes him like a part of Notre-Dame, and builds him a home. Looked at this way, you could understand him as a somewhat dark but good priest, but he also has a strange side. Although alchemy itself was certainly regarded as a remarkable science at the time (it being a technique to try to turn everything into gold..), there were also people who regarded alchemy as a nonsensical discipline. It could be something to fuel a certain 'desire for research' in him, but he too was not a perfect priest. Moreover, as his younger brother 'Jehan,' on whom he had lavished such love, grew into a good-for-nothing, perhaps he got stressed and turned his attention instead to 'religion.'

The poor fellow, thinking the provost of Paris was asking his name, broke the silence he usually kept and answered in a hoarse voice from his throat.

"It's Quasimodo." When the answer didn't match the question at all, a burst of laughter began again, and Master Robert, red-faced with anger, shouted. "Are you mocking me too, you monstrous wretch?"

"I'm the bell-ringer of Notre-Dame." Quasimodo answered that way, thinking he had to explain to the judge what kind of person he was.

"A bell-ringer!" said the provost, who, as already mentioned, had woken that morning in a rather foul mood, and there was no need for such a bizarre answer to stoke his anger further. "A bell-ringer! At the crossroads of Paris I shall have the carillon of the whip struck upon your back. Do you understand, you scoundrel?"

"If, my lord, you wish to know my age," said Quasimodo. "I believe I shall turn twenty come the feast of Saint Martin."

This time it really was too much. The provost of Paris could no longer endure it.

"What, did you ever see such an insolent fellow, you're making a fool of the provost! Constables, drag this hideous wretch to the pillory of the Grève, beat and turn him for one hour. I'll teach him a proper lesson. Damn it all! And within the territory of the seven baronies of the Viscounty of Paris, report the present sentence to the public with four trumpets."

Quasimodo is raised by Claude and begins to live his life as the bell-ringer of Notre-Dame, and he feels joy at being a bell-ringer. Quasimodo, who lived ringing the bells on time and feeling that sound - heaven too is heartless - becomes deaf, unable to hear sounds, and gradually stops speaking. The only person he converses with is 'Claude Frollo,' who took him in and raised him. The reason he speaks as in the dialogue above is probably because he cannot understand the situation. The fact that following La Esmeralda and trying to strike up a conversation - in the book it's depicted like an assault, but that's because of Quasimodo's Cyclops-like appearance, not because of his character - he gets caught by Captain Phoebus, and that this leads to the present trial, is something he cannot understand. Since he cannot hear, since he cannot make out people's words, there was no way at all for him to know. He speaks in order to understand a situation he can't make sense of, but since Claude isn't there, there's no one to explain the situation, no one to talk to, so he ends up being subjected to punishment. His nature isn't bad. On the contrary, his heart seems good. Phoebus and Jehan Claude (Father Claude's younger brother) are foul-mouthed from the start, but Quasimodo is naturally reticent and even his speech isn't coarse. Yet I found it so regrettable that being deaf could only become such a cause of sorrow for him.

La Esmeralda, La Esmeralda who feels like the daughter of La Chantefleurie. Her name comes up as unusual, but, hmm, it's certainly different, yet I felt this name too has a certain charm. La Esmeralda, a Bohemian (gypsy), performs together with her goat 'Djali' and unintentionally bewitches men, and this woman who appears as the most beautiful maiden steals the heart of Captain Phoebus, steals Gringoire's heart, steals Father Claude's heart - she steals both the negative and the positive - and steals Quasimodo's heart too. I really don't think there's ever been a case where a heroine bewitched all the men to this extent. (1:4 is absurd.) The 'beauty' she possesses would be hard to express easily. It emanates from her freedom, her own looks play a part, and her performances with Djali draw a very good response, so the name 'Egyptian princess' is not wasted on her. There was a social tendency to view Bohemians or gypsies unfavorably, but that was probably because French society of the time held up 'aristocratic' culture, which doesn't suit 'Bohemians,' as the highest ideal. I too had a period during my travels when I met free spirits and envied them and wanted to talk with them, so I understand Quasimodo's heart.

The content of the book is spread out in many directions, so to talk about the characters I'll stop about here, but this book's other charm lay elsewhere too. Notre-Dame de Paris is so well known as The Hunchback of Notre-Dame that it keeps being known only as a story with Quasimodo as the protagonist, but I think that's because, given the nature of opera, film, and musicals, the scenario writers' focus was placed on the pitiful, pathetic Quasimodo. It's a re-creation that exploits compassion. However, this book also has a story about 'Paris' itself. Centered on the Left Bank and Right Bank of the Seine (referring to south and north) and the Île de la Cité, Hugo explains the changes of Paris across history and the roles and major buildings of the Île de la Cité, the Left Bank, and the Right Bank, explaining urban culture. He also emphasizes that Notre-Dame Cathedral is a highly composite style and explains 15th-century Paris, 14th-century Paris, Roman-era Paris, and so on. This is Hugo putting into this book the achievements he gained through his research, and I think the author probably wanted to say that one should not focus only on 'Quasimodo's' story but should also take an interest in the city of 'Paris' where Notre-Dame Cathedral stands.

I think I'll have to talk more in part 2. At the end of Volume 1, Esmeralda giving water to Quasimodo on the pillory will be an unforgettable, famous scene.

Related post: Notre-Dame de Paris part.2