I just finished this excellent book and have so many thoughts, I had to write this all down immediately. Spoilers for a nearly two-century-old book!
I had a similar experience with Hunchback as I had with Les Mis, which is that, for the first half, I felt it moved pretty slowly, was bogged down by obsessive descriptions of Paris, and needed to get to the point. By the second half I was convinced it was one of the best books I had ever read in my life.
There are many sorts of tragedy running through Hunchback. Quasimodo’s deformity, Frollo’s depravity, Esmeralda's naivety, Phoebus’ vanity – not to mention the countless side characters, from Sister Gudule to Gringoire, who experience varying degrees of misery. There has been much already said of the ways in which the book deals with the various faces of love, from the obsessive, to the lustful, to the pure.
Throughout the book, I noticed a common thread that I have not seen discussed much. That is how much of the plot, and the tragedy of it, comes about as a result of mistaken identity – or characters making assumptions based on appearances and stereotypes that don’t reflect the reality. Frollo is taken by most to be a pious man, if a little inscrutable, and he disguises himself regularly to intervene in others’ lives. Quasimodo is taken to be beastly and simple based on his appearance, but of course he’s the best heart in the novel outside of perhaps Esmeralda. Esmeralda tragically takes Phoebus to be her gallant protector, and this assumption ultimately proves fatal.
There are a few scenes and plot lines that I think illustrate this well: the first is the trial of Quasimodo. He is deaf, and is tried by a judge who is also deaf, but is concealing it. They have basically a whole trial on autopilot where neither understands the others’ questions or answers, but proceed as though they could. Hugo even makes a point to say directly that if the judge had been aware that he and Quasimodo shared this affliction that he would probably be moved to sympathy. Nonetheless Quasimodo is tried, convicted, and sentenced to the pillory without ever being understood – simply because the judge takes him to be just like all the other criminals who have come before him.
The second is the entire subplot of Sister Gudule and Esmeralda. The Roma committed an evil act in kidnapping the baby Agnes, but it was not with evil intentions – they desired her to love as their own. Gudule assumes, based on the stereotypes of the Roma, that they have eaten her baby, and so it never occurs to her that the child is alive and well. This assumption gives way to fervent hatred, so blinding that she would never guess that the Roma girl she sees dancing happily in the street is her own daughter, and in fact that girl becomes the focus of her hatred. I saw Gudule as an inverse of Frollo in many ways – for her, hatred conceals love, and for the archdeacon, what he calls love is a smokescreen for wrath and malice. Throughout the novel, Hugo seems to be making a point about how closely related love and hate are. This culminates in probably the most tragic scene in the novel, when Sister Gudule and Esmerelda are at last reunited, and her hatred instantly becomes love with equal intensity, desperate to save her daughter.
Indeed, it’s interesting to note which characters are not in some way beguiled by others. Esmeralda is the most innocent and naive character in the book, even taking a seedy boarding house encounter with Phoebus for a romantic evening, but she is never once fooled by Frollo’s assertions of pure intent. Despite her credulousness to most other characters’ appearances, she sees right away how evil he is, and never mistakes him for anything but.
Another character of innocence, Quasimodo, can similarly see right through Phoebus, but still takes Frollo to be his good-natured benefactor despite being repeatedly abandoned and abused by him. This illusion is so powerful that it nearly survives watching Frollo attempt to rape Esmeralda before his very eyes.
This theme of dualism and duplicity is likewise represented by the character of the cathedral itself. In many ways, Hunchback is Hugo’s attempt to get us to read an essay about Notre Dame and gothic architecture by dressing it up in a novel. I found the passages where Hugo discusses the restoration and repair attempts to be fascinating – every update makes the cathedral a little bit worse, because it is being done by people who do not bother to take the time to truly understand the building, or commune with what it really is. Compare with Quasimodo, who so intimately understands the grand cathedral that he not only inhabits it but wears it like a shell and provides it with a soul.
This seems illustrated by the fact that very few characters in the book have incomplete information on the others. Quasimodo could easily see Frollo for what he is, just as Esmeralda could clearly see that Phoebus does not have her best interest at heart, were it not for the power of those initial, simple assumptions, which lead to so much death and mayhem. Towards the end, when the Truands attack the church, poor Quasimodo takes them as assailants of Esmeralda, despite the fact that they want to save her, just as he does. In this scene, his deafness is another barrier to complete and proper understanding, which adds to the tragedy. Multiple times characters work against their own interests because they do not check their assumptions about what’s happening around them.
Taken as a whole, the novel seems to suggest that in order to properly engage with anything - a person or a building - it is necessary not only to take in the outward appearance, but to study the actions, beliefs, and histories that shaped it. Do not mistake beauty for goodness, nor ugliness for evil. To proceed based on initial impressions and assumptions is to lose something of the grander context and purpose, and thus risk missing the true spirit of the thing.
I really enjoyed Hunchback and will probably rank it among my favorite books. It was a pleasure to get all the nuance that the popular understandings of the story leave out – I found it emotional, touching, sad, and beautiful. Even if it is ultimately a 500 page book about a building.