The Hunchback of Notre Dame - Victor Hugo

By Kate Norrish Staff Writer If the first thing you thought of when you saw this title is the Disney movie, do me a huge favor for this article - forget everything you know about Claude Frollo. I say this because the book, published in 1831, is arguably more about him than it is about the title character Quasimodo, and while I don’t like how the Disney film portrays Frollo, I understand why they chose to make him a standard villain. This is because I have no idea how anyone could create a book-accurate Frollo and still wind up with a kid’s movie at the end. The story begins when Frollo’s brother dies, and he is asked to care for the brother’s young son - Jehan. This makes Frollo extremely uncomfortable. The reason being because he, being a member of the Medieval French Clergy, was told his entire life that pedophilic activity is something men naturally do to children, and that it is unreasonable to ask them to abstain from it. Despite never showing any desire to harm children in that way, he takes extreme measures to keep himself away from minors. This includes abandoning the child, who he cares for deeply. What adds a sense of deep pity - and slight horror - is when the audience does the math and realizes that Frollo’s paralyzing fear of sex and children began when he was in his late teens. This changes when a disabled 4-year-old, Quasimodo, is found abandoned in the cathedral and, noticing the local nuns’ disgust toward his facial differences, Frollo realizes that no one else would be willing to care for him. This results in him raising Quasimodo. However, when Esmerelda enters the picture, Frollo’s sexual desires are more than he can handle, leading to some tasteful - yet horrific - self-harm and violence. One of my favorite scenes focusing on this is when Quasimodo is publicly tortured and humiliated. Jehan, now an adult, takes an active part in it. Frollo is horrified, but makes no attempt to stop what is going on. This Frollo is an incredibly sympathetic character, up until a scene that comes out of nowhere for people who have never seen the Disney film. I will not spoil it. However, I have concerns over how some may interpret it as showing how celibacy can corrupt a person. I feel that linking a lack of sexual activity with inappropriate behavior - both sexual and otherwise - is incredibly harmful. Even so, the portrayal of Frollo’s confusion, and eventually moral decline, gives the reader whiplash, and gives me complicated emotions that seem to be similar to how Quasimodo sees his father figure. Hugo also blurs the lines of what is appropriate for a man to do involving a woman, allowing the readers to question the culture surrounding gender relations and sexually inappropriate behavior. For example, at one point Frollo humiliates himself by asking a man why he was alone in the streets with Esmerelda. That man turns out to be Esmerelda’s husband. It is left up to the reader to decide whether or not Frollo asked out of lust or genuine concern. If you have not read any of Victor Hugo’s works before, fair warning, it is OK to skim a bit. Hugo is famous for including far more description than is necessary or wanted, and this book is the worst offender among the books of his I have read. Unless you want chapters upon chapters of bland descriptions of seemingly every building in Paris, for the love of God, don’t make the mistake I did when I first read this book by getting it on audiobook unless you absolutely have to. It’s OK. You’re among friends here. You can cheat a little, because fun fact - this book was partially written to encourage tourism. This is a powerful book that I would never trust Disney to do justice. It is ahead of its time, unafraid to show the most horrific ways sexuality can harm ourselves and others, and immensely empathetic. Mentally prepare yourself before reading, but set aside some time for “The Hunchback of Notre Dame.”