The Hunchback of Notre Dame is an animated film that was released by Walt Disney Pictures in 1996. It is a retelling of an 1831 novel by Victor Hugo, and the story follows the life of Quasimodo, a man crippled at birth and hidden away in the cathedral of Notre Dame, Paris. The film features several glimpses of the concepts that we have articulated this semester. One of the more evident examples are the heavy tones of racial as well as cultural barriers within the film. The Romanians, often referred to as “gypsies” in the film, are a group of people outcast by the dominant culture of Notre Dame. The leading character Esmerelda acts as a lens through which these concepts are magnified for the audience. There is an interesting connection to be made between Esmerelda’s role in the story and some of the issues of social identity that authors such as Ortiz Cofer and Homi Bhabha taught us. Although Esmerelda is painted to be a part of Romanian community, her physical appearance is a critical point of interest in the story. It is this element of social identity that is meant to aid its audience–mostly mostly young American children–to relate to Esmerelda and feel included in her story. This element of beauty and inclusion is a common formula found in this era of films released by Disney. In a way, Esmerelda’s character expresses a level of the hybridity that Bhabha wrote about. Her role as a Romanian is combined with her role as a female lead and she is in essence transformed. It is through this pseudo “Third-Space” that the negative connotations of the Romanian people are slowly dissolved from the story, hidden behind the familiarity of Esmerelda’s character.
There are a few similarities between Quasimodo and Judge Frollo’s relationship and Hegel’s master-slave dialectic. Quasimodo refers to Frollo as master and is treated as an outsider by society. His presence is known, yet he remains hidden in his tower out of fear of the social pressures of society. In this way, Quasimodo is restricted to being an Other, or subaltern. The magnitude of these concepts are further exemplified in an a scene in which Frollo visits Quasimodo and asks him to recite his alphabet. When Quasimodo recites “Festival” instead of “Forgiveness” he is scolded. Scolded not for being incorrect, but for stepping outside of the limited parameters that Frollo has drawn for him. This scene solidifies not only that Quasimodo is not heard, but furthermore highlights the power-dynamic between the two characters. For just as Frollo is recognized by Quasimodo as the master, Frollo refuses to recognize Quasimodo. It is this relationship that results in Frollo being unable to see beyond his own scope. For as Hegel argued, the master cannot truly appreciate the recognition of the slave because he does not value the slave’s opinion. This is a film littered with systemic issues that parallel modern society. It encourages cultural acceptance and emphasizes the value of character over beauty.