Perspectives on "The Hunchback of Notre Dame" the musical

When I was working on my assignment and listened to “The Hunchback of Notre Dame” (Menken and Schwartz, 1998) the musical soundtrack, adapted from the book of the same name by Victor Hugo (2011) as background music for my study, I suddenly realised how my reactions towards the characters had changed since the first time I watched it. In this essay, I will focus only on the character Claude Frollo.

When I first watched the musical, Frollo appeared to be a kind-hearted person who was misguided by the evil in this world (that is of jealousy?) to commit a sin (which is the hunt for Esmeralda that includes murder, arson, and criminalisation of the innocent) (Menken and Schwartz, 1998; Hugo, 2011). At that time, I quite disliked the plot because it seemed to suggest that all evils are caused by circumstances, which may be considered equivalent to whitewashing of wrongdoings. Yet, when I listened to the soundtrack a second time, I was surprised to learn that my interpretation of his actions had changed quite drastically. In the opening scenes where he reluctantly agreed to take care of his brother’s deformed son (Menken and Schwartz, 1998; Hugo, 2011), I interpreted it as an act of self-gratification (rather than of kindness as I first watched the musical). Even though Frollo agreed to take care of the deformed son, what he eventually ended up doing was not to raise a son, but to enjoy control over the submissive (which is his brother’s son – Quasimodo). What has happened that has changed my impression of the character Frollo? One hypothesis could be because of the additional information about the sins that Frollo would commit later on in the musical. This hypothesis implies that the judgment I have arrived at (that his sins are bad) caused me to re-interpret his actions in a negative way. This hypothesis seems probable given I was conscious of the information that Frollo is the villain in the musical (which I was not aware of when I first watched the musical).

Even though I am not certain whether the hypothesis was right, I am terrified by the implications of that hypothesis. Living our lives, we often rush to judgment about people we meet. And apparently, interpreting others' actions forms an important part of our life (probably we spend a large amount of time decoding what others mean by what they say). If our impressions of people in fact influence our interpretations of their meanings or intentions, perhaps we should start reflecting on the role perspective formation plays in society. Let us take the prison system as an example. The prison system is supposed to help criminals start a fresh page in life. And for criminals not faced with capital punishment or lifelong imprisonment, we hope that one day these criminals will return to society to lead a peaceful life. Is that true? How will society perceive an ex-criminal? It is easy to claim that the past lies in the past. Since the criminals have served their time in prison, we should give them a chance to redeem their wrongdoings. We hope so because we believe that mishaps could happen to everyone, and we want to create a system where mistakes can be forgiven. But given the hypothesis that our impressions of a person can influence our interpretations of their meanings and intentions, how should we ensure that the criminals are given a blank slate on which to paint their lives? Perhaps society are willing to shift perspectives and forgo the bad impressions of these criminals. I wonder if this proposal is true, given the (in)famous saying “Once a criminal, always a criminal”. I do not know if there is any grain of truth in that saying. But the saying alone supports the idea that there exist people who interpret meanings and intentions based on past impressions. The saying insinuates that the criminal will continue to do bad things because the criminal has done bad things in the past – a form of induction I would say, and induction certainly has its blemishes (as discussed by many philosophers). I admit that I cannot give a resolution to the problem I have just highlighted. But I want to show that the devil of impressions influencing interpretations has implications in real-world social problems, not just a challenge to literary and movie analyses.

To end my essay, I want to share a problem that troubles me personally. How should I approach people who have offended me? Virtuous as it sounds to forgive and forget, I cannot remove the memory of being hurt and offended. The memory forms parts of my subconsciousness, and I have a tendency to avoid interactions with people who have offended me to avoid further conflicts. Have we not all collected for ourselves a similar story (if not exactly the same)? People often suggest to allow ourselves time to heal from the psychological wound. Yet, wounds rarely heal completely – they mostly leave scars. And for a mental wound to heal, shouldn’t we first learn to make sense of the wound and find out how we should approach the wound? So, dear readers, how should we make sense of our impressions of someone and our interpretations of their meanings and intentions thereof?

November, 2025, Singapore.

___________________

Cited Works:

Hugo, V. (2011). The Hunchback of Notre Dame. HarperCollins.

Menken A., Schwartz S. (1996). All songs on The Hunchback of Notre Dame [Album]. Studio Cast Recordings.