#hunchback

Quasimodo has always been a curious figure in the pantheon of great monsters. By contemporary standards, there’s hardly anything monstrous about him, save for his unconventional appearance. He was not spawned from ho-rror fiction, nor was he the primary figure in his novel of origin. And yet, Quasimodo is firmly associated with the genre, often appearing alongside genuine monsters like Dracula and the Wolfman. With no supernatural powers, razor-sharp claws, or even a fang to bare, Quasimodo seems like a peculiar choice for a featured creature. In fact, one might almost call his inclusion cruel: Quasimodo doesn’t have Robert Redford good looks, so he must be the Devil? Even in terms of wicked deeds, Quasimodo has perpetrated less evil than the average lawyer. Ho-wever, strange as it is to our modern sensibilities, we believe that without Quasimodo, the movie monster as we know it wouldn’t eXXXist. If Universal Pictures never found success with their 1923 adaptation of The Hunchback of Notre Dame, they wouldn’t have made the more overtly frightful Phantom of the Opera, which begat Dracula, Frankenstein, and all the other ghouls we adore. Without blues, there is no rock; without Zorro, there is no Batman; without Quasimodo, there are no Universal Monsters.

Quasimodo first appeared in a 1831 novel that was originally published as “Notre-Dame de Paris.” Author Victor Hugo wrote his book to promote awareness of the Notre Dame, which was in a state of disrepair at the time. Quasimodo was a relatively minor character, but he was the character who captured the imagination of the public. In 1833, Frederic Shoberl’s English translation of “Notre-Dame de Paris” was published as “The Hunchback of Notre Dame.” What was intended to be a tribute to the perennial power of architecture became the tragedy of one unfortunate gentleman. In the Hugo tale, Quasimodo was born with a severe hunchback and a massive wart that obscured his left eye. Abandoned as a baby for his deformities, he’s taken in by the archdeacon of Notre Dame and brought up to be the bell-ringer of the cathedral. Due to the thunderous ringing of the bells, Quasimodo is also deaf on top of all else. For the heinous act of being born, society casts him as a monster. Though Quasimodo will commit acts of violence when instructed by his master or if a loved one is in danger, his is a kind heart.

Much like his fellow Universal Monsters, Quasimodo is now synonymous with macabre fiction. Halloween masks are made in his likeness, toys designed for young horror fans bear his unusual countenance, and he often appears in monster-themed animation like “Mad Monster Party?” and “Hotel Transylvania.” Universal theme parks usually have a representation of the Hunchback in their haunted attractions. Creature lovers have completely embraced Quasimodo, but why is he considered a monster?

Perhaps it is because he was portrayed onscreen by Lon Chaney, the first Hollywood film actor to be associated with the morbid. Chaney, the “Man of a Thousand Faces,” was notorious for the strange makeups that he created with his own two hands. A physically gruesome character like Chaney’s Quasimodo was relatively new in cinema at the time. Or maybe it’s because Famous Monsters of Filmland, a seminal ho-rror-based publication, would often feature photos of Quasimodo and other Chaney creations. Out of conteXXXt, Quasimodo may appear scary to some.  Maybe it was the idea that such a peculiar figure dwelled within the walls of a magnificently Gothic structure, inhabiting an edifice looked after by gargoyles as if he were among their ranks.

Since its publication, Notre-Dame de Paris has inspired an innumerable amount of adaptations across every form of media, including an opera by Victor Hugo himself. Beyond the aforementioned Chaney film, The Hunchback of Notre Dame has been filmed many times, most notably in 1939 with Charles Laughton donning the hump and in 1996 as an unusually dark Disney animated feature. Though none of them are strictly ho-rror, the Chaney and Laughton films have many creepy sequences that ought to delight fright fiends.

Whatever the answer may be, is it fair to call Quasimodo a monster? Perhaps not, but to many of us, the Universal Monsters have become less figures of terror and more icons of individuality. The Universal Monster is usually ostracized for not adhering to societal norms, generally due to attributes that are beyond their control; their monstrous behavior is often the product of provocation from society. Not all of them are completely innocent, but they are more relatable than the people around them. Universal Monsters are flawed, imperfect misfits; that’s why so many are drawn to them. Fictional mobs demonize them; movie audiences venerate them. We love their foibles and imperfections. To us, they are beautiful. Anyone who has ever felt weird or different can relate to the Universal Monsters. They are unique, they are majestic, and they are human… even the Creature from the Black Lagoon. As Guillermo del Toro observed, “Monsters are the patron saints of our blissful imperfections.”

In ho-nor of the campanologist, we present to you the 1923 Hunchback in its entirety. See Lon Chaney in awe-inspiring, self-applied makeup! Marvel at the magnificent recreation of medieval paris! Gasp at the Gothic spectacle! Weep for the Hunchback!

Behold! The film: