k but like im still hung up on how jehan frollo went from being quasi’s half brother to his biological father. and the interesting thing is, it actually changes the story a LOT. like, in the book, quasimodo just kind of shows up and frollo adopts him out of fear that that could have been jehan, and he sympathizes with that. more so, quasimodo in the book is more of a representation of the soul of notre dame rather than a character of his own. he exists to serve notre dame, in a way. jehan’s just the drunken spoiled younger brother who goes to his brother for money instead of getting a job and living independently. florika doesn’t exist, jehan never gets kicked out of school, and he doesn’t have a child he can’t take care of. it takes away from TONS of the motivation the musical ends up having for the big “what makes a monster and what makes a man” message.
in the musical, as mentioned before, jehan falls in love with a roma woman, they get kicked out and have quasimodo, who jehan, in a last ditch effort, hands over to his brother to take care of. the tone of this action varies from actor to actor. lucas coleman’s jehan seems to give quasimodo away genuinely out of a want for the child to have a successful, good life, and he knows that frollo might be able to give him that. now contrast that with jeremy stolle’s jehan who gives quasimodo to frollo because even on his death bed, he continues to go back to his brother for aid. he perpetuates the notion that jehan was constantly dependent on others up until his dying breath.
regardless of how the action is played out, it’s important that it happens because it sets us up for like…the entire story of hunchback of notre dame. if jehan doesn’t give his newborn child to claude frollo, there’s no story. i think in frollo’s eyes, quasimodo is seen as a sort of “second chance”. he sees how his brother kind of fell from grace and turned to a life of “sin” in the eyes of the catholic church, and how that almost definitely means he’s damned to hell. and remember, that’s his brother, the man he admits to loving the entire time at the end of the show. frollo’s seeing his brother go against everything they were ever taught and to him it results in his death and damnation. that’s insane.
aha, but the child. look, it’s my brothers child that’s kind of fucked up, and comes from (in frollo’s mind) two fucked up parents, maybe i can save him in the way i couldnt save my brother.
jehan frollo being quasimodo’s biological father allows the hunchback of notre dame to begin its entire plot, and gives most of frollo’s motivation for raising quasimodo the way he does which in turn motivates quasimodo to leave the cathedral and the whole thing falls like a domino effect all because jehan frollo gave away his child. the entire action in itself sets up the “what makes a monster and what makes a man” message, and i think that’s something that’s completely lacking in the book.
like ok, i understand that the book was never about social justice, it was about architecture, but if you’re going to make all of these awful characters, i think you should at least give them a solid reasoning for it, because they’re clearly motivated by something, we just never know what. as much as i don’t, and don’t want to, you can’t even put the blame on esmerelda, which you shouldn’t, because she didn’t do anything, but even if you were to try, you couldn’t, because everything that happens to frollo is the result of his own actions and feelings and thoughts.
i’m rambling now and getting off track, but like bro i just wanna know how we got from point A to point B and how that affects the story, and why that change was chosen and implemented.