The monster that I discussed in the last assignment was the character of Judge Claude Frollo in the Disney adaptation of "The Hunchback of Notre Dame." Out of all the theses from Cohen's piece, Frollo is probably the best example of the first thesis: The Monster's Body is a Cultural Body. Cohen states that "the monster signifies something other than itself: it is always a displacement." (4) It is no coincidence that Frollo's character is a public official, because ultimately the character is a symbol and representation for the corrupt and hypocritical government of Paris. He also embodies the extreme institutional racism against immigrants such as the Romani people. Going back to the etymology of the word monstrum which means "that which reveals," Frollo serves as a way to reveal the wrongdoings of the government, the negative effects of racism, and the hypocrisy of the Church as well. Many of Frollo's actions throughout the film, and the original Victor Hugo novel, represented cultural events that were taking place during that time period of history. I think the example of a monster like the character of Frollo helps develop Cohen's first thesis better because Frollo is an example of a monster whose existence is a critique against a very powerful dominant cultural institution and provides an alternative perspective. Cohen seems to believe that often times the monster is used as a scapegoat based around the experiences of minorities and marginalized people in order to demonize them. While this can be absolutely true, I believe that monster stories can have many points of view and that a monster can represent culture in a myriad of ways, including being a critique of powerful cultural institutions instead of necessarily being propaganda of the dominant status quo.
Comments
Post a Comment