I like to think of myself as a "Disney child"-- growing up, my brother and I had a fairly large collection of Disney VHS tapes that we would watch regularly. While I still vividly remember details from my favorite films such as Peter Pan and The Lion King, though I haven't seen them for a whole decade, I have no recollection whatsoever of certain films such as The Hunchback of Notre Dame. I'm certain that I have seen this film before, and talking to my mother reinforced this belief. However, when I sat down to screen it this weekend, I realized that I had absolutely no memories pertaining to this film. It was essentially an entirely new experience for me, which was all the more exciting. Yet, as I began to watch the story of Quasimodo, Esmeralda, Phoebus, and Frollo unfold in front of my eyes, my excitement quickly turned into astonishment.
To be entirely honest, I was not at all impressed with the film, and genuinely appalled by the first half. In particular, I found the lyrics of the songs, constantly referring to Quasimodo as a "monster" and other  harsh, derogatory terms, to be especially disturbing and unexpectedly so, considering that the film is meant for children. I strongly agree with Martin F. Norden when he states in his criticism ""You're a Surprise from Every Angle": Disability, Identity, and Otherness in The Hunchback of Notre Dame" that "the film seems to preach acceptance of society's Others but is in fact an embodiment of bogus "political correctness"". Though the happy ending is identifiably "Disney" and preaches the cliche of accepting others not for their external appearance but their inner character, this resolution does not sufficiently discredit the blatantly biased, critical portrayal of Quasimodo throughout most of the film. Yes, he gains acceptance by the community for his rescue of Esmeralda and protection of the cathedral, but the evidence throughout the film implies that this acceptance is conditional-- if he had truly been integrated into society, why does Esmeralda end up with Phoebus? The resolutions of most Disney films are distinctly characterized by heterosexual relationships, so it is all the more significant that Quasimodo ends up alone and partnerless. Thus, Disney's ultimate message does not equate disabled people with normal, functioning members of society but merely elevates them past the status of children. Personally, I believe that Disney made a mistake in attempting to adapt such a classic, dark tale into a child-friendly animated film. Not all works of literature are meant to be "Disney-fied". Though I do not believe that The Disney Company had ill intentions, the oversimplification that is so characteristic of Disney films (and understandably so, given the target audience) ultimately rendered this film offensive towards people with disabilities.