Batman/Dr. Wertham and CCA missinterpretations

From Pop-Cult Guides

Jump to: navigation, search
DC Universe characters: Heroes · Villains · Supporting characters | DC Universe locations · The Multiverse | DC Universe chronology
DC Comics titles | History | Imprints | Other Media | Personnel
Fictional biography: Contemporary · Golden Age · Silver Age | Abilities
Supporting characters | Enemies: Major · Minor · One timers · Henchmen · Mobsters · From other media | Locations
Bibliography | Publication history | Writers | Artist | CCA issues | Batman in other media

Certain trades are a lot more denindamg than others Ironworkers are in an extremely hard trade so are brick layersany of the rest are physically denindamg. Modern tools havemade most a lot easier than they were 40 or 50 years agoa lot of women are getting into construction in certain tradeswith the exception of the two I named and maybe also theboiler makers. The fact is working construction will keep youin shape and make you stronger than the average person.If you want to work construction I say go for it get in an apprenticeship and study and learn your trade well. There isnothing like being able to take your children some whereand to be able to say I helped build this. Template:See also

Psychologist Fredric Wertham's general assertion in his 1954 book Seduction of the Innocent is that readers imitated crimes committed in comic books, and that these works corrupt the morals of the youth. The most notorious charge in the book, however, is leveled at Batman, in a four-page polemic claiming that Batman and Robin are gay. "They live in sumptuous quarters, with beautiful flowers in large vases, and have a butler," Wertham wrote. "It is like a wish dream of two homosexuals living together." Wertham asserted, "the Batman type of story may stimulate children to fantasies."[1]

Image:Batbed.png
Bruce Wayne and Dick Grayson. Panel from Batman #84 (June, 1954), page 24.
Wertham became aware of this alternative reading through his conversations with fans of Batman in the fifties, who brought the comic book to his attention as an example of the idealization of a "homosexual lifestyle." Burt Ward has also remarked upon this interpretation, in his autobiography Boy Wonder: My Life in Tights noting the relationship could be interpreted as a sexual one, with the show's double entendres and lavish camp also possibly offering ambiguous interpretation.[2] This is despite the fact that the TV series was an attempt at a tamer version of Batman which tried to be less violent than the comic series — one of Wertham's arguments against comics.

The fact that the original Robin costume is made up of tiny green shorts and pixie boots also lead to some homosexual suggestions; however, Robin's costume was designed in the late 1930's, and he was meant to appeal to children as a colorful, fun character in contrast to the darker Batman. The current Robin dresses in a more modern costume that is not as skimpy as the original design.

Image:Batgirlbettebatmite.jpg
Bat-girl, from Batman #144 (December 1961). Story by Bill Finger, art by Sheldon Moldoff.

Despite the lack of any concrete cause-and-effect link between reading comics and "deviance", these suggestions raised a public outcry during the 1950s, eventually leading to the establishment of the Comics Code Authority. It has also been suggested by scholars that the characters of Batwoman (in 1956) and Bat-Girl (in 1961) were introduced in part to refute the allegation that Batman and Robin were gay, and the stories took on a campier, lighter feel.[3] Julius Schwartz has said that when he became editor of the series he was conscious of the inferences that could be drawn from Batman's living arrangements, and that because of this he and writer Bill Finger had Batman's butler Alfred killed and his role in the stories filled by Dick Grayson's Aunt Harriet, providing in effect a female chaperone at Wayne Manor.[4]

Commenting on homosexual interpretations of Batman, writer Alan Grant has stated, "The Batman I wrote for 13 years isn't gay. Denny O'Neil's Batman, Marv Wolfman's Batman, everybody's Batman all the way back to Bob Kane... none of them wrote him as a gay character. Only Joel Schumacher might have had an opposing view." Devin Grayson has commented, "It depends who you ask, doesn't it? Since you're asking me, I'll say no, I don't think he is ... I certainly understand the gay readings, though."[5]

Image:Batman panel - Robin what have I done to you.jpg
From Justice League of America #44, published in 1966. Story by Gardner Fox, pencils by Mike Sekowsky.

While changing morals have made the issue less important today, popular culture and a number of artists continue to play off the homosexual connotation of the Batman-Robin relationship against the wishes of the publisher.[6] One notable example occurred in 2000, when DC Comics refused to allow permission for the reprinting of four panels (from Batman issues 79, 92, 105 and 139) to illustrate Christopher York's paper All in the family: Homophobia and Batman Comics in the 1950s[7] Another happened in the summer of 2005, when painter Mark Chamberlain displayed a number of watercolors depicting both Batman and Robin in suggestive poses. DC threatened both artist and gallery with legal action if they did not cease selling the works and demanded all remaining art, as well as any profits derived from them.[8]

Most recently, George Clooney said in an interview with Barbara Walters that in Batman & Robin he played Batman as gay. "I was in a rubber suit and I had rubber nipples. I could have played Batman straight, but I made him gay." Barbara Walters after laughing then asked, "George, is Batman gay?" To which he responded, "No, but I made him gay." [9]

Batman, both as a superhero and in his identity as Bruce Wayne, has been portrayed throughout his years in comics and other media as having enjoyed a number of romantic relationships with women, and his encounters with his female adversaries have also occasionally used sexual tension to add to the narrative. Batman's sexuality is, as intended by most authors, predominantly heterosexual. Homosexual readings of the texts are the product of non-canonical reader interpretations.

Personal tools