Since the unexpected intersection of my life and the lives
of superheroes has been willed into being by Adam, I’ve been thinking about
superheros and their place in the American wetdream. One of the ways I go about
understanding something (which is a way I have of feeling superior to it) is to
find the root of it, the precursors, the historico-etymological unconsciousness
from which it was called forth. So I thought that maybe this was found in such proto-fascists
as Carlyle.
My advice is, if you think that Carlyle’s essay on Heroes in
history is the royal road to the birth of Superman, forget it. Don’t blow the
dust from that volume! I am a big fan of the 19th century essayists,
but Carlyle is simply too bogus. With respect! Coleridge, De Quincey, the whole
Romantic crewe were, like Carlyle, into German literature, but unlike him, they
didn’t transform it into dyspepsia and fascism. I remember reading Carlyle’s
history of the French Revolution and liking it, but the Hero book, which started
out as a series of lectures and was listened to, at so much per seat, by a
group that dwindled as it became apparent that Carlyle’s Scot’s accent was here
to stay, is not the background to Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, or any of the
great mutants that have now put the lock on our popular culture.
My search for the origins of the superhero cult made a
necessary stop at Jill Lepore’s book on Wonder Woman – which Lepore traced back
to the peculiar crossroads between utopian feminism and criminology, all staged
with Harvard in the background. Wonder Woman was, from the beginning, a super
hero like no other – not only because she was a woman (and got the usual comic
book sexism thrown at her. Jules Feiffer, in his book on the history of super
heroes, claims she is too flat chested. Wha???), but because her back story was
expressly mythological. She was not a laboratory accident, or a military
experiment, or a creature from another world. Lepore’s was an exemplary intellectual
history. B-b-but I was looking for a key to the entire mythology, rather like dotty,
repressed Causaban in Middlemarch, and it seems to me that there has to be more
– some horizon of possibility that gave superheroes such enormous importance in
American culture. My suspicion – or theory,
since my suspicions have a way of becoming theories overnight – is that the
super mutant ethos and fascination is tied into newspaper culture. A culture
that, in spite of the efforts of such as Barthes, is too little interpreted
from the lit crit aspect.
My theory, untested by historical research, is that the
superhero and his or her obsessions arise in close proximity to the racket of
the newspaper format. Newspapers jumble together, in columns that stand next to
each other but maintain a monad’s distance, war, crime, weddings, weather, politics
and everything else. It is as if news were always a traffic jam. In particular,
crime stands out. News media loves crime. So do readers. But with the love of
crime stories goes the fear of crime fact. It strikes me that the obsession of
superheroes with crime is one of the keys to the mythology. Carlyle’s heroes
don’t even bother with crime. They are concerned with founding society and
changing consciousness. They are saints, writers, and statesmen. They are
certainly not policemen. In Greek and Norse mythology, the heroes are involved
with sacred transgressions. They care about sacrifice, not about bank robbery.
Lepore’s exploration of the origins of Wonder Woman takes up
this theme. William Moulton Marston, her creator (or one of them. Lepore is
very clear about the collective input into this invention), was also one of the
inventors of the polygraph machine.
The standard history of superheroes usually begins in the
1930s, with Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman. The 30s, too, saw a crime wave
the like of which was not seen in the US until the 70s, the Great Depression
(which undermined rules about property crime by showing the criminal behavior
of the most propertied), and the rise of Fascism. All of which might have
something to do with the way that Superheroes were both obsessed with crime and
incredibly submissive to the powers that be. One might expect that a man of
steel from another planet would have some sympathy with the man of steel from
the Soviet Republic of Georgia, Stalin, but there’s no trace of revolutionary
in his actions or thoughts. The only revolutionaries are the arch villains, who
are still ultimately tied by the hip to the forces of order – they are weirdly
willing to destroy the social order to make money, the ideal representative of
the social order. There is some blip, some slippage in the thinking of the
villains, which may be why they don the clothes of carnival mutants and engage
in lumpen-revolutionary acts, out of some tabloid nightmare.
No comments:
Post a Comment