On the subject of the guh I don't even know where this is going. I know nothing about gender studies, everything i've done is social science in one way or another, but not of this sort.
Alright, let's talk about the original superman: he was created by two Jews (siegel and shuster), on the eve of the Second world war, in '38. Superman's story,was supposedly intended to parallel aspects of the Golem of Prauge. This raises a number of questions regarding notions of impotence, testosterone driven strength, and the most puzzling of all, hubris. This is possibly a discussion that requires an entire course to properly capture, but it is easy to see how superman was able to catch on with incredible speed and popularity. However, just as the Golem of Hebrew tradition ultimately falls, with the close of WW2 we see a hiatus in superhero comics, with publishers reverting to teen humour such as that depicted in Archie comics. I wonder if this is perhaps an attempt to recover some notion of lost pubescence, but then it would also be important to examine those works' readership.
It would not be until the mid-1950s, in a period of increasing nuclear tensions and American intervention overseas that we would see the resurgence of superheroes onto the comics scene, even inserting themselves and performing on the very site of American intervention (For instance, Iron Man, the Punisher, and others have their start in Vietnam in addition to the evocation of SGT. Rock's WW2 legacy during America's late-50's re-militarization)
This also brings to mind the question of women in this militarized comics scene-- What precisely is the role of Super girl, or Wonder Woman? Cynthia Enloe, author of Maneuvers asserts that standing armies that operate for extended periods of time have always been dependent on women, and societies that mobilize themselves to an extent such as the military take many steps in the process of militarizing military dependents', and civilians' lives.
Just as an aside, when we speak of homosexual overtones (that seem to be all but canon when discussing Batman and Robin) one has to wonder about the sexual undertones of the inclusion of women into the comics scene. How are these relationships reflective of how our society militarizes women? Is the role a filial support role? perhaps reflective of the need for women to assume previously gender-specific jobs? or is it a sexual re-appropriation, a de facto prostitution? As Enloe puts it, are women (such as these fictional female superheroes) being maneuvered or empowered? or both?
However, given the changing face of comics, militarization, and masculinity, it seems that these subjects are never far apart, and should serve as a framework for further discussion, as I develop my research further.
1 comment:
Drew,
You're pointing out a lot of converging themes that are worth sorting out here. I think they point to three separate frameworks: the creators and their personal histories, agendas, questions about identity (social, sexual, gendered, national, ethnic, racial); the characters and what they represent; and the readership.
I think it's interesting that Superman is mined from the Jewish myth of the Golem, but also transformed into a figure of American truth and justice. In many ways, the Golem is simply a vessel for a new identity, a new being that is completely controlled by its creators intentions (both good and bad.) In that sense, the fact that Jewish-Americans during WWII invent Superman suggests a wealth of ideas about national identity, as well as what American masculinity might mean/look like if it's seen as a reflection of nationhood.
We can talk more about this when we discuss Captain America as well.
B
Post a Comment