The Western, the Warlock and the Wertham
In 1954, the psychologist Fredric Wertham published Seduction of the Innocent, his infamous diatribe about the incipient dangers of allowing young children to read comic books.
Seduction of the Innocent has gone down in history as a reactionary screed that predicts doom and despair if we do not act to ban comic books immediately, or at least strip them of the insidious subtext that was so objectionable to the Fredric Werthams of the world.
The character of Batman was singled out by Dr. Wertham for especial outrage, mostly because (he felt) the character was dripping with gay messaging that would turn young boys into raging homosexuals. This is only one aspect of Dr. Wertham's book, but it's the one that tends to get the most attention in hindsight.
His warnings were taken very seriously, both by the general public and by the US government, and the comic book industry was ultimately regulated and sanitised, exactly the way he wanted. And then society went on to decriminalise homosexuality and legalise gay marriage, so I guess Dr. Wertham was completely wrong when he blamed all of it on Batman.
Wertham's feelings about Batman were... passionate, and his "explanation" of the homo-erotic subtext in Batman stories remains the most frequently quoted portion of his entire book. Just to prove my point, I'm going to quote it for you right now:
Sometimes Batman ends up in bed injured and young Robin is shown sitting next to him. At home they lead an idyllic life. They are Bruce Wayne and "Dick" Grayson. Bruce Wayne is described as a "socialite" and the official relationship is that Dick is Bruce's ward. They live in sumptuous quarters, with beautiful flowers in large vases, and have a butler, Alfred. Batman is sometimes shown in a dressing gown. As they sit by the fireplace the young boy sometimes worries about his partner: "Something's wrong with Bruce. He hasn't been himself these past few days." It is like a wish dream of two homosexuals living together. Sometimes they are shown on a couch, Bruce reclining and Dick sitting next to him, jacket off, collar open, and his hand on his friend's arm. Like the girls in other stories, Robin is sometimes held captive by the villains and Batman has to give in or "Robin gets killed."
[…]
The atmosphere is homosexual and anti-feminine. If the girl is good-looking she is undoubtedly the villainess. If she is after Bruce Wayne, she will have no chance against Dick. For instance, Bruce and Dick go out one evening in dinner clothes, dressed exactly alike. The attractive girl makes up to Bruce while in successive pictures young Dick looks on smiling, sure of Bruce. Violence is not lacking in these stories.
Wertham goes on to prove his interpretation of Batman and Robin by citing the testimony of teenage homosexuals who had been sent to him for "treatment".
One young homosexual during psychotherapy brought us a copy of Detective Comics, with a Batman story. He pointed out a picture of "The Home of Bruce and Dick" a house beautifully landscaped, warmly lighted and showing the devoted pair side by side, looking out a picture window. When he was eight this boy had realized from fantasies about comic book pictures that he was aroused by men. At the age of ten or eleven, "I found my liking, my sexual desires, in comic books. I think I put myself in the position of Robin. I did want to have relations with Batman. The only suggestion of homosexuality may be that they seem to be so close to each other. I remember the first time I came across the page mentioning the 'secret bat cave.' The thought of Batman and Robin living together and possibly having sex relations came to my mind. You can almost connect yourself with the people. I was put in the position of the rescued rather than the rescuer. I felt I'd like to be loved by someone like Batman or Superman."
What exactly is a "citadel of masculinity" after all, if not a great big man-camp? Or vice versa?
We will screen Warlock at 7.30 on Thursday, the 26th of September at the Victoria Park Baptist Church.
Seduction of the Innocent has gone down in history as a reactionary screed that predicts doom and despair if we do not act to ban comic books immediately, or at least strip them of the insidious subtext that was so objectionable to the Fredric Werthams of the world.
The character of Batman was singled out by Dr. Wertham for especial outrage, mostly because (he felt) the character was dripping with gay messaging that would turn young boys into raging homosexuals. This is only one aspect of Dr. Wertham's book, but it's the one that tends to get the most attention in hindsight.
His warnings were taken very seriously, both by the general public and by the US government, and the comic book industry was ultimately regulated and sanitised, exactly the way he wanted. And then society went on to decriminalise homosexuality and legalise gay marriage, so I guess Dr. Wertham was completely wrong when he blamed all of it on Batman.
Wertham's feelings about Batman were... passionate, and his "explanation" of the homo-erotic subtext in Batman stories remains the most frequently quoted portion of his entire book. Just to prove my point, I'm going to quote it for you right now:
Sometimes Batman ends up in bed injured and young Robin is shown sitting next to him. At home they lead an idyllic life. They are Bruce Wayne and "Dick" Grayson. Bruce Wayne is described as a "socialite" and the official relationship is that Dick is Bruce's ward. They live in sumptuous quarters, with beautiful flowers in large vases, and have a butler, Alfred. Batman is sometimes shown in a dressing gown. As they sit by the fireplace the young boy sometimes worries about his partner: "Something's wrong with Bruce. He hasn't been himself these past few days." It is like a wish dream of two homosexuals living together. Sometimes they are shown on a couch, Bruce reclining and Dick sitting next to him, jacket off, collar open, and his hand on his friend's arm. Like the girls in other stories, Robin is sometimes held captive by the villains and Batman has to give in or "Robin gets killed."
[…]
The atmosphere is homosexual and anti-feminine. If the girl is good-looking she is undoubtedly the villainess. If she is after Bruce Wayne, she will have no chance against Dick. For instance, Bruce and Dick go out one evening in dinner clothes, dressed exactly alike. The attractive girl makes up to Bruce while in successive pictures young Dick looks on smiling, sure of Bruce. Violence is not lacking in these stories.
Wertham goes on to prove his interpretation of Batman and Robin by citing the testimony of teenage homosexuals who had been sent to him for "treatment".
One young homosexual during psychotherapy brought us a copy of Detective Comics, with a Batman story. He pointed out a picture of "The Home of Bruce and Dick" a house beautifully landscaped, warmly lighted and showing the devoted pair side by side, looking out a picture window. When he was eight this boy had realized from fantasies about comic book pictures that he was aroused by men. At the age of ten or eleven, "I found my liking, my sexual desires, in comic books. I think I put myself in the position of Robin. I did want to have relations with Batman. The only suggestion of homosexuality may be that they seem to be so close to each other. I remember the first time I came across the page mentioning the 'secret bat cave.' The thought of Batman and Robin living together and possibly having sex relations came to my mind. You can almost connect yourself with the people. I was put in the position of the rescued rather than the rescuer. I felt I'd like to be loved by someone like Batman or Superman."
Wertham uses his young patient's account to reinforce his point, and to encourage responsible parents everywhere to set fire to their sons' Batman comics before a whole generation of American boys start swapping their baseball gloves for Judy Garland LPs. But Wertham actually had his reading of the situation exactly backward.
Batman wasn't turning kids gay. It was the other way round.
The British academic Andy Medhurst expressed it very succinctly in his 1991 essay about Wertham:
Batman wasn't turning kids gay. It was the other way round.
The British academic Andy Medhurst expressed it very succinctly in his 1991 essay about Wertham:
Denied even the remotest possibility of supportive images of homosexuality within the dominant heterosexual culture, gay people have had to fashion what we could out of the imageries of dominance, to snatch illicit meanings from the fabric of normality, to undertake a corrupt decoding for the purposes of satisfying marginalised desires. […] Wertham's patient evokes in me an admiration, that in a period of American history even more homophobic than most, there he was, raiding the citadels of masculinity, weaving fantasies of oppositional desire. What effect the dread Wertham had on him is hard to predict, but I profoundly hope he wasn't 'cured.'
While I share Mr. Medhurst's concern about the ultimate fate of Dr. Wertham's anonymous patient, I would also respectfully point out that popular culture of the 1950s was not quite as devoid of "images of homosexuality" as he suggests. Even the most unyielding "citadels of masculinity" of the era were vulnerable to the odd lavender throw-pillow of homoeroticism, or even the occasional chintz curtain of innuendo.
While I share Mr. Medhurst's concern about the ultimate fate of Dr. Wertham's anonymous patient, I would also respectfully point out that popular culture of the 1950s was not quite as devoid of "images of homosexuality" as he suggests. Even the most unyielding "citadels of masculinity" of the era were vulnerable to the odd lavender throw-pillow of homoeroticism, or even the occasional chintz curtain of innuendo.
Lovely curtains... they're actually a plot point.
What exactly is a "citadel of masculinity" after all, if not a great big man-camp? Or vice versa?
To Boldly Go Where No Western Has Gone Before
As a mainstream cinematic genre, the Hollywood Western is probably about as macho as they come, and Warlock positively drips with its fair share of testosterone.
It tells the story of the town of Warlock (nothing to do with Witchcraft) a small, unincorporated community that is being terrorised by a gang of increasingly out-of-control and sadistic cowboys. The law has been powerless to stop the violence, so the townsfolk take the controversial decision to hire their own private Marshal. The situation gets out of control very quickly.
It tells the story of the town of Warlock (nothing to do with Witchcraft) a small, unincorporated community that is being terrorised by a gang of increasingly out-of-control and sadistic cowboys. The law has been powerless to stop the violence, so the townsfolk take the controversial decision to hire their own private Marshal. The situation gets out of control very quickly.
There is a reason why I am including Warlock in a series entitled Genre Fluid.
The basic plot of Warlock may recall any number of classic "Western" tropes (it re-works many elements of the "O.K. Corral" story) but, as will become increasingly apparent as you watch it, the film isn't actually about that. There is another story, hiding behind the first story; one that reveals itself only gradually.
The basic plot of Warlock may recall any number of classic "Western" tropes (it re-works many elements of the "O.K. Corral" story) but, as will become increasingly apparent as you watch it, the film isn't actually about that. There is another story, hiding behind the first story; one that reveals itself only gradually.
Andy Medhurst talked about "undertaking a corrupt decoding for the purposes of satisfying marginalised desires" (I bet he says that to all the guys) but the "marginalised desires" in Warlock don't need to be decoded; they are right out in the open, for everyone to see.
The "Citadels of Masculinity" (and thank you, Andy Medhurst, for that singular metaphor!) have been lovingly redecorated with fresh curtains and some darling new furniture (that's not saucy innuendo, by the way; it's literally a plot point).
When Fredric Wertham's "patient" spoke about imagining a Batman/Robin private life he was engaging in what is now referred to as "Slash Fiction" (as in Kirk-slash-Spock; Holmes-slash-Watson etc).
Warlock is its own Slash Fiction. There is no need to read against the grain here, because the film does it for you.
Not all Westerns are about the same things.
I don't know whether Fredric Wertham's patient ever had a chance to see Warlock when it was released in 1959, but I'd like to imagine that he did see it. I think he would have enjoyed it.
Warlock is its own Slash Fiction. There is no need to read against the grain here, because the film does it for you.
Sorry... spoilers...
Not all Westerns are about the same things.
I don't know whether Fredric Wertham's patient ever had a chance to see Warlock when it was released in 1959, but I'd like to imagine that he did see it. I think he would have enjoyed it.
We will screen Warlock at 7.30 on Thursday, the 26th of September at the Victoria Park Baptist Church.
I'm SO unhappy that I can't attend this screening and talk! Your analysis is whip smart and and delightful. This isn't exactly pertinent, but while I was reading this, I thought of the scene in Birdcage (the 1996 American one) where Robin Williams is trying to teach Nathan Lane how to "walk like a man." After Lane performs his somewhat effeminate impression of John Wayne's walk, he asks Williams, "No good?" to which Williams replies, "It's perfect; I just never realized that John Wayne walked like that." (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=il81V3Pnl7g)
ReplyDeleteI taught Human Sexuality (university level) for 36 years. Our institution had what we called "Learning Communities" where two (or more) classes were taught together, combining curricula in innovative ways. Human Sexuality was quite sought after as a class to pair with. I got to teach several wonderful combinations like Ethics, Ancient History, and Literature. My favorite one was with Film. Gender was always my favorite subject and we had great fun selecting the films and creating writing assignments. So your Genre Fluid series is right up my boulevard. I'm so glad I discovered your blog, but terribly, terribly sad that I can't be there. But thanks for the entertaining and informative blogs! It's as close as I'll get, I'm afraid. 💛
(I took liberties with the heart because I'm old enough to be your mother. I know, because I saw some of her interviews. I swear I'm not stalking you; I was just curious about your work and ran across the interviews.😊 )
Your "Learning Communities" courses sound fantastic! I love the idea of combining the curricula in various ways; that would surely produce all sorts of unique perspectives on the subject matter.
DeleteI can only imagine the stories you must have from teaching Human Sexuality for so many years. Was there a dramatic shift in attitudes among the students over that time?
These are exactly the kinds of courses that I would love; I'm sorry we are so far apart, geographically! I daresay I would have been sitting in the front row of your presentations as well!
I agree, we'd have fun conversations over coffee! The students changed drastically over the 36 years in many ways. One wonderful change was the acceptance of GLBTQ folks. About 35 years ago, a young man said out loud that he thought "they all should be shot." And no one in the class pushed back in the least. It was so shocking and sad. A few years later, we were discussing gender and I was demonstrating the way I coached actors to use nonverbal gender behaviors. I put my index finger against my cheek and tilted my head toward the finger side - a very feminine gesture - and asked the class to do it. NONE of the young men would do it. They flat refused. So, in a fit of pique, I stormed that I would give an 'A' to any man who came dressed as a woman. Being grade whores, they were interested now and challenged me. We worked out the rules of the assignment. They had to wear skirts/dresses and panty hose and make-up and high heels. (I wanted to build some empathy.) Women could come dressed as men, but that's not much of a stretch, so they had to wear neckties (tight) and/or real "workman's" clothes, no makeup, no hairstyle, and a rolled up pair of socks in their underwear (at least a little empathy). I thought the men would come in some dreadful version of "Arsenic and Old Lace." But they all worked with women friends and were gorgeous! The very best thing was when a young man in his short skirt and double D stuffed bra (they all had giant "breasts" - Ha!) walked past one of his jock friends and bent down and kissed him on the cheek!!! We had a great debrief about how the clothes allowed them to escape their homophobia. We then decided to go, as a class, to the cafeteria and just go in and sit together and watch the other students. It was a smash hit and they learned so much. It became an activity we did every quarter. The staff and faculty begged me to tell them when we were going to do it so they could watch. There came a time when the assignment was no longer necessary, hallelujah!
DeleteThe other big change is that in the early days, students were embarrassed at first (I have ways to get them comfortable right quick). Most were unabashedly naive. In the last few years of my career, *many* of them were decidedly kinky! They used sophisticated sexual language and proudly discussed crazy shit they'd come across on the internet. But, they were no more really knowledgeable about their bodies or about having what I would consider a healthy sexual relationship. A shocking number didn't use protection. Most were afraid of love and intmacy, but comfortable having casual sex, one night stands and drunk sex. Nothing wrong with casual sex if they're honest and using good communication about it. But this was like drunken "frat boy" sex, verging on assault as the norm. The definition of "sexy" had become all "show us your boobs" and S&M fantasies - some horrid music video version. "Sexy" had become based on the male gaze and teenage boy fantasies. It made me very, very sad. In one way, I'm not surprised that more women are seeking relationships with other women. Women had become frightened of men because of the "education" they received on "date rape." I don't think anything has made me sadder. I don't want to demonize these kids. I met many, many wonderful young people doing a great job of consciously crafting their own ethics and desires and creating real joy and intimacy around sex.
Oh, hell, I've just gone on and on here. This is why we need to have coffee! I'm SO interested in hearing what you think and know about movies and sexuality and the evolution of sex over the generations! It's not many people I can have these kinds of conversations with. Thanks for showing interest in the class. Although, after my lengthy chronicle, you may have learned not to drop a penny in this machine! :-)