Customer Reviews

Batman Unmasked: Analyzing a Cultural Icon

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Will Brooker's "Batman Unmasked" has its moments. Brooker does a great job of giving the character a solid publication background and discussing some of the key issues that have come up in the history of the Batman character. However, he seems to spend a disproportionate ammount of time trying to convince us all that Batman is gay, or, more accurately, that "gay readings" of Batman are not "wrong", or even uncommon.

Well, to be frank, of course they're not "wrong," as you can never be "wrong" in an interpretation of a character. I remember writing a paper in my freshman year comparing the characters of Hamlet, Iago, and Richard III, and concluding that Hamlet could be read as a villain. However, Brooker preemptively tries to pigeonhole everyone who argues against this point as "homophobic" and tries to essentially say that most of the gay subtext of the character in the 40s, 50s, and 60s was intentional. It's one thing to reinterpret a character, it's something completely different to make the assumption that the subtext is intentional.

Brooker spends little time talking about "The Dark Knight Returns," probably the most famous, well-loved, and groundbreaking Batman comic book of the last 25 years, and only mentions it as a counterpoint to the more campy interpretations and as an influence on Tim Burton's 1989 film.

Finally, Brooker spends way too much time quoting from Internet message boards. I guess that's fine for a Culture Studies book, but I think that time may have been better spent reading Carl Jung, Joseph Campbell, and Bruno Bettelheim and discussing how The Batman fits into the ideas of authors who have done similar works relating to mythology and fairy-tales.

This wasn't a bad book, but I think it could have been MUCH better.

Readers searching for a loving, fannish look at Batman would be happier with those books written by Les Daniels or Chip Kidd. Batman Unmasked contains no Batman art, no story reprints, not even a Batman image on the cover. Brooker intends instead to present the reader with a well-researched and documented work that reads rather like a Ph.D thesis. Oddly enough, Brooker devotes well over half the book to discussing what has become little more than a humorous footnote to most Batman fans: the idea, first presented by Frederic Wertham in Seduction of the Innocent, that Batman's relationship with Robin can be read in a homosexual context. As has always been the case, some readers will laugh at the examples provided; others may find offense. More interesting, however, are Brooker's assertions that secondary artists and writers, specifically Jerry Robinson and Gardner Fox, worked on Batman far earlier than previously thought, thus leaving us with the idea that Bob Kane contributed far less to the character's genesis than he has earned credit for. Ultimately, Batman Unmasked will be interesting only to those readers who know what to expect when they buy it.

The idea of analyzing Batman as a serious cultural icon may seem laughable - until one realizes that there is some sixty years of history to the character and his companions. Batman has been there through most of the 20th Century, so there's something to analyze.

This is not a pop culture book - this is an analysis of culture. Serious, insightful, footnote-heavy analysis. This is not for the casual comics fan - this is for people who love comics and their culture and want some insight into that culture and that history.

This book analyzes batman in "blocks" of time. From the creation, to the war years, to the 50's, the 60's, the 70's, and beyond. Examples of interpretations, misinterpretations, and historical impact are given, at times in incredible detail (such as panel-by-panel analysis of a comic issue).

Without giving anything away about the book, this analysis looks at how Batman came to be, what themes have endured, and how the times have (and haven't) affected him. Most interestingly, the "dark eras" of the comics Inquisition of the 50's and the controversial pop-interpretation of the 60's are examined in detail - and some startiling revelations and interpretations are made.

The problem with reviewing this book is that I can't do it justice and don't wish to spoil the readers. However, simply, if you care about comics in general or Batman in particular, and like to understand the deep issues of culture, buy it. Buy several - give them to friends. It's worth it.

This book is a good examination of Batman's impact on society, but more than that it takes a good look at the impact of all comics. The author addresses issues of Batman's creation and his creators, war, propaganda, camp, homosexuality/homophobia and more.

He's very knowledgable and it's an interesting read, but after finishing it, you can't help but feel like Brooker had an agenda.

He seems to strongly defend the two most embattled topics of the Dark Knight - the 1960s TV series, and the question of his sexuality. It's one thing to be objective and fair in reporting these issues, but Brooker easily spends more than half his time explaining why the 1960s series wasn't as bad as we collectively remember it, and why Batman could be gay.

More than that, not only does he suggest that it's possible that Batman is gay, he suggests it might add more dimension to the character by opening him up to more situations. He quotes message board posts (a questionable form of research) and attacks any poster as "homophobic" if they try to assert that Batman is not gay.

Booker can spend all day examining the fictional life of Bruce Wayne off the page/screen, but that doesn't change the fact that Bruce Wayne HAS NO LIFE off the page/screen. We can only take him on what we have seen released from official sources (ie: DC Comics and WB). He reads a lot into subtext, which is fun, but that doesn't always mean it's the intended reading. I can apply political, religious and feminist readings to FRANKENSTEIN, but that doesn't mean it was Shelley's intention.

Regardless, Brooker is very knowledgable and informed, but the time he spends defending the two most embarrasing moments of Batman's history leads one to question his entire thesis -- especially when you take into account Brooker's own sexuality.

You'll feel like he had an agenda to promote.

This is a rare thing - a scholarly study that you can't put down. It's beautifully written, enlightening and thoroughly researched all at once. I strongly recommend it to anyone with an interest in the Batman in particular or popular culture in particular. Superb.

This is a rare thing - a scholarly study that you can't put down. It's beautifully written, enlightening and thoroughly researched all at once. I strongly recommend it to anyone with an interest in the Batman in particular or popular culture in general. Superb.

I bought this not because I'm a Batman nut, but because the jacket implied it was going to be a well-written, well-researched history book of a sort, and I enjoy reading those. I didn't realise it would be quite such a good read as it is. Brooker is clearly in love with the subject, but he's also very thorough and is an amusing writer as well. Some of the chapter on Adam West and camp had me laughing out loud on the tube.

Yes it would have been nice to see a few more pictures, and yes it reads like a thesis at times (I suspect it probably was!), but if you want to read an intelligent, fun book that touches on some major issues in pop culture, this is a great place to start.

Batman unmasked is the quintisential exploration into the role of Batman as a cultural icon. It is a must read for those who have followed the 'caped crusader' in print, television and the cinema.

Being a huge Batman fan, I was very excited to read of this book's release in the 1/5/01 issue of ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY -- I was tremendously disappointed in it after buying it. The Batman photos included along with the EW review led me to believe that the book would be at least somewhat adaquately illustrated, which it is not. Practically the only photos in the book are of the author's diary entry about Batman written when he was seven years old, a newspaper clip telling of the author's Ph.D in Batman history, a photo of some Batman toys, and a magazine cover showing Chris O'Donnell as Robin! Batman is obviously a very visual character, and this pathetic selection of photos is worse than having no photos at all. I feel the photos relating to the author are particularly distasteful -- he seems determined to milk his 15 minutes of fame as a self-proclaimed "Batman Doctor" for all it is worth.

And the text of the book leaves much to be desired as well -- for example, he devotes a lot of text to a discussion of the 1943 serial BATMAN, and then does not even mention the 1949 serial BATMAN AND ROBIN. And the author seems to be somewhat fixated on the idea that Batman is gay, not a particularly appealing or original concept. To me, the book's uneven literary content and nonexistent visual content lead to the work not being worth a fraction of its cover price -- I'm baffled by the fact that EW reviewed it at all, let alone reviewed it favorably.

Batman fans, do yourself a favor -- instead of buying this book, buy a Batman graphic novel, a Batman T-shirt, or a cool Batman toy. Because when all is said and done, Batman is about escapist, adventurous fun, and this book is about a mediocre author with lots of publicity savvy getting way more attention than he deserves.