Changing Dress As a Display of Masculinity in the Superhero Genre
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Fashion Theory The Journal of Dress, Body and Culture ISSN: 1362-704X (Print) 1751-7419 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rfft20 Masque-ulinities: Changing Dress as a Display of Masculinity in the Superhero Genre Friedrich Weltzien To cite this article: Friedrich Weltzien (2005) Masque-ulinities: Changing Dress as a Display of Masculinity in the Superhero Genre, Fashion Theory, 9:2, 229-250, DOI: 10.2752/136270405778051374 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.2752/136270405778051374 Published online: 27 Apr 2015. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 550 Citing articles: 2 View citing articles Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rfft20 Masque-ulinities 229 Fashion Theory, Volume 9, Issue 2, pp. 229–250 Reprints available directly from the Publishers. Photocopying permitted by licence only. © 2005 Berg. Masque-ulinities: Changing Dress as a Display of Masculinity in the Friedrich Weltzien Superhero Genre Weltzien studied art history, Because of its use in differentiating between women and men, dress is an archaeology, and philosophy in important resource in defining gender as a social dimension. In what Freiburg, Vienna, Cologne, and Berlin. He received his PhD in follows, I do not want to examine which modes of dress signify masculin- 2001, for work on the philosophy ity specifically; rather, I would like to raise another question. Namely, to of the body and body concepts what extent is gender constructed by the act of changing dress? The in Europe after 1945. He currently serves as Research analysis will not focus on the costume itself but on the difference between Assistant in the Department of two alternative costumes and the circumstances under which the change Art History at the Free University is performed. To pursue this thesis I will make use of a topos of gender Berlin. His research projects 1 include autopoiesis in art, studies which defines masculinity as a masquerade. In this context, the aesthetics of production, comics, main intention is not so much to distinguish the deceiving mask from any and gender theory. weltzien@ kind of “real” or unmasked image, but to get hold of an analytical zedat.fu-berlin.de 230 Friedrich Weltzien instrument with which to study the very moment of change: the dynamic process of masking as it is signified by the variation of clothing. The popular genre of the superhero comic book presents a well-known example of the construction of masculinity through the use of different costumes. With the invention of the Superman story by Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster in 1938—a character that originated in fanzine sketches from as early as 1933—the change of costume (from the hero’s masked costume to casual wear and back) has been a crucial element in the superhero narrative. Hence, Superman, Batman, and Spider-Man are able, and must, change their dress continually. Considered in phenomenological terms, my aim in this article is to relate these superheroes to historical and theoretical models in which dress changes men, and thereby to dismantle the mechanics of gender construction of dress in the second half of the twentieth century. In Western popular culture, for example in novels, cinema, television and video clips, in comic books and caricature, even in advertisements, it seems that a change in clothing has been deemed more significant for female role models than for male ones.2 If we accept this as given, it is striking that a special type of macho masculinity—from Zorro to Ameri- can wrestling or the Mexican Lucha Libre—makes use of the mask as a form of butch embellishment. As a very special kind of dress the mask always provokes the wish to see behind it, to take it off and to discover something hidden. In this, the mask represents the general possibility of re-creating a person by a change of dress: fine feathers make fine birds. The mask shows dress, not as an expression of an underlying fixed identity, but inversely illustrates that it is the dress which builds up the image of a person. The topic of the masked hero is not an original comic-book invention. In Western literature it can be traced back at least to Greek antiquity. But the recent adaptations of superhero comics in mainstream Hollywood movies prove the ongoing topicality of this narrative scheme. During the last two decades, comic-book movies, and in particular films about superheroes, have undergone a renaissance. Films like Spider-Man Parts I and II, The Punisher, Daredevil, The Incredible Hulk, Judge Dredd, six Batman movies, X-Men, The Mask, and others are not cheap productions targeted only at teenage boys and fans, but they are special-effect films of a very advanced technical level that appeal to a wide audience. These movies are mainstream, earning billions of dollars worldwide. Consider- ing the huge and still growing audience for these films it is obvious to assume a connection with contemporary conceptions of masculinity—as an expression of abstract ideals or even as a prescriptive model for the young. Although in recent years the comic book market has shrunk, the success of superhero films highlight the issue of manhood that is conveyed by Superman and his comrades. The different media of comic-book and cinema are fundamentally distinct, yet it is appropriate to take a closer look at how dress constructs gender within the special genre of the superhero narrative. Masque-ulinities 231 Men of Steel and Extraterrestrial Textiles My basic premise is that the superhero story is concerned with the con- struction of a certain role model of manliness. Primarily invented and developed in the late 1930s and 1940s—as a kind of masculine pendant to the super-feminine Pinup girls—the image of Superman and other superheroes like Batman (who had his first appearance in Detective Comics #27, dated May 1939) or Captain America (first appeared March 1941), is historically parallel to the National Socialist neo-Nietzschean concept of the “Übermensch” (superman) in Europe. These superhero images may be compared to twentieth-century concepts of masculinity, as George L. Mosse has done (Mosse 1996). “Man of steel,” Superman’s nickname, translates to Russian as “Stalin,” which has become more familiar to us as the revolutionary nom de guerre of Joseph Djugashvili. Similarly, Hitler wanted German men to be as “hard as Krupp steel.” In both instances, a metamorphosis from flesh into non-human steel is stipulated. The historical survival of Superman as an identification figure, unlike that of his totalitarian contemporaries in Europe, might be grounded in the fact that he was always able to change back into the mediocre man of flesh and blood—albeit only by masking his superhuman steeliness. The comic-book hero was altered following World War II. According to the Comics Code, in the 1950s, it was forbidden to show uncensored acts of violence or sexual intercourse.3 The comic-book superhero became akin to an idealized boy scout, and as a subgenre of comic literature was most popular and successful in the USA as well as Europe. A host of new heroes were born in this time, such as Stan Lee’s Spider-Man in 1962. After the comeback of the “tough guy” incorporating elements of martial arts and action stories during the 1970s, the postmodern superhero of the 1990s is a doubt-ridden and broken figure. As seen in Frank Miller’s important Batman comic book The Dark Knight Returns (1986), the superhero is now aware of his morally and democratically insecure position. Through these variable (super-) masculinities—and regardless of different and sometimes inconsistent origin stories, with changing authors and different editions of the comic books—two aspects have always remained: the costume of the superhero, and the need for him to constantly change costumes. Towards the end of Quentin Tarantino’s film Kill Bill Volume II (2004), the character Bill, played by David Carradine, is talking to “The Bride,” played by Uma Thurman, about what he calls “the mythology of Super- man.” Bill teaches her that Superman is different from all other superheroes because of his costume. As he is an alien from Krypton, he brought along some extraterrestrial textiles out of which his costume was later made. While the other superheroes dress up like showmen at a carnival, Superman is the only one who is, in fact, himself when he wears his masquerade—and is incognito when he plays his other self, Clark Kent. His dress is not a costume, says Bill, because he is “born as Superman.” 232 Friedrich Weltzien I want to argue that Bill’s theory of superhero mythology is incorrect. In examining the performance of masculinity in the superhero genre through the changing of dress I will refer mainly to Superman, Batman, and Spider-Man. Superman—as well as the two other superheroes—seems to be busy changing his clothing all the time. Like his human colleagues, he needs two alternative outfits for the construction and the performance of masculinity. In that regard, he is no exception. The question is, how does this mechanism of gender performance work? Superheroes at Home The three stars of the genre are all characterized by a split personality. All three of them have a private life completely disconnected from their public heroic acts. It is important to note that the civilian identity of the hero is never acknowledged by the other players in the narrative.4 In his everyday life, Superman is Clark Kent, an unexceptional journalist and one who is demonstratively clumsy. The civilian alter ego of Spider-Man is a teenage high school nerd called Peter Parker.