By M. Keith Booker. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger, December 2008. Cloth: ISBN 0-313-35774-9, $49.95. 232 pages.
Review by Tamar Gablinger, Humboldt Universität Insititut für Sozialwissenschaften, Germany
In his book, Red, White, and Spooked: The Supernatural In American Culture, M. Keith Booker provides the reader with a review of conspicuous (and less conspicuous) elements of the supernatural in contemporary American popular culture. Through this review, Booker hopes to demonstrate how “the evident fascination with the supernatural in American popular culture arises largely from an attempt to satisfy utopian longings that result from the lack of genuinely supernatural elements in day-to-day American life” (x). Booker, a professor of English at the University of Arkansas who specializes in Science Fiction, has already written several books that have added to our understanding of American culture and its visual representations. With Red, White, and Spooked, Booker has undertaken quite a task, first of all because of the prominence of the supernatural in so many contemporary (and historical) works of popular culture; and also because of the rigorous effort to link between these supernatural elements and his thesis.
Red, White, and Spooked certainly accomplishes those purposes. Booker has limited himself to representations of the supernatural in film and television from the early 1990s onward, such as Lost, Heroes, or Pushing Daisies, alongside more “veteran” examples, recent “role models” to the whole genre - Buffy the Vampire Slayer and The X-Files. He attempts to uncover the underlying link between takes of the supernatural and political and social agendas.
Despite this concentration in the contemporary, Booker does not neglect a much-needed review of the place of this current fascination with the supernatural in the wider context of the supernatural in popular culture altogether. Booker divided his work into three parts: a historical analysis of the “longing for adventure” in American culture; a discussion of the place of the supernatural heroes and anti-heroes in American popular culture; and an analysis of the link between belief in the apocalypse, the modern conspiracy narrative, and the supernatural. The first part of the book also mentions non-American depictions of the supernatural, namely the Harry Potter series and the Lord of the Rings books and films. Harry Potter's quintessential Britishness is contrasted with the classical American high-school tales, but unfortunately, Booker makes no reference to the popular “tweenie” Twilight series, which could serve as the perfect example for Booker's argument at this point. Booker, however, discusses in several passages of the book, the place of the high-school and teenage years in general in tales of the supernatural, from Buffy to the X-Men. Critical analysis indeed suggests (92) that corporations create works such as Buffy or Charmed to fill what seems like a spiritual void in contemporary teens' lives.
In such a wide academic work, a reader might always find some aspects less explored, and Booker's comprehensive study is not an exception. Booker, for example, neglects the flourishing religious popular culture and the representations of the aforementioned “secular” supernatural elements in it, especially the highly popular Left Behind series, which includes books for adults and teens, films, graphic novels, and even a video game depicting the apocalypse. Similarly, no reference is being made to the link between the supernatural in popular culture and the foundations of several American religious groups, most strikingly Scientology. The link between the “religious” and the “secular” supernatural might be the next realm that should be explored in a further study about the supernatural in American popular culture, especially given Booker's hypotheses about the role of the supernatural as a compensator for the lack of magic in a country awash with the rationalized religion that is the capitalist, Protestant ethic.
Nevertheless, Booker succeeds in demonstrating how the mythology of the supernatural relates to several important contemporary political and social questions, such as prejudices against homosexuals, free choice, exploitation of workers, environmental destruction, and the development of nuclear energy or weapons. Booker, however, is fully aware that “the corporate entities that produce popular culture are not likely to introduce products that are intentionally subversive” (175-76). Some of the works analyzed by Booker provide, nonetheless, the challenge to the prevailing system that could be used as entry points for critical discussion and change.
3 comments:
Just some work I previously completed and thought it would be interesting.
Representations of the supernatural discussion using a core text.
I will be studying A Midsummer Night’s Dream by William Shakespeare, Daemonologie by James 1 of England and Dream by Simon Forman.
In the time that these pieces were being wrote, the supernatural was a taboo subject and there were consequences for those who spoke of it or for those who were suspected part of it. There are many in themes in A Midsummer Night’s Dream but I will be focusing on the supernatural. The Athenian world is the reality of the play and the fairy world is the idealism of the play- this world is an escape from reality. Even though these worlds are different, Shakespeare merges them together with irony because as the love issue in the real world worsens, the characters escape into the woods- where the fairy world resides. This is why old texts are still relevant today because even though the main themes may seem far fetched, the underlying notions have relevance to today’s society or to our own personal lives. This thought is supported by Keith Thomas in Religion and the Decline of Magic, he states:
Today’s children are bought up to think of fairies as diminutive beings of a benevolent disposition, but the fairies in the Middle Ages were neither small or particularly kindly…
It is important to understand how perceptions of fairies have changed over the years and how different societies react to the idea of them. As children, Thomas is explaining that fairies are made out to be playful and happy creatures. We find evidence of this in the tradition of ‘tooth fairies’. When a child loses a tooth and feels pain and upset, the parents console this with the introduction of a fairy who takes the tooth in exchange for money. It is not fully clear where this tradition started but it would be interesting to know as Thomas states that the perception of fairies in the Middle Ages were negative. This notion is supported with Puck- Oberon’s jester- a mischievous character. He does not mean to harm the others but his tricks such as rubbing the love potion on Lysander’s eyes instead of Demetrius’ and turning Nick Bottom’s head into an ass deliberately make him seem perverse. Oberon also abuses his powers and plays a trick upon Titania as revenge for her not allowing him knight the Indian boy. It is ironic because the main reason why the magic was used was to make love un-requited but this backfires- Lysander see’s Helena first, falling in love with her- forgetting Hermia and the mess grows. We may question the sincerity of the love as they are being led to love by magic and not true feelings. What is also ironic is one of Lysander’s quotes: “The course of true love never did run smooth.” (I.i.132–134). This is ironic because Puck’s attempt at creating true love did not run smoothly either. We might argue if Puck really fit’s the description of stereotypical fairies as he states: “Captain of our fairy band, Helena is here at hand, And the youth, mistook by me, pleading for a lover's fee. Shall we their fond pageant see? Lord, what fools these mortals be!” (III.ii.115). He seems to be very aware of the surroundings and what is going on as he ridicules the others for not realising that magic is being used in many sectors of their lives. Most of the time, fairies are seen to be dim and unintelligent creatures but Puck shows an air of credibility.
continued..
The dream in the play frightens the characters as they are not able to fathom the visions. Hippolyta states: “Four days will quickly steep themselves in night, / Four nights will quickly dream away the time” (I.i.7–8). This supports evidence for the fact that dreams will play an important role. Shakespeare creates a lot of dramatic irony; the audience know that Nick Bottom’s head has been turned into an ass’ by Puck and that the only reason why Titania loves him is because of Oberon’s trick, but because Nick cannot understand this- he convinces himself they were nothing more than a dream:
I have had a most rare vision. I have had a dream past the wit of man to say what dream it was. Man is but an ass if he go about t’expound this dream. Methought I was—there is no man can tell what. Methought I was, and methought I had—but man is but a patched fool if he will offer to say what methought I had. The eye of man hath not heard, the ear of man hath not seen, man’s hand is not able to taste, his tongue to conceive, nor his heart to report what my dream was. I will get Peter Quince to write a ballad of this dream. It shall be called ‘Bottom’s Dream’, because it hath no bottom. (IV.i.199–209).
This is Shakespeare’s way of making the taboo light-hearted. An ass is a stereotypically stupid animal and this parallels with the fact that he believes someone has beautiful as Titania could fall in love with him- ironically making himself look like an ass. This is interesting because it may be Shakespeare’s belief that people cannot handle the truth and that they seek an escape- a possible explanation as for why the lovers ran away together into the woods. The repetition of ‘methought’ highlights his inner turmoil and inability to explain what he saw. Shakespeare makes dreams ironic as Nick believes this dream was never-ending so he calls it ‘Bottoms dream’. The style of the speech is almost a confused rambling which shows how the concept of dreams were so alien to an Elizabethan audience. Still to this day, dreams are confusing regardless of all the research that has been taken to try and explain this. Most people say there seems to be no concept of time in dreams which relates to ‘Bottoms dream’.
Moving Simon Forman’s Dream, it is a straightforward ‘dream’ but can be analysed using a number of techniques. An interesting and popular way to analyse would psychoanalysis by Sigmund Freud. Author Paul Brians said: “Freud argues that dreams are wish-fulfillments, and will ultimately argue that those wishes are the result of repressed or frustrated sexual desires. The anxiety surrounding these desires turns some dreams into nightmares.” A line in the text reads: “I dreamt that I was with the queen, and that she was a little elderly woman in a coarse white petticoat, all unready”. This quote is contradictory as the word ‘white‘ hints at virginity but ‘unready‘ could mean promiscuity. However, sometimes fairies and other supernatural are portrayed as white lights so this can relate to A Midsummer Night’s Dream. Another contradiction is: “…and then we went through a dirty lane. And she had a long white smock, very clean and fair, and it trailed in the dirt and her coat behind.” ‘White’ signifies cleanliness but this has been corrupted by the dirt. We can associate lanes and dirt to the woods in A Midsummer Night’s Dream
The last extract from Daemonologie is from one of its three books.
continued...
James writes:
These Witches on the other part, being enticed either for the desire of revenge, or of worldly riches, their whole practises are either to hurt men and their goods, or what they possess, for satisfying of their cruel minds in the former, or else.
Even though this text is about witches, we can relate it to A Midsummer Night’s Dream as it supports claims that the supernatural is the work of the devil.
It is not easy to have one set opinion on the supernatural as we have seen many different forms of it in each text. On one hand, it has been used to help people but has backfired- causing a negative affect. It is important to understand the history of the supernatural so we can see how opinions have changed and why the texts are composed as they are: Geoffrey Scarre from Witchcraft and Magic in 16th and 17th Century Europe writes:
When misfortune strikes us, we do not search our neighbourhood for the old woman who has bewitched us; nor do we believe that knowledge or love or power can be ours if we employ the correct rites, charms or incantations. The witch and the magician are absent from the stage of real life, and have been relegated firmly to the realm of fantastic fiction.
This is a more modern day approach to the supernatural. It is unlikely that we would accuse someone of witchcraft if something goes wrong but in the earlier periods this was the common scapegoat of misfortune. It has been imbedded in our minds that supernatural is related only to fiction but there are still some cults and groups that believe it is the workings of everyday activity.
But we may argue that this is not due to supernatural being the work of the Devil- that it is due to individual characteristics: Oberon and Puck may be innately mischievous people but their powers help them reach these levels. In terms of the authors who composed these texts, what they wrote would be controversial- people were not accustomed to reading such material. However, it was also revolutionary- giving the supernatural a new dimension and for those interested in it, allowing them to compose their own material. It is interesting to read how the taboo has altered over the centuries- there is a great contrast to the ideals in history to those we read today.
It is evident that Puck believes that life would be uncomplicated if magic were part of everyone’s life. It is Oberon who tells Puck of the potion- a magic juice from a flower that you smear upon the victim’s eye and upon awakening, they fall in love with the first person they see. To Puck, this is a means of untangling the mess the mortals have made, bringing about real love and banishing the un-requited, but it does not happen this way as the mess continues to tangle. This is also not relevant to modern day as love cannot be forced.
It would not be bad to say that Oberon is bad person as Thomas states: “The name ‘Oberon’ or ‘Oberion’ was borne by a demon who had been frequently conjured by fiftteenth- and sixteenth century wizards.” However, this does not mean to say that he is an Machiavellian character, it could be Shakespeare’s idea to allow the character’s names to have relevance to their personal qualities. It could also be a coincidence that the names correlate but we do not know the authorial intention so this is left to the reader to decide.
Post a Comment