A
Review of the Literature
The
1960’s hit comic series Spiderman, which was also made a movie by Sam Raimi in
2002 is an action adventure film in which the story flows like a peculiar love
story has been interpreted by Richard L. Kaplan. This analytical article
revolves around the love story of two adolescent which does not happy endings
unlike other films. The article is the interpretation of the societies of 1960s
in the States which is also same in the today’s period.
The
rhapsodies of love reveal the entanglements of romance in good and bad models
of man; the threats of hyper masculine men are acting out in the part of the
traditional Oedipal trauma offers a potent crowbar with which to pry open the
hearts of American culture and expose the romantic myths and nightmares laying
within. The ultimate pressure of being unusually charming and attractive for
being liked by the society and the superhero that has soft corner in a heart
eventually turns down a girl who thinks other responsibilities are yet to be
served rather than love is adequately illustrated by author in this article.
Analysis
of the story:
Author
Richard L. Kaplan claims Spiderman, Sam Raimi’s 2002 action adventure film love
story as a peculiar as different as what other critics quotes this film as a
love story in disguise. The most enduring love story with the fusion of the
fight series with the villains, Kaplan seems to like the story more. The super
hero, the super-villain and the charming heroine to accompany upon, the story
is somehow as usual as other stories. In my opinion, the article is not so
reveal upon the heroine’s character. As eyes sees what it wants to see, I felt
the character of Spider man’s girlfriend played by Mary Jane Watkins, is just as
an eye-candy to the readers. Despite her shifting from one man to another, the
author felt her movement with boys as “affections shifting from bad love object
to bad love object” unless he is ‘The White Knight-Superman’.
After
rescuing from a harassing gang of underclass ethnics, MJ kisses Spiderman and
then it created a sparkle of true love with each other. What I don’t agree with
the author here is that only by a single kiss, the author felt it a true love.
MJ’s bad lovers and Parker’s enemies are taken as the oedipal fantasies of the
child. Here, it is weird that Peter Parker and MJ are considered as children by
the author and I don’t feel any connection between the oedipal fantasies with
the villains and the bad lovers respectively because the teenagers are not the
child and they are both grown-ups who escape from home to find their fortunes
in Manhattan.
I
feel the whole article Spiderman in Love written by Richard L. Kaplan is
indifferent to MJ and thinks the ego-centric decision taken by Spiderman which
destroys the love between the budding relationships is good which has created a
chaos in the roles of gender. In a nutshell, the article provokes a detailed
description which creates vibes in the article.
Agree/disagree
I
agree with the entire author’s main point and his interpretation but somehow I
feel that ‘Oedipus formula’ and ‘the adolescent on steroids’. The sensational
interpretation of his article has a better description, enriched classification
of the points. However, the ‘Oedipus formula’ and the adolescent on steroids
was somehow out of the context in this story and article too. I don’t feel
Peter Parker and MJ are children anymore to think their enemies and bad lovers
as the Oedipus formulas.
In
this story, I rather felt the characters of Peter Parker and MJ has been
featured as the outgrown adolescent who knows how to handle the relationship
and escaping to the skyscrapers, fortunes in Manhattan. They are not child
anymore and the Oedipus factor is not related in this story. The villains and
the bad lovers are not supposed be killed for the sake of having a soft corner
for own mother. Killing and dumping the guys are not what exactly Oedipus
factors mean. This is not child fantasy anymore. If it has to be, every girl
who dumps a guy has to be in the verge of Oedipus factors. And every guy who
wants their opponent to be in control has to be in the verge of Oedipus
factors.
When
suddenly a guy whose muscle pumps up, loses his acne, voice deepens discovers a
power then also he is disguised by the people. The author seems to have a
feeling that the bulky muscles, tone abs and husky voices are supposed to rule
the world is untrue. The behavior of a typical person is what matters the most.
The male superiority is also weird in almost all the main points author
interprets about.
Important/
unimportant
This
article is important because I tend to get knowledge about the perception of
different kinds of people residing in the United States during 1960s. Their
attitude about man, their capability of controlling society, dreams to achieve
great future without parental support are the fascinating details I got from
the article. With the ever evolving of the culture in the decade, I felt, this
culture is still in the American’s mind. I also learnt from the article that
love has to be sacrificed eventually when it brings responsibility.
To
the standpoint, I got a vivid knowledge about the perception of the people
which believes male’s superiority as the utmost preference today. The person
has to charming and attractive at the same time to lead the world to survive in
the time of 1960s time in the States.
Reference:
Kaplan,
Richard L. (April 2011), The Journal of Popular Culture, Volume 44, issue 2, p.
291-313 ISSN: 0022-3840, DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-5931.2011.00833.x. Blackwell
Publishing Inc
No comments:
Post a Comment