Ira
Smolensky
ÒTruth,
justice, and the American wayÓ
A long time
ago, I had a friend whose oft-stated motto (and thoroughly sincere belief) was
that Òguilty pleasures are the best pleasures.Ó
While I
cannot concur with the statement as a general maxim, I do have a few guilty
pleasures that I would hate to give up.
One is
watching old Charlie Chan movies.
Another is
drinking cream soda, especially the old New York Seltzer kind that was ever so
subtly flavored.
Since New
York Seltzer is no longer in business, the frequency of my cream soda drinking
has gone way down.
And I have re-visited
all of the old Charlie Chan films except for the seriesÕ dying gasp entries
starring Roland Winters.
In order to
pick up the slack, I have been working my way through The Adventures of Superman TV series (1952-1958) starring the ill-fated George
Reeves. ReevesÕ story served as
the basis for the 2006 film Hollywoodland, which piqued my interest in the series.
I had
watched Superman only sporadically as a kid. Even
back then, I could tell that the program was made on a tiny budget with rapidly
assembled scripts. Yet, I kind of
liked the characters. After all,
what pseudo-journalist such as myself has not identified with Jimmy Olsen,
Clark Kent, and Lois Lane?
Upon
re-examining the show, I have actually been pleasantly surprised. True, the special effects are primitive
(some would say laughable), and the production values straight out of the
bargain basement, but there is a very nice chemistry among the actors, some
subtle humor, and, in the early black and white shows, an appealing noir-like
atmosphere.
The opening
credits of the show establish Superman as Òfaster than a speeding bullet, more
powerful than a locomotive, able to leap tall buildings at a single bound.Ó They also assured watchers that,
Òdisguised as mild-mannered reporter, Clark Kent,Ó Superman carried on a Òfight
for truth, justice, and the American way.Ó
The premise
that these last three items went together was apparently uncontroversial at the
time.
But, quite
interestingly, the notion of Òthe American wayÓ was left undefined in The
Adventures of Superman.
For
example, the show does not turn Superman loose against communism, capitalism,
or even racism for that matter.
Certainly,
if Wisconsin Senator Joe McCarthy ran Hollywood, Superman might have spent
numerous episodes rooting ÒredsÓ out of the State Department, quelling commy
insurgencies around the world, and unceremoniously heaving KGB henchmen into
outer space.
If, on the
other hand, Norman Thomas, avid American socialist, was script editor, Superman
might have used his great powers to eliminate poverty and bring about a more
equitable distribution of wealth.
If great
civil rights lawyer (and later Supreme Court Justice) Thurgood Marshall called
the shots, Superman might have brought about an immediate end to segregation
and forced the KKK to embrace a philosophy of Gandhian non-violence.
Instead,
the showÕs interpretation of Òthe American wayÓ was neither pronouncedly right
nor left-wing.
Of course,
this aversion to ideology was to be expected for a show seeking a broad
audience.
Then, too,
the showÕs credibility would have suffered if it took an ideological bent. If Superman truly wished to eliminate
communism, poverty, and/or racism, how could the show explain the fact that
such evils still existed, in abundance, in the world?
And, so,
back in the 1950Õs it seemed like a good idea for Òthe American wayÓ to be
different things to different people.
In real
life 2007, we may not have that luxury.
Right now,
President BushÕs interpretation of Òthe American wayÓ does not seem to be
taking the nation where it wants to go.
Nor does it seem to be the partner of truth and justice.
In the 2008
election, along with a president and congress, we will be selecting a vision of
Òthe American wayÓ to be utilized at home and abroad, one that must serve the
real needs and most elevated dreams of ordinary human beings.
5/17/07