Superheroes vigilantism.pdf

17
67 EJAC 34 (1) pp. 67–82 Intellect Limited 2015 European Journal of American Culture Volume 34 Number 1 © 2015 Intellect Ltd Article. English language. doi: 10.1386/ejac.34.1.67_1 Keywords superhero vigilante brand identity management postmodern marketing power play culture jamming Katherine Marazi Aristotle University of Thessaloniki superhero or vigilante? a matter of perspective and brand management abstract Vigilantism is a recurring theme in superhero narratives where, objectively speak- ing, all superheroes are vigilantes. Nevertheless, the fictional nature of superheroes allows one to contemplate the ideological grey area and connotations of vigilante. This article will focus on three specific ‘human’ superheroes who display a strong brand identity in order to examine the theme of vigilantism in connection with brand identity and brand management so as to display the oscillating power strug- gle between individual and the collective, between the private corporate sector and government power. Drawing on the position of power from which one speaks or is prompted to speak, as advocated by Michel Foucault, as well as the practices of brand management and postmodern marketing as advocated by Adam Arvidsson, this article views vigilantism as occupying an ideological grey area due to the brand presence of the superheroes, thus displaying a convoluted relationship between a brand governing authority and a government authority. The question at hand is whether the character wants to be perceived as a vigilante due to a context he has set, or is deemed as such, because a different authority cannot infiltrate said context so as to control and conform him to the opposite effect.

Transcript of Superheroes vigilantism.pdf

  • 67

    EJAC 34 (1) pp. 6782 Intellect Limited 2015

    European Journal of American Culture Volume 34 Number 1

    2015 Intellect Ltd Article. English language. doi: 10.1386/ejac.34.1.67_1

    Keywordssuperherovigilantebrand identity

    managementpostmodern marketingpower playculture jamming

    Katherine MaraziAristotle University of Thessaloniki

    superhero or vigilante? a matter of perspective and brand management

    abstractVigilantism is a recurring theme in superhero narratives where, objectively speak-ing, all superheroes are vigilantes. Nevertheless, the fictional nature of superheroes allows one to contemplate the ideological grey area and connotations of vigilante. This article will focus on three specific human superheroes who display a strong brand identity in order to examine the theme of vigilantism in connection with brand identity and brand management so as to display the oscillating power strug-gle between individual and the collective, between the private corporate sector and government power. Drawing on the position of power from which one speaks or is prompted to speak, as advocated by Michel Foucault, as well as the practices of brand management and postmodern marketing as advocated by Adam Arvidsson, this article views vigilantism as occupying an ideological grey area due to the brand presence of the superheroes, thus displaying a convoluted relationship between a brand governing authority and a government authority. The question at hand is whether the character wants to be perceived as a vigilante due to a context he has set, or is deemed as such, because a different authority cannot infiltrate said context so as to control and conform him to the opposite effect.

    EJAC_34.1_Marazi_67-82.indd 67 4/15/15 10:33:48 AM

  • Katherine Marazi

    68

    Vigilantism is an occasional theme in the superhero universe but appears to be more prominent in the case of superheroes such as Batman, Green Arrow and Iron Man notably due to their more human nature. Unlike characters such as Superman, Thor, the Hulk and Spiderman whose powers are either part of their nature, or have been acquired through magic or science, Batman, Green Arrow and Iron Man, have acquired superiority by pushing their physicality and/or intelligence to extreme limits. More importantly, the vast financial support network, which they have at their disposal, grants them a distinguished posi-tion in fictional society as opposed to other superheroes. Thus, Bruce Wayne, Oliver Queen and Tony Stark are all human characters within the superhero sphere; however, a strong, common feature among the three is that they are all businessmen displaying a prominent brand presence as Wayne Enterprises, Queen Consolidated and Stark Industries, respectively. Brooker (2012: 79) has insightfully deemed Batman a range brand both in our world but also in his; the W that marks Wayne Tower and the Bat logo signal the brand presence of the characters dual identity in the business world and the crime fighting one. Tony Stark/Iron Man could be considered the Marvel Universe range brand equivalent to DCs Batman. As a result, by not displaying actual superpowers, vigilantism becomes a prominent theme as the fictional public is constantly questioning the right of these human characters to take matters into their own hands. What is more, for viewing audiences who are aware of the characters dual identity, vigilantism takes on a different perspective by not necessarily questioning the motives but the right of these characters to take advantage of their attributes and abilities. Consequently, the human-ness of these characters in connection with their corporate brand presence makes them ripe for the examination of the vigilante theme, which resonates more politically due to the fact that as humans they can ultimately conform to, or be controlled by, an overarching governmen-tal authority who seeks to maintain a status quo. The intriguing factor, however, is the oscillating power play between the governing authority of the brand and the government authority where each side occupies differing places on a spec-trum, thus affecting how the character is perceived. Whether the dual identity is secret or not also plays a vital role. The issue regarding the power play becomes one of access and control. As Iron Man 2 (Favreau, 2010) demonstrates, the US government cannot control Iron Man without controlling Tony Stark. In the case of Batman, as seen in Christopher Nolans films, or the television series Arrow (2012), where identities are both secret, the government cannot begin to exact control, or power of authority, unless the brands context reveals a point of access. More importantly, the relationship between Batman and the Joker in Christopher Nolans The Dark Knight (2008) positions the Joker, albeit as a symbol of chaos and terror, but also as a figure who manages to enter and question the Batmans authority in the context set by the Batman brand by taking on an anti-branding logic and culture jamming stance. By taking into account what Michel Foucault advocated in his The History of Sexuality regard-ing the position of power from which one speaks, or is prompted to speak (1979 cited in Brooker 2012: 89), this article argues that the theme of vigilant-ism occupies an ideological grey area due to the brand presence of characters that displays a brand governing authority within a government authority where the question at hand is whether the character and the authority behind the character - wants to be perceived as a vigilante due to a context he has set, or is deemed as such because a different authority cannot infiltrate said context so as to control and conform him to the opposite effect. Is it a question of what a vigilante actually is or who deems him as such?

    EJAC_34.1_Marazi_67-82.indd 68 4/15/15 10:33:48 AM

  • Superhero or vigilante? A matter of perspective

    69

    1. According to the Oxford Dictionaries Language Matters a vigilante is a member of a self-appointed group of citizens who undertake law enforcement in their community without legal authority, typically because the legal agencies are thought to be inadequate (2014). The Cambridge Dictionaries Online defines a vigilante as

    a person who tries in an unofficial way to prevent crime, or to catch and punish someone who has committed a crime, especially because they do not think that official organizations, such as the police, are controlling crime effectively. Vigilantes usually join together to form groups.

    (2014)

    Finally, the Merriam-Webster Online: Dictionary and Thesaurus states that a vigilante is a person who is not a police officer but who tries to catch and punish criminals; is a member of a volunteer committee organized to suppress and punish crime summarily (as when the processes of law are viewed as inadequate); broadly: a self-appointed doer of justice (2014, original emphasis).

    what is a vigilante and what is a superhero?Vigilantism is an ambivalent term when viewed through the fictional prism because it is ultimately detached from reality. Essentially, a vigilante is an individual, who may join a group displaying similar logic, who takes the law into his or her own hands without permission from legal or governmen-tal authority, because that authority is allegedly inadequate, thus prompt-ing the individual, or group, to fight, prevent and punish crime, ultimately representing an alternate, ambiguous form of justice.1 The initial Spanish origins (Merriam-Webster Online: Dictionary and Thesaurus 2014) of the word, however, connote that vigilante can also come to mean watchman, or guardian, thus offering a different, possibly positive, dimension of mean-ing and value, particularly to fictional super/hero characters such as Batman. Essentially, vigilantes are outcasts of society as they do not act in accord-ance with government state laws in spite of their logic and motives occa-sionally being subjectively understood and viewed as acceptable by citizens who may identify with their reasons of action. This identification apparently stems from emotions triggered by similar situations citizens may have expe-rienced and, moreover, may be amplified if said citizens are not satisfied with the legal actions of the system in question. When considering the theme of vigilantism, one ponders on what is justice, as well as what is right, what is wrong and what is the best course of action. More importantly, is there a middle ground between the individual and the collective logic with regard to the aforementioned issues? Hero mythology and superheroes in particu-lar, effectively surface these queries in relation to society and the status quo. According to Angela Ndalianis, [h]eroes and superheroes have never oper-ated in a vacuum (2007: 3); instead, their actions have a fundamental link to the welfare of the society from which they originate. As a result, for consumer audiences, superheroes in most cases are perceived as the good guys, who can distinguish between right and wrong, and even though they take matters into their own hands, are not deemed vigilantes as such but watchful, protec-tive guardians.

    Superheroes are considered a continuation and extension of the hero myth in modern-day culture and similarly emanate, according to John Girling (1993 cited in Ndalianis 2007: 4), the inspirational character of myths evident in turbulent times that not only come to provide meaning to identity but also call into question the reality of powerful, impersonal forces at work in society. The super/hero is a concrete manifestation of an abstract concept that speaks of the struggle of civilization to survive and maintain order in a world that threatens to be overcome with chaos (Ndalianis 2007: 30). Hence, as Richard Reynolds (1992: 77) states, the super/heros mission is to preserve society not to re-invent it. Geoff Klock (2006: 43) stresses the fact that Frank Miller in his work aimed at highlighting the fact that at least theoretically, each superhero is fighting for an overall change in society, even if in each individual issue the hero is usually reactionary in maintaining the status quo. What this entails is that super/heroes are not actively changing the status quo, but they offer a respective context via which to examine it, question it, and reach meaningful conclusions or observations. This has become evident in the cases of revisionary superhero stories, such as Alan Moores Watchmen (1986, DC Comics), which effectively comes to question the motives of the char-acters as well as raising the question to whom are they accountable. While Danny Fingeroth (2006: 17) argues that the super/hero comes to represent

    EJAC_34.1_Marazi_67-82.indd 69 4/15/15 10:33:48 AM

  • Katherine Marazi

    70

    2. AccordingtoSmith[t]hesecretidentityalsoembodiestheAmericanimmigrantexperienceasassimilation,inwhichthealienOthermustputonamainstreamcostumeinordertopasswithinsociety,amasqueradethatisalwaysinjeopardyofbeingexposed(2009:12627).

    values of the society that produces him and by extension appears to always know what the right thing is, Reynolds informs that:

    Superheroes are by and large not upholders of the letter of the law; they are not law enforcement agents employed by the state. The set of values they traditionally defend is summed up by the Superman tag of Truth, Justice and the America Way. Sometimes the last term has been interpreted in a narrowly nationalistic way but far more often has stood for the ideals enshrined in the US Constitution.

    (1992: 74)

    Hence, super/heroes in the real world would constitute vigilantes resonat-ing Robert Rays (1985) dichotomy of the official hero [who] works entirely within the system and the outlaw hero who may overtly work for the insti-tution, but [who has] lost faith in the institutional order, working outside the system according to [his/her] own individual set of rules (1985 cited in Smith 2009: 134). As a result, by viewing super/heroes as metaphors, or symbols, one can examine, re-evaluate and question the system, the status quo, as well as notions such as justice and the meaning of vigilantism. For superheroes, this is achievable through the exhibition of particular attributes, and for the case studies in question the rules are governed by brand identity logic.

    The two main attributes which render super/heroes as vigilantes by simul-taneously provoking audience engagement, possible identification with but also detachment from said characters are their dual/secret identity and their superpowers. A masked, or hidden identity, is essentially employed by those who aim to engage in illegal activities. Superheroes, on the other hand, create a secret identity for purposes of anonymity. As a result, the only way to distin-guish hero from villain, or criminal, is to examine the motives. According to Fingeroth (2006: 48), anonymity can also serve those who engage in acts of political, or social, courage who would otherwise be severely punished. In the case of Spiderman, anonymity is employed so as to protect family and loved ones. In addition, a mask can invoke terror, or mystery, thus complicating the motives behind ones actions, or attempting to conceal said motives as in the case of philanthropists (Fingeroth 2006: 48). Batman and Arrow fall into this category. Wayne and Queen want to be seen as someone or something completely different from their alter egos. In The Dark Knight (2008) during a conversation with D. A. Harvey Dent, Wayne actually questions the right and credibility of the Batman, thus planting in the minds of those around him his distinct position towards the character. Finally, anonymity grants cour-age that allows one to act, or speak, without fear of repercussions (Fingeroth 2006: 48). The secret identity in combination with anonymity provokes audi-ence identification because it signals the struggle faced in maintaining equi-librium between whom one truly is and who one is expected, or even wishes to be in various contexts. Ultimately, it becomes a matter of what identity is projected, in what context and for which reasons, hence the idea of wearing a mask and becoming someone else is alluring and cause for identification, thus ensuring a positive disposition towards superheroes. This automati-cally leads to the notion of dual identity which as Gary Engle (1992 cited in Fingeroth 2006: 5354) explains is apparent in American society due to the immigrant experience2 which can be applied to superheroes as well, the most obvious being Superman/Clark Kent. What the dual identity entails is the act of assimilation in the respective society in order to become part of that society,

    EJAC_34.1_Marazi_67-82.indd 70 4/17/15 7:56:14 PM

  • Superhero or vigilante? A matter of perspective

    71

    thus acting as another aspect that allows the audience to identify with super-heroes. Again, for cases such as Superman this indicates the need to infiltrate and be accepted by society, whereas Wayne, Queen and Stark are already part of that society. Bruce Wayne and Oliver Queen both exhibit dual, albeit secret, identities which allow them to, on the one hand, as Wayne and Queen, belong to and act within the system, but on the other hand, grant them a foothold to the system which they oppose both at a corporate and government level when taking on their secret personae. By keeping Batman and Arrow a secret, they offer no access point via which the system can conform or control them, which ultimately leads to them being considered vigilantes by the fictional government and public. Iron Mans case appears to be unique because not only does Tony Stark reveal his identity in the first Iron Man (Favreau, 2008) film, he also divulges his intention in Iron Man 2 (2010), which is to privatize world peace. On the one hand, by revealing his identity Tony Stark grants the government his point of access which the US government seeks to attain and control, but at the same time raises the question of whether governmental authorities should, or even can, make him conform to their agenda which is to hand over the Iron Man technology, or if that technology ought to remain in the hands of the particular individual. The aspect of governmental control features more prominently for these particular characters when one takes into consideration the second aspect that deems these characters superheroes, or possibly vigilantes, namely, their superpowers.

    Powers, whether physical or intellectual, accumulated via magic or science, as in the case of Thor and Superman which are simply part of the characters nature, are the attributes that enable one to become a superhero. They also call into question the actions and motives of the individual who has such power at his or her disposal and more importantly the right to take advantage of that power by taking matters into his or her own hands. Bruce Wayne, Tony Stark and Oliver Queen, however, actually display no powers in the fantastic sense other than the human capabilities, which they have pushed to extreme limits thanks to their corporate and monetary support, which also grants them a highly prominent brand presence. Hence, the main reason superheroes may be deemed as vigilantes by governmental and law authorities is because they display certain powers that said authority may not, or cannot, conform and control, thus allowing such characters to pose as a threat to the status quo. This is even more prominent when superheroes display no actual super powers. Superhero powers, in contrast to the dual or secret identity, according to Robert M. Peaslee (2007: 38), are the attributes which do not allow one to identify with but actually distance audiences from these otherworldly charac-ters and act as the springboard from which one begins to question between the self and the whole, between desire and responsibility, between chaos and order. For the case studies in question, the fact that their powers are a result of monetary and corporate holdings may even be viewed as provoca-tive. Nevertheless, superhero characters become attractive because they are both Superman and Everyman, alter ego and superego (Peaslee 2007: 37). Wayne, Queen and Starks superiority, however, is not entirely unattainable which makes them more susceptible to the vigilante theme. The powers that Batman, Arrow and Iron Man display are anchored in their corporate presence, which is why they would qualify more as actual vigilantes in our world. This, as Peaslee (2007: 37) argues, has much to tell the viewer about the value and legitimacy of the institutions in which such power is situated. Peaslee (1971 cited in 2007: 38), views superheroes in juxtaposition with E. P. Thompsons

    EJAC_34.1_Marazi_67-82.indd 71 4/15/15 10:33:49 AM

  • Katherine Marazi

    72

    3. UmbertoEco(1972)inhisThemythofSuperman,commentedthattheprevailingviewofSuperman(andsuperheroesgenerally)asmythicalsaviorswas,bywayofmyopia,inerror;instead,Ecopointedout,analystsshouldbeattunedtotheparticularlyAmericanqualitiesofSuperman,whoeschewsfightinginjusticeonthemacroorstructurallevelandpreferstowagesmallerbattlesofimmediateandpalpablesignificance.Theeffectofthisdecision,accordingtoEco,isanimplicitacceptanceanddefenseontheherospartofthetenetsofcapitalismandbureaucracy,suchaspropertyownership,legality,anddueprocess.Insum,Supermanisideology(1972citedinPeaslee2007:37).

    concept of moral economy, and confirms the goodness that superheroes display and their intent to do the right thing when the governmental authority appears incapable or unwilling to do so. This in a sense justifies their pres-ence both for the fictional public but also for the viewing audience. If any audience identification is displayed towards the heros powers then it takes place in a hypothetical context whereby if one had said powers how and for what reasons would one use them. However, Peaslee (2007: 38) also suggests that bureaucracy also be considered so as to determine the context of action, which as this article will argue is more prominent due to their brand presence. Essentially, superheroes whether deemed vigilantes or not evoke a corre-spondent implicit good-ness, a common-sense approach to doing the right thing that often operates outside the acceptable parameters of bureaucratic authority (Peaslee 2007: 38). Max Weber, on the other hand, explains that society as a human construct in connection with the technical and economic conditions of machine production that determine and govern our lives result in an iron cage of constraint for all individuals belonging to such a mecha-nism (1958 cited in Peaslee 2007: 38). What is more,

    bureaucracy in full flower comes to act in opposition to the very democ-racy responsible for its creation [and] [s]ince superheroes do not reject bureaucracy outright but exist to varying degrees within it, the dialecti-cal nature of the human relationship with law and propriety are vividly expressed in their activities.

    (1958 cited in Peaslee 2007: 38)

    Thus, having skills, abilities or the means to do good becomes a question of power. Bruce Wayne, Oliver Queen, Tony Stark are not only businessmen within their fictional realm, but the existence of their enterprises stems from their acceptance of the democracy and bureaucracy of their fictional world. Peaslee (2007: 3738), moreover, in contradiction with Eco (1972) who views superheroes, particularly Superman,3 as ideology, suggests viewing superhe-roes as representing a gap in ideology, which is also reminiscent of Michel Foucaults (1972) notion of discontinuity. Superheroes, in order to be current and relevant, need to accommodate themselves to specific eras and historic-cultural contexts (Ndalianis 2007: 34). Hence, one cannot strictly speak of a linear, continuous, unruptured metaphor or symbol of a specific ideology. As Foucault informs,

    [b]eneath the great continuities of thought, beneath the solid, homo-geneous manifestations of a single mind or of a collective mentality, beneath the stubborn development of a science striving to exist to reach completion at the very outset, beneath the persistence of a particular genre, form, discipline, or theoretical activity, one is now trying to detect the incidence of interruptions.

    (1972: 4)

    Consequently, considering superheroes as metaphors of ideology would offer continuity in relation to examining notions such as power, authority and justice, but viewing them as gaps, or seams, would deem them as a tool for deciphering the discontinuity in relation to their ideological meanings. By focusing on superheroes whose powers are based in their brand pres-ence, this article will display the complexity revolving around the notion of

    EJAC_34.1_Marazi_67-82.indd 72 4/15/15 10:43:23 AM

  • Superhero or vigilante? A matter of perspective

    73

    vigilantism but also delve into the context that seeks to impose this notion and the meanings it assigns.

    The componenTs of brand idenTiTy and The issue of power playViewing Bruce Wayne, Oliver Queen and Tony Stark through the prism of brand identity will shed light on the collaborating components of the respec-tive brands and, moreover, will display the power play resonating within the brand as well as its relation with external authority or governing figures. David A. Aacker (1996: 6869) informs that the brand identity structure consists of a core and extended identity. More specifically, the core identity the central, timeless essence of the brand is most likely to remain constant as the brand travels to new markets and products. The core essentially resonates the nature and logic of all superheroes and can be viewed as a common aspect. What allows one to differentiate between superheroes is the extended identity. The extended identity includes brand identity elements, organized into cohesive and meaningful groupings that provide texture and completeness (Aacker 1996: 6869). The extended identity consists of the brand as a product, an organization, a person and a symbol. What this entails is a myriad of superhero products in the form of comic books, graphic novels, films, television series, video games and merchandise. It also points to the myriad different superhe-roes and their distinctive symbolic meanings. Most importantly, the notion of organization, which is akin to a system of logic, rules and ideologies, is the aspect that displays and ensures elements of power play. What is important to consider is that, despite the overlapping of brand identities and by exten-sion the overlapping and coexistence of brand organizations, each organiza-tion respectfully seeks to define its borders of action and influence, ultimately resulting in a postmodern, and even metafictional, organization within an organization where the question of borders, power and influence immediately comes into play. The entertainment industry is initially, and essentially, an industry that caters to audience consumers by providing content, tactile and service commodities. Thus, DC and Marvel are organizations that mainly deal in superhero entertainment but are also subject to their respective governing organizations, Warner Bros. and Disney. By extension, both Warner Bros. and Disney reside within American society and abide by the business, market-ing and patent laws issued by the US government. Both DC and Marvel character brands are subject to their overarching organizations, namely, DC Comics and Marvel Entertainment. Marvels superheroes actually display this type of relationship within their fictional universe, where specific superheroes are subject to the S.H.I.E.L.D. organization, which in turn is subject to the fictional manifestation of the US government. This relationship in fact appears to be the focal point in the second season of Joss Whedons television series Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. (2013). A similar logic of an organization can also be viewed within the Avengers team also subject to S.H.I.E.L.D. the Justice League, C. Xaviers X-men and Magnetos Brotherhood. At the level of indi-vidual superhero characters, this becomes even more apparent when viewing Batman, Arrow and Iron Man, whose alter egos display a strong brand pres-ence within the fictional universe.

    The nature and structure of brand identity in the fictional narrative of the respective case studies not only indicates the relation between the brands components but can also be seen in connection with the authority figure of

    EJAC_34.1_Marazi_67-82.indd 73 4/22/15 8:48:03 AM

  • Katherine Marazi

    74

    government in order to evidence the workings of power play. The core of the brands in question is the moniker of the family names, Wayne, Queen and Stark. These brands preside in a fictional US society and are subject to the laws and regulations of the overarching fictional US government. Essentially, the power play becomes one of government against private corporate power. The figure of person with regard to the extended identity is the superhero character in question while the actual corporations constitute the organization aspect of the brand complete with a board of directors. What this entails is the questionable and oscillating position of power of Wayne, Queen and Stark within the organization. This relation appears more complex when consid-ering the alter egos of these characters are extended identities of Wayne, Queen and Stark but also products of the corporations. Tony Stark and Stark Industries are subject to the fictional US government, while his alter ego, Iron Man, is subject to Stark and Stark Industries. Hence, in order for the US government to control and use Iron Man for its national defense agenda, it initially needs to assimilate and control Tony Stark, who as the film displays, goes against the government in favour of his industrious brand logic regard-ing the Iron Man suit. Tony Stark is Iron Man, Iron Man is Tony Stark and as such Tony Stark refuses to abide by what the US government is asking of him. On the other hand, both Bruce Wayne and Oliver Queen make use of the utilities and materials available via their organizations, Wayne Enterprises and Queen Consolidated, in order to manifest their superhero personae that can be seen both as extended identities of these characters but also as products of the corporations. In Batman Begins (Nolan, 2005), Wayne refers to the head of the Applied Science Division, Lucius Fox, in order to procure the necessary materials, equipment and apparel in order to become Batman. What is most intriguing is how both Wayne and Alfred decide upon ordering certain products, via Wayne Enterprises, in bulk so as not to arouse suspicions within Wayne Enterprises, which would ultimately lead to legal repercussions. Wayne, essentially, extends an invitation to an employee of Wayne Enterprises to enter the Batman brand, thus drawing an interconnecting bridge between the two which he can use to his advantage. Queens case is quite similar in the first season of the television series Arrow (20122013) where he takes advan-tage and recruits both his bodyguard and an IT employee while using his financial wealth to establish both his secret headquarter of operations within an abandoned property of Queen Consolidated as well as any technologi-cal means, weapons and apparel necessary. Unlike Tony Stark, both Wayne and Queen keep their alter egos secret from both their brand organizations as well as from the public, ultimately displaying that their actions as Batman and Arrow do objectively entail vigilantism. Stark, on the other hand, upon seeing the underhanded dealings his CEO Obadiah Stane had engaged in which ultimately endangered him, decides to unveil his secret identity and link it to the new logic of Stark Industries, which now goes against the production and distribution of weaponry. In a sense, Stark both capitalizes and legally corporatizes both himself and Iron Man as a force capable of protecting the American Nation by privatizing world peace, against both means of war but also against foes that would use such means against America. Thus, when commissioned to grant the US government access to the Iron Man technol-ogy for defense purposes he refuses due to his disbelief in the authenticity of their goals and so as to maintain the core essence of what Iron Man, and by extension, Stark Industries represent. Starks position appears justified, from a corporate perspective, when Col. James Rhodes confiscates one of the Iron

    EJAC_34.1_Marazi_67-82.indd 74 4/15/15 10:33:49 AM

  • Superhero or vigilante? A matter of perspective

    75

    4. When a particular media product (or content) can be promoted across different media channels and sold in different formats, what is marketed is not so much films or books, as content brands that can travel between and provide a context for the consumption of a number of goods or media products. Thus brands like The Lion King, Harry Potter, the X-Files and Britney Spears come as music, film, books, games, McDonalds hamburgers, cosmetics, clothing and websites to mention just a few possibilities. Computer games are popular form of such extensions.

    (Arvidsson 2006: 75)

    What Nintendo for example sells is a branded environment that provide[s] a particular context for kids consumer agency (Arvdisson 2006: 76).

    Man suits, and by extension forces CEO P. Potts to engage in legal battles against the US government due to the illegal seizure of trademark property. What is interesting in Iron Mans case is that when the US government fails to assimilate Tony Stark and as a result proceeds to procure the Iron Man tech-nology via other means, another organization, S.H.I.E.L.D, whose mental-ity appears to be a combination of the US governments defense tactics and Tony Starks corporate vigilante logic manages to recruit Stark, thus becom-ing the mediator between both governmental and industry organizations. Of course this example is just an indication of just how complex and convoluted the coexistence, overlapping, and definition of borders and power between organizations can be. Another power player, which can affect how the super-hero is perceived, is that of brand management and marketing.

    Media Franchise Culture treats its Intellectual Properties and media fran-chises as brands for marketing purposes. Marketing, however, according to Richard Maxwell (in Miller et al. 2001: 152), does not aim at protecting its consumers. Instead, it seeks to provide consumer audiences with intertextual commodities4 that offer a branded environment and initially provide a context for consumer action within which a particular consumer good or media prod-uct can acquire additional dimensions of use-value and by extension become a channel for the construction of branded ambience that can capture the attention of consumers (Arvidsson 2006: 7677). What needs to be taken into consideration, therefore, is the context the brand belongs to as well as the context the brand in question actually sets. For Batman, Iron Man and Arrow, the brand sets a superhero context that becomes a matter of vigilantism only from external factors that have not been granted access to the brand, or if they have are now in a position of accumulated knowledge to question the super-hero characters motives and actions. In addition, Arvidsson (2006: 13) argues that Media Culture is commercial culture: its contents are commodified, its communications proceed in order to make money. This means that life within the media is also life within Capital. The case studies in question appear to display this mentality that appears to govern both the superhero characters and the negotiation of meaning of the notion of vigilantism, especially when viewed in its postmodern mindset. Postmodern advertising, according to Arvidsson (2006: 63, 68), sought to take advantage of intertextual commodi-ties and their associations whilst developing brands that could anticipate things such as emotion, community or reassurance, while postmodern brand management sought to provide brands as goods, or tools, whereby consumers could create their own meanings as opposed to modern brand management that sought to impose ways of thinking and behaving in relation to the brand. As such, one can contemplate the numerous and various superhero mani-festations and, in comparison, draw various meanings regarding symbolism, themes and ideology. Brand management, however, also uses Brand Identity as a tool not only to guide in the treatment it will undergo as Extended Identities but also to create brand associations or as Aacker (1996: 25) puts it what the organization wants the brand to stand for in the customers mind.

    How consumers think and feel about a brand is where the value of a brand truly resides. Since superheroes reside in Pop Culture, brand marketing aims to cater to the wide mass audience to which they can promote said I.P.s and branded content. This is achieved via range brands, co-branding and sub-brands which offer a variety of different products, catering to different tastes and preferences but ultimately uniting the consumer audience underneath a specific umbrella brand, or brand system. What is of significance, however,

    EJAC_34.1_Marazi_67-82.indd 75 4/15/15 10:33:49 AM

  • Katherine Marazi

    76

    5. Branded goods are experiential commodities. At least according to the marketing literature, it is how they make you Sense, Feel, Think, Act and Relate (Schmitt, 1999), that make up the core of their use-value. However, contrary to, say, a feature film, and like, say, a computer game, brands do not so much provide readymade experiences, or, for that matter, more enduring forms of immaterial use-values, like identity and community. Brands thus rely on the productivity of consumers not only for the realization, but for the actual co-production of the values that they promise. Like contemporary consumption more generally, brands depend on consumers rendering these objects part of themselves and of their life-world, on consumers letting themselves become part of the experience of being with products.

    (Arvidsson 2006: 35)

    is the function of the brand within both Capital and Pop Culture. Celia Lury advocates that the brand pre-structures the action where brand owners own a particular predetermined frame of action that they see as guaranteeing them use-value and profit-value (2004 cited in Arvidsson 2006: 8, original empha-sis). As such, consumer audiences are granted access to the context of the brand by purchasing products and services, thus enjoying the use-value while the industry enjoys the profit-value. Similarly, in the fictional realm, secondary characters gain access to the superhero brands context of action through the revelation of the superheros dual/secret identity and the superhero benefits from any help or assistance these characters have to offer. The premiere of the Arrow 3 (20142015) sees Captain Lance making a public announcement that condemns the anti-vigilante group and accepts the Arrow as an ally towards the police force (Morgan 2014). What is ironic is that Lance was initially the number one enemy of the Arrow in the police force, but the eventual coop-eration of both allowed Lance to enter the Arrows and Queens context which altered his conception of the character. Rob Shield further supports that brands are virtual goods in the sense that they do not display the tangibil-ity of the actual but [they] clearly exist nonetheless (2003 cited in Arvidsson 2006: 8). As a result, according to Arvidsson

    brands do not so much stand for products, as much as they provide a part of the context in which products are used, which is the core compo-nent of the use-value5 that brands provide consumers with [and by extension the relative organization or industry with].

    (2006: 8)

    The use-value differs depending on whether one engages with the brand context or not and as a result refocuses how one comes to view particular issues. In the case of Batman, Lucius Fox is granted brand access to both the Wayne and Batman brand, thus comprehending the logic behind the superheros motives, which he comes to question nonetheless, when Batman resorts to cell-phone sonic surveillance in order to locate the Joker. In the case of Oliver Queen, both John Diggle and Felicity Smoak are granted access to both brands, thus willing to help in the Arrows crime-fighting ventures until they clearly appear to be prompted by personal and vengeful reasons. Similarly to the case of the Arrow and Captain Lance, the cooperation of Batman with Harvey Dent prompts Dent to change his initial views of the hero as vigilante. Finally, Tony Starks personal problems that lead to an instability of his brand not only prompt Col. Rhodes, on behalf of the US government, to take matters into his own hands but also indicate the exist-ence of brand liabilities that can affect the way the superhero, his motives and actions are viewed. Brands have the ability to act as a medium of commu-nication, ultimately setting a context of both dialogue and action between production and consumption. Hence, the superheroes in question, if viewed as brands, can also be considered a medium via which one can negotiate the notion of vigilantism. However, even if Intellectual Properties can be viewed as belonging to the intertextual commodities(see endnote 4) that offer a branded environment and provide a particular context for consumer agency within which a particular consumer good or media product can acquire addi-tional dimensions of use-value, they also, by extension, become a channel for the construction of branded ambience that can capture the attention of consumers (Arvidsson 2006: 7677). Thus, when it comes to the branded

    EJAC_34.1_Marazi_67-82.indd 76 4/15/15 10:33:49 AM

  • Superhero or vigilante? A matter of perspective

    77

    6. Lucasfilm President Kathleen Kennedy (2014) informs in The Legendary Star Wars Expanded Universe Turns a New Page posted on the official Star Wars website (25 April 2014) that

    We have an unprecedented slate of new Star Wars entertainment on the horizon. Were set to bring Star Wars back to the big screen, and continue the adventure through games, books, comics, and new formats that are just emerging. This future of interconnected storytelling will allow fans to explore this galaxy in deeper ways than ever before.

    (www.starwars.com)

    7. Mike White (2014) in his online article Star Wars new media set as official canon only informs:

    New things are afoot in the galaxy far far away. The studio behind the insanely popular Star Wars franchise has announced the new direction they plan to take. Up until now there has been a large amount of media released with a Star Wars name branded on it, but those were works that took place in the Expanded Universe, meaning that they did not follow the main Star Wars story. The decision was made by Lucas Film and the man himself, George Lucas. They stated that all Star Wars new media, including the games that are planned for future release, will be set

    environment, audiences are somewhat guided in how they view, perceive and possibly discuss the brand.

    For any organization, a brand is a commodity of value, and in spite of the marketing tactics employed to maintain and attract new consumers, a govern-ing logic via which the organization in question establishes and maintains its authority is undisputable. Arvidsson (2006: 67, original emphasis) informs that Brand management is about putting public communication to work under managed forms, by providing a context where it can evolve in a particu-lar direction essentially add[ing] to or reproduce[ing] the particular qualities that the brand embodies. In fact, this logic reflects the tactic employed by the superhero characters when they reveal their identities to other charac-ters. Nowadays it is not a matter of imposing ways of using goods or how consumers think and behave but of actually offering brands as tools so that consumers can create their own meanings and by extension functional and emotional values (Arvidsson 2006: 68). As the LucasFilm Studio decision6 to renegotiate the franchise canon displays, the industry is always behind and in connection with consumers in some cases in dialogue, in others guiding even possibly dictating the nature, stature or treatment of a branded I.P.7 Arvidsson (2006: 74, original emphasis) insightfully explains that an impor-tant task for brand management is to ensure that the ongoing production of a common social world on the part of consumers proceeds in ways that repro-duce a distinctive brand image, and that strengthens the brand equity the productive potential that the brand has in the minds of consumers which is understood as the most important factor behind brand value. Thus, in order to achieve this, brand management employs what Michel Foucault alluded to as government; in the sphere of brands and marketing what this entails is that brand management is achieved through the provision of particular ambiences that frame and partially anticipate the agency of consumers (1991 cited in Arvidsson 2006: 74). Or, as Lury has advocated, the brand becomes a

    platform for action that is inserted into the social and works to program the freedom of consumers to evolve in particular directions. While it is not impossible for consumers to break with the expectations inscribed in these ambiences the task of brand management is to create a number of resistances that make it difficult or unlikely for consumers to experi-ence their freedom, or indeed their goals, in ways different from those prescribed by the particular ambience.

    (2004 cited in Arvidsson 2006: 74)

    The marketing tactics employed in The Dark Knight in connection to the Batman Joker relationship actually set the ambience for the Batman brand to be viewed as a vigilante nonetheless, but in the Spanish connotation of the word.

    vigilante superhero and the prisM of brand MarKetingThe brand context established in The Dark Knight (2008) through the oppos-ing, albeit complementary, brand characters of the Batman and the Joker appears unique and in accordance with postmodern brand marketing aiming to create certain emotions via which to maintain audience brand loyalty. Naomi Klein (2001) displays the negative aspects of brand culture by rais-ing awareness towards unknown circumstances and dealings, the treatment

    EJAC_34.1_Marazi_67-82.indd 77 4/15/15 10:33:49 AM

  • Katherine Marazi

    78

    as official canon only. Meaning that it will not make any references to any events or characters that made appearances in the Expanded Universe mentioned above. Although the Expanded Universe of the franchise has only served to boost the insurmountably large fan base, George Lucas wanted it to be known that that Star Wars will not be restricted or limited by the concept of the Expanded Universe. As of now the only canon media in the Star Wars franchise are the first six films and the animated series, Star Wars: The Clone Wars which started airing in March 2008.

    (www.guardianlv.com)

    8. That Joker has no secret identity is significant: Bakhtin points out that the fools of medieval culture were not actors playing their parts on a stage, as did the comic actors of a later period, impersonating Harlequin but remained fools and clowns always and wherever they made their appearance.

    (Brooker 2012: 137)

    of and situation of cultural labour and the effects of brand culture engage-ment. In a way, the repartee and the ambiguous relationship between Batman and the Joker in The Dark Knight reflects this stance and cautions against blind loyalty towards a brand. Unlike Tim Burtons Batman and Joker who both display dual identities and have an origin story, Nolans Joker has only one identity8 while being completely evasive about his origin. Instead, he appears as a possible mirror reflection of the Batman. Brooker (2012: 176) sees the relationship between the Batman and the Joker as not one of binary opposi-tions but as a spectrum where they do not occupy opposing sides but differ-ent points on the rainbow range of light thrown by a prism, which also comes to reflect the point of view from which one is considering a character as a hero or vigilante. The campy aesthetic of both the 1960s television series and Joel Schumachers Batman films are an example of how Batman, similarly to the Joker and most of his adversaries, is, and has always been, [] a figure of carnival (Brooker 2012: 175). Another example in the actual film is when Commissioner Gordon informs Batman of a new adversary who has a simi-lar taste for theatrics. Moreover, the copycat Batmen at the beginning of the film not only point towards the cheap knock-offs of brands but also allow Batman to establish his brand authenticity and theatricality by stating that he does not wear hockey pants, but a full-fledged genuine costume. As a result, the dynamic between control and chaos that plays out in the Joker/Batman relationship is not simply about order versus carnival, or repression versus libido; it also describes Batmans shifting position on a spectrum from cop to criminal, insider to outlaw (Brooker 2012: 186). As such, the Joker who is the epitome of carnival comes to culturally jam the dominating brand message of the Batman. The very logic of Bahktins carnival connects to the theme of corporate culture jamming that was implemented in the marketing poster campaign of The Dark Knight. The notion of carnival indicates a temporary suspension; a temporary liberation from the prevailing truth and from the established order (Brooker 2012: 139). Similarly, according to Charles Reed (2010: 3), culture jamming is traditionally considered to be an action that aims at disrupting dominant messages, through the manipulation of images, by introducing noise into the signal that might otherwise obliterate alterna-tives to it. Culture jamming is considered to be anti-corporate rhetoric, hence as Reed (2010) evidences, the mere fact that this tactic was employed both in the paratextual marketing and promotional features of Nolans The Dark Knight but also through the character of the Joker within the fictional narrative indicates that a different brand ambience was established through which to consider the Batman brand.

    Both Batman and the Joker display a brand presence in the film, but it appears that the culture jamming context set by the Joker brand overshad-ows the Batman brand and calls into question the nature of Batman as hero or vigilante. The relation amongst brands appears convoluted. One the one hand, there is the legal hero D. A. Harvey Dent to whom the Bruce Wayne brands offers support in his election campaign. On the other hand, Batman is presented as the outlaw hero who occasionally cooperates with Dent. Finally, there is the terrorizing figure of the Joker who has [n]o matches on prints, DNA, dental, clothing is custom, no labels. Nothing in his pockets but knives and lint. No name, no other alias (Nolan, 2008). He does, nonetheless, have his own costume, his own calling card and sets his own unique brand ambi-ence of culture jamming. Drawing from Debord (1956, 2005), Eco (1986) and Dery (1993), Reed (2010: 16) informs that the foundation of culture jamming

    EJAC_34.1_Marazi_67-82.indd 78 4/15/15 10:33:49 AM

  • Superhero or vigilante? A matter of perspective

    79

    is that most mass media messages are controlled in such a way as to margin-alize all other forms of communication which are outside of that control. In Batmans case that message is his ultimate goal to fight crime in the city of Gotham. That control appears to be governed by the corporate sector, which due to being the economically and socially powerful, controls both the communication and the channels of transference. As a result, Batmans control is anchored in his corporate self as Bruce Wayne. In accordance with Debord (2005), Reed (2005 cited in 2010: 16) informs that control appears in the spec-tacle where the tangible world is replaced by a selection of images which exist above it and the spectacle is viewed, according to Boje (2001), as a theatric performance that legitimizes, rationalizes, and camouflages violent produc-tion and consumption(2001 cited in Reed, 2010: 16). Evidently, this points to what Brooker (2012) advocated in regards Batmans theatricality, but it also points to Batmans ability to stand above the city of Gotham, its criminals but also its laws. Production and consumption inevitably points towards Marxs concept of political economy where peoples social existence determines their consciousness and in this relationship the ownership of capital deter-mines who has power in society (1978 cited in Reed 2010: 16). As a result, Batmans power exists in his alter egos corporate relations and holdings with-out which he would not have the means to become Batman. However, the existing brand culture of commodities and services is an indication of this control thus pointing to Debords expansion on Marxs view of capital control being the control of things which only appear to have value rather than exist-ing for a specific purpose or fulfilling an actual need (2005 and 1978 cited in Reed 2010: 16, original emphasis). Batmans value is exactly what the Joker comes to jam and question.

    What is negotiated in the relationship of the Batman and the Joker is essen-tially the spectacle ambience, which as Marcus explains is symptomatic of a world in which all communication flows in one direction, from the powerful to the powerless aiming to persuade the masses while the carnivalesque is employed so as to call for a release from corporate power (1989 cited in Reed 2010: 17). Throughout the film, one can witness both the Wayne brand and the Batman brand cooperating with the governing authority represented by the district attorney Harvey Dent and Commissioner Gordon. Batman by the end of the film is posited in the minds of consumer audiences as a watchful protector or even a panoptic guardian. On the surface it may appear as a clas-sical tale of hero versus villain, but the main underlying theme that pulsates, similarly to the Jokers instrumental theme, is who is the Batman and why does he not reveal himself. For the public within the fictional universe, this question echoes every time the Joker terrorizes the citizens of Gotham City in the hope of proving the Batmans inability to uphold justice, control, order and maintain his brand logic. The Joker literally calls into question whether Batman is a hero or a vigilante. As Reed (2010: 66) states, the Joker challenges the watcher or guardian nature of Batman but also questions who will guard the guards themselves. Hence, by jamming the Batman brands ambience and making noise regarding the nature and legitimacy of the authority behind the Batman brand, the Joker concludes that the public will see Batman as the Joker, namely, a freak. By refusing to take off his mask in compliance with the publics demands, Batman admits to being outside the established order, ultimately being deemed a vigilante by the fictional public. For consumer audiences, on the other hand, who are aware that Batman takes the blame for Harvey Dent/Two-Faces indiscretions, the Batman truly becomes the

    EJAC_34.1_Marazi_67-82.indd 79 4/15/15 10:33:50 AM

  • Katherine Marazi

    80

    watchful guardian who essentially manages to uphold the established order by not tarnishing the reputation of one who was believed to be the best citi-zen in Gotham and one the fictional public could place faith in now that their trust in the Batman has been shaken. The issue of vigilantism, consequently, is affected and renegotiated depending on point of view.

    The implementation of culture jamming both within the fictional story and as an advertising practice appears to serve both the distinction of Nolans Batman reboot but also hints towards the concept of hegemony, because the production sought to establish their dominance by at once producing and limiting their own forms of counterculture. As Brooker (2012: 103) informs, Nolans realism is consistently associated with toughness, grittiness, rawness and masculinity, and contrasted to an extent with the gothic stylings of Burton, but more significantly, with the camp theatricality of Schumacher. As a result, both Nolan, as an authorial brand, and the new Batman reboot, establish their unique, respective position within the Batman matrix becoming an instance, or sub-brand amongst the numerous other Batman sub-brands such as Burtons, Schumachers, Frank Millers, Denny ONeils and Grant Morrisons. At the same time, a brand differentiation, or rather dilution is achieved between the Batman and Joker brand due to the implementation of culture jamming. While postmodern branding is insistent on controlling the context the brand sets, it is more open to the emotions and interpretations of the audience. As Reed (2010: 59) highlights, the alternating positions of action-reaction and weakness-strength is important within the context of the films poster campaign because it destabilizes the ability for the audience to clearly define either character. The messages of these two brands appear ambiguous, interchangeable and even equally acceptable, and as a result lead to brand value in spite of which character the audience may identify with or prefer. Therefore, the film may challenge the audience to consider Batmans heroic, protective nature against the panoptic guardian he eventually assumes at the end of the film, but its ultimate goal from a marketing perspective is to accumulate brand value. The high indication of brand loyalty, either towards the Batman brand or the Joker brand in Nolans film displays that whether or not Batman is truly, legally speaking a vigilante in respect to our world is not the dominating question. While in our world Batman would conceivably be deemed a vigilante, for the majority of the fictional public at the end of the film he is considered a full-fledged vigilante. For Commissioner Gordon, who has been extended access to the Batman brand similarly to Captain Lance and the Arrow, Batman is a watchful guardian, a dark knight. Finally, for all-knowing characters and audience consumers he remains a super/hero.

    The notion of vigilantism in connection to superheroes is complex and ambiguous at best. To consider, in a realistic sense, that all superheroes are vigilantes would be to adopt as Stephen Krensky (1954 cited in 2008: 4849) highlights Fredric Werthams negative stance towards these fictional char-acters as promoters of violence, disobedience and juvenile delinquency. By considering them as embodiments of American ideology, or even more impor-tantly, as gaps or tools for the negotiation of ideology, evidences the convo-luted and ambivalent nature of various themes and issues. Viewing a small sub-group of superheroes who share a corporate presence in their fictional universe through a brand identity management prism offers further indica-tion that the notion of vigilantism constitutes a grey area or at least the agents and institutions that label, or promote, a character as such operate within an oscillating power structure. While superhero characters and stories are not

    EJAC_34.1_Marazi_67-82.indd 80 4/15/15 10:33:50 AM

  • Superhero or vigilante? A matter of perspective

    81

    intent on promoting or creating actual vigilantes they do offer a context within which one can consider vigilantism from numerous aspects and by extension ultimately challenge one to consider the position(s) of power that define and delimit a vigilante, or a hero.

    referencesAacker, D. A. (1996), Building Strong Brands, New York: Free Press.Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. (2013, USA: ABC).Arrow (20122013, USA: Warner Home Video, DVD).Arrow 2 (20132014, USA: Warner Home Video, DVD).Arvidsson, A. (2006), Brands: Meaning and Value in Media Culture, Abington,

    Oxon and New York: Routledge.Brooker, W. (2012), Hunting the Dark Knight: Twenty-First Century Batman,

    London and New York: I. B. Tauris.Cambridge Dictionaries Online (2012), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,

    dictionary.cambridge.org. Accessed 6 June 2014.Eco, U. and Chilton N. (1972), The Myth of Superman, Diacritics, [e-journal]

    2: 1, pp. 1422, http://www.jstor.org/stable/464920. Accessed 17 April 2008.Favreau, Jon (2008), Iron Man (DVD), USA: Marvel Studios, Fairview

    Entertainment and Paramount Pictures. (2010), Iron Man 2 (DVD), USA: Marvel Studios, Fairview Entertainment

    and Paramount Pictures.Fingeroth, D. (2006), Superman on the Couch: What Superheroes Really Tell Us

    about Ourselves and Our Society, New York and London: Continuum.Foucault, M. (1972), The Archeology of Knowledge (trans. A. M. Sheridan Smith),

    London: Tavistock Publications.Klein, N. (2001), No Space, No Choice, No Jobs, No Logo, London and New York:

    Harper Perennial.Klock, G. (2006), How to Read Superhero Comics and Why, New York and

    London: Continuum.Krensky, S. (2008), Comic Book Century: The History of American Comic Books,

    Minneapolis: Twenty-First Century Books.Merchandise (2014), The Legendary Star Wars expanded universe turns a

    new page, Star Wars, 24 April, http://www.starwars.com/news/the-legen-dary-star-wars-expanded-universe-turns-a-new-page. Accessed 15 June 2014.

    Merriam-Webster Online: Dictionary and Thesaurus (2014), Springfield, Massachusetts: Encyclopedia Britannica Company, www.merriam-webs-ter.com. Accessed 10 June 2014.

    Miller, T., Govil, N., McMurria, J. and Maxwell, R. (2001), Global Hollywood, London: bfi Publishing.

    Morgan, L. (2014), Arrow Season 3, Episode 1 Recap: Oliver goes on an explosive first date in The Calm, New York Daily News, 9 October, http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/channel-surfer/arrow-season-3-episode-1-recap-calm-blog-entry-1.1968519. Accessed 10 October 2014.

    Ndalianis, A. (2007), Do we need another hero?, in W. Haslem, A. Ndalianis and C. Mackie (eds), Super/Heroes: From Hercules to Superman, Washington, DC: New Academia Publishing, pp. 18.

    Nolan, Christopher (2005), Batman Begins (DVD), Directed by Christopher Nolan. USA: Warner Bros.

    (2008), The Dark Knight (DVD), USA: Warner Bros.

    EJAC_34.1_Marazi_67-82.indd 81 4/15/15 10:33:50 AM

  • Katherine Marazi

    82

    Oxford Dictionaries Language Matters (2014), Oxford: Oxford University Press, www.oxforddictionaries.com. Accessed 9 June 2014.

    Peaslee, R. M. (2007), Superheroes, Moral Economy, and the Iron Cage: Morality, alienation and the super-individual, in W. Haslem, A. Ndalianis and C. Mackie (eds), Super/Heroes: From Hercules to Superman, Washington, DC: New Academia Publishing, pp. 3750.

    Ray, R. (1985), A Certain Tendency of the Hollywood Cinema, 19301980, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Reed, C. (2010), Agents of chaos: An analysis of the poster campaign for The Dark Knight as an example of corporate culture jamming, M.A. thesis, Omaha: University of Nebraska, http://search.proquest.com/docview/743820249?accountid=8359. Accessed 10 February 2013.

    Reynolds, R. (1992), Super Heroes: A Modern Mythology, Jackson: University Press of Mississippi.

    Smith, G. M. (2009), The superhero as labor: The corporate secret identity, in A. Ndalianis (ed.), The Contemporary Comic Book Superhero, New York and London: Routledge. pp. 126143.

    White, M. (2014), Star Wars new media set as official canon only, Guardian Liberty Voice, 30 April, http://guardianlv.com/2014/04/star-wars-new- media-set-as-official-canon-only/. Accessed 15 June 2014.

    suggested citationMarazi, K. (2015), Superhero or vigilante? A matter of perspective and brand

    management, European Journal of American Culture 34: 1, pp. 6782, doi: 10.1386/ejac.34.1.67_1

    contributor detailsKatherine Marazi is a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Translation and Intercultural Studies at the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki. She also holds a degree in English Language and Literature and an M.A. in American Literature and Culture. Her research interests focus on Adaptation theory, Brand Identity theory, Media Franchises and Pop Culture. She has deliv-ered conference presentations on Batman, adapting Marvel Superheroes for a Cinematic Universe, trans-media storytelling and Buffy the Vampire Slayer. She has conducted a creative writing workshop in the context of the Transparent Windows book club (School of English, Aristotle University) catering to character building, superheroes and MMORPGs. She has writ-ten book reviews focusing on comic books and superheroes. In 2013 she received a Scholarship for Academic Excellence by the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki. Since 2013 she has been acting as a teaching assistant in the School of English at Aristotle University with a focus on introductory fictional courses and literary research courses.

    Contact: Faculty of Philosophy, School of English, Aristotle University, 54124, Thessaloniki, Greece.E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]

    Katherine Marazi has asserted her right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be identified as the author of this work in the format that was submitted to Intellect Ltd.

    EJAC_34.1_Marazi_67-82.indd 82 4/15/15 10:33:50 AM

  • Copyright of European Journal of American Culture is the property of Intellect Ltd. and itscontent may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without thecopyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or emailarticles for individual use.