Danny Fingeroth. Disguised as Clark Kent: Jews, Comics, and the Creation of the Superhero

Danny Fingeroth. Disguised as Clark Kent: Jews, Comics, and the Creation of the Superhero. Continuum International Publishing Group Inc. (2007)

Reviewed by Alina Mattison


Disguised as Clark Kent: Jews, Comics, and the creation of the Superhero was written by Danny Fingeroth, the former editor of Spider Man Comics. The foreword is by Stan Lee, chairman of Marvel comics. Fingeroth writes as a journalis,t so this book is more enticing then books that are written by professional historians. Even though this book was written in 2007, most of the time, the author is focusing on what is going on in the1940’s, 1950’s, and a little bit of the 1960’s.

In the very beginning of the book, there is a foreword by Stan Lee. I have never read or seen a book with a foreword. I thought this was really interesting because Stan Lee is very famous and is know for his superheroes more so then writing in books. In the foreword he discuses how he came to develop his passion for the superheroes. He also reveals he wished he had never changed his name. I like how this was included in the novel because it allows the reader to be more intact with the book. It is nice to have a famous person who has created the character America has grown to love, tell a little bit about himself in the book instead of hearing it from just the author.

This was a very interesting book to read. I believe the main point of the book that Fingeroth is trying to get across is how the Jewish cultures and attitude impacted the United States. In his book, he shows and discuses how the Jews who came to America were able to use their past to push forward and create the Superheroes which everyone in America has heard of. The first part of the book explains where the Jews came from and what was going on at that time in their lives. The time when the comics started to appear was during world war II. They portrayed the Nazis as the villain and all evil. After this, the comic books started to appear. They creators of the Superheroes were trying to pin point the children of America and this is why they used exciting fun story. The people who supported the comics were the kids who’s parents gave nickels and dimes to bye comics. Therefore the main group who were supporting the comics at the time were kids.

The Jews created the Superheroes in a way that portrayed what America was to them. Many of the superheroes were not just telling a story but were telling the story of what their creators dreamt about. To the Jewish creators of the superheroes, they were telling what America meant to them and why they came to the country. Fingeroth, was able to connect how the Jews which created the famous Superheroes we know today from leaving and coming to America which gave them a bright new future to look forward to.

Fingeroth was able to connect key points in his book. He provided information about what was going on that made the Jewish people create the superheroes they did. He provided what the superheroes meant to the Jews and what they portrayed. Fingeroth used valid information to prove his point in his book. It was very clear and concise about what he was trying to get across to the reader.

I really liked how Fingeroth organized his book. He made it easy for the reader to put things together and see his point clearly. The beginning of the book explains the background of the Jews and what they were going through. Fingeroth explains how the holocaust had a big impact on the Jews and is a big part of their past. He also explains in the book how the main creator such as Stan Lee Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster all grew up in the Same enclave in Bronx in upper Manhattan. Some of the creators even went to the same high schools together. He gives enough background information to show how and why they created the Superheroes they did but not too much informations to where the reader gets bored. Overall, Fingeroth, organized his information very neatly and easy for the reader to follow.

This book was assigned for me to read so I did not pick it out. I am really glad I read this book though because I thought it was really interesting and had a lot of good information that I did not know about. I did not know at all before reading this book that the main Superheroes everyone knows were created by Jews. I thought it was really interesting how if the Jews did not migrate here because of what was going on over in Europe that America probably would not have the Superheroes everyone loves today.

I thought the author carried out his task very well and made his point very clear. I also enjoyed his style of writing. Most of the books about history are written by historian. They tend to be more often then not scholarly books and very factual. A lot of the time I have a hard time keeping interested in scholarly books so it was nice to have a break from it and read a book written by a journalist. Because he was a Journalist, I thought the information he provided was interest and kept the reader tentative instead of being dull. Overall I really enjoyed this book and found the information it contained to be insightful and thought provoking.

Johnson, Paul E. A Shopkeepers Millennium and Revivals in Rochester, New York, 1815-1837: Hill and Wang, 1978. (revised 2004)

Book Reviewed By Alina Mattison

Paul E. Johnson is the author of A Shopkeepers Millennium. Johnson is currently a professor at the University of South Carolina and has devoted his time to history and writing. This book was first published in 1978 by Hill and Wang and since has been revised in 2004. Hill and Wang publish books dealing with history and politics. This tells the readers it is supposed to be read primarily by historians and students. In Johnson's revised book from 2004,the author included new a preface. Johnson has been criticized a great deal about his book because there is little mention of women. During the era he writes about, the women had a great deal in the role of the church yet he does not recognize what women did in any way. The preface in the revised version allows Johnson to talk about this issue. He states even though he was highly criticized, he would not change what he wrote about. He says might add a little bit more information but he would to keep the basic information he already had the same if he were to re-write the book. I think it is interesting he says this because of how much criticism he got about the book.

In Johnson's book, the main point is that politics and religion have roles within each other. The first part of the book focuses on Rochester, New York, from its beginning stages as a town. He goes into depth about how Rochester was set up and what kind of people moved to the city. During this time, Rochester was the largest and fastest growing city in the United States. Even though in the beginning of the book he explained how it was a small town he explains how it quickly grew and became more populated. He explains how the wealthy people of Rochester were mostly Presbyterian. The wealthy people of Rochester, basically controlled and directed the economy. This was important because if the wealthier majority was controlling the working class then they were theoretically controlling the city. This later has a lot to do with how Johnson is able to connect religion to politics.

The first part of the book, seems to lead directly to a later discussion of Charles A. Finney. Finney's influence is the one of the main points to the book. Johnson has a lot of details about Rochester and the people in Rochester which better allows him to explain his connections in politics and religion having to do with Finney. Johnson writes the first part of his book to support the second part which deals with how religion and politics came in to play with each other and the people of the town.

Charles Finny was an important man in Rochester. Johnson uses the second part of his book to talk about Finney and how Finney used politics and religion together. Finney was once a lawyer and then decided to give up law and go and preach every nightof the week and three times every Sunday. Finney was a man in the upper class and among the more wealthy. Since he was a lawyer, the people he was friends with were also mostly upper class and more toward the wealthy side. Finney was Presbyterian and was very devoted to the church. Because of his relation to the church, he influenced the upper class of Rochester to mimic what he thought. Johnson argues because the upper class was Presbyterian and they controlled the working class, the majority of Rochester had to be Presbyterian because if they were not, then the upper class would not hire people who were not Presbyterians. The church was directly related to the politics going on at this time in Rochester.

The Whigs, the more conservative party, who were mostly Presbyterian, were the stronger political party during this time. The other political party during the time were the democrats. They were more liberal then the Whigs. An example Johnson uses is how the democrats did not believe drinking alcohol should be outlawed whereas the Whigs were completely against alcohol altogether. Because the economy was run by the upper class, who were Presbyterian, the working class was also Presbyterian. When it came to voting, the political power who was ahead of the other was the Whigs because they were full of upper class Presbyterians and were supported by the majority of the city. Johnson argues in his book that religion and politics are directly related to one another. He does a good job at organizing his thoughts to support his theory and main point of the book.

I believe Johnson did a good job supporting his ideas and main point of the book. The way he organized and utilized his information was useful and helpful. The place where I thought he fell short on in his book was about women. He was very criticized by people about this point and I definitely agree with the critics. Women, if anything, had more impact on the church then men did at the time. Many times, women were more active in the church then the men and did more to benefit the church. Because of this, I do not believe Johnson is giving the full picture of what was going on in Rochester at the time.

I am not a huge fan of scholarly books. I have a hard time keeping focused and staying interested in the book. For me this scholarly book was better then most I have read. There were a few times where I thought the book was a little bit redundant but overall it was not too bad. There were some parts of the book I found to be dull but other part I thought were interesting, even though Johnson failed to recognize the role women had at this time, he supported his main point and put forth an abundance of information about Rochester and what was going on in the city during this era.

Altogether I liked the book and thought it had some very interesting information in it.

Paul E. Johnson. A Shopkeeper's Millennium: Society and Revivals in Rochester, New York, 1815-1837. Hill and Wang: New York, 1978 (Revised in 2004).

Book Review By: Jaquelyn McEwen

Paul E. Johnson, a professor of history at the University of South Carolina, is an established author. His book: A Shopkeeper’s Millennium: Society and Revivals in Rochester, New York, 1815-1837, has been around since its original publication in 1978 (revised in 2004). This book was published by Hill and Wang, which publishes books that focus on American history, world history, and politics. The revised addition of the book, in 2004, allowed Johnson the ability to write and include a preface. He used the preface as an opportunity to communicate with his readers about what he felt was wrong and write this much criticized book. Within the pages of this book Johnson has tried to argue that the relationship changes between work and domestic life were at the center of religious change in Rochester. He specifically follows revivals led by Charles Finney. He does this by focusing on, “biographies of the converts themselves. reconstructed from church records, newspapers, genealogical materials, tax lists, city directories, census schedules, petitions sent from Rochester to various agencies of government, and...diaries and letter left by participants in the revival” (14). Johnson has broken this book down to six main topics of interest and within each of those he has created sub-topics to help further the understanding.

The first chapter of his book centered around developing an understanding of the economy of the time. Johnson described the economic situation of the time fully enough to be understood by the reader and then tied Charles Finney to the economic outcomes of many of the successful men that attended Finney’s church. I felt that his writing in this section became slightly confusing. Johnson began the chapter about Finney, and then diverged away from Finney to and earlier date within the time period. He then built back up to Finney’s arrival. This was the only section within the first four sections that really mentioned Finney and his impacts on the revival.

The following three sections included society, politics, and impasse. While each of these chapters entailed a mass amount of detail and facts they became very jumbled and confusing. As mentioned earlier within each chapter there were sub-chapters to further elaborate on a specific detail. While Johnson’s intentions to make the information easier to understand and systematic, I feel he really just lost the reader’s understanding. Since each sub-chapter started around 1815 and ended around 1837 making timeline correlations between the different sub-chapters became very difficult. I also felt that this writing technique had a lot of redundancy making the facts less powerful and making it seem as though Johnson had run out of material to write about. Although the redundancy definitely made the points that: (1) There were drastic changes in the employer-employee relationship, (2) This is the time that the middle-class developed, (3) Drinking was an issue, and (4) Political rivals, jealousy, turmoil and corruption came about.

The next sections of the book really dove into Charles Finney and the role he played in the revivals in Rochester. To support his main argument Johnson states that the men who attended Finney’s church were of a higher class and more successful, but he then also states that there are not adequate records on church attendees and the majority of the records that are available come from “blue-collar” churches which severely underestimates the number of workingmen that attended the churches (157). I feel that this in a way ruins the power of the point and puts the validity of his argument into question.

While this book serves as a good learning guide for the economics, society, and politics of the time according to men it severely falls short including the impact women played in the revivals between 1815-1837. Johnson does not bring women up in his book as playing any role whatsoever. He fails to mention that in the upper-class home the wives stayed home and ran the household, thus having major impacts in the home. He also fails to mention that in lower class and single women often worked in the factories, thus having an impact on the working class. Once again, Johnson fails to mention that the majority of the church goers were women - which directly affects his arguments that religious men were the main contributors of the revivals. His disregard to note the influential impact women had during the time brings his argument into question. Johnson has completely left out an entire side to the full picture, thus not giving a completely clear image of how the revivals really came about.

It seems that Johnson has written this book the way that he would like to see it, leaving out the parts that don’t support his main argument. This makes me wonder what other aspects he may have looked over and failed to mention.

Overall, I feel it is important to mention that this book does contain a lot of valid historical information about the male working class, male politics, and influences of evangelical men. As Johnson mentions in his newly added preface this book is a good learning tool for undergraduates, but not as powerful of a learning tool for graduate students. Undergraduates can still benefit from the book since its pages contain many interesting facts and descriptions of how the middle-class developed in Rochester, New York. Also, looking at the length of time this book has been used as learning tool in college courses (over three decades), one can see that it obviously contains important historical information that teachers want their pupils to know.

Although Johnson has received countless amounts of criticism for this book he has obviously written a book that still effective in the classroom today. Regardless of its several shortcomings, Johnson’s book has persevered and is still being read today. Even though his correlation between society, religion, and revivals was not as clear and fully developed as it could have been he has made an extraordinary attempt to illustrate his argument.