When I was a kid, I thought of the old "Batman" television show as simple adventure. When I saw episodes of it as an adult, I was surprised to learn how satirical it had been.
Let's consider. First of all, the most obvious thing about the show is that absolutely
none of the "good guys" have any senses of humor whatsoever. All of them are portrayed as being serious as heart-attacks 100% of the time. It's most obvious with Batman and -- interestingly -- Robin, but it's true of all the good guys.
What's more, none of the good guys ever betray the slightest hint that they have even the slightest idea of how to enjoy life. Every one of them comes across as utterly devoid of fun.
The next most obvious thing about all of the "good guys," particularly Batman and Robin, is that they're
completely black-and-white thinkers. To them, everything and everyone is either "good" or "evil," and there's no middle ground whatsoever. For example, Batman is forever referring to the villains as "fiends," even if they've committed no crimes more serious than jaywalking. To his credit, Batman seems to believe in the possibility of redemption, but he's nonetheless portrayed as a completely black-and-white thinker who seems to regard every action as either praiseworthy or heinous. And he doesn't seem to have the capacity to understand that someone might commit a "heinous crime" like speeding without being a horrible person.
The villains are forever capturing Batman and Robin and then putting them into some sort of death trap. More often than not, B&R escape not because they're smart or because they have nifty gadgets -- but out of pure luck. For example, I remember one episode in which B&R were hooked up to electrical cables.
Just as the villain threw the switch that would electrocute our heroes, Gotham City experienced the world's most conveniently-timed power outage. (Even as a kid, I thought that a completely unbelievable coincidence.)
Batman
frequently noted that they seemed to cheat death on a regular basis. He claimed that it was because they were such good people, and that "Providence" was, therefore, on their side -- and would intervene when necessary, to protect them.
Perhaps the most noteworthy thing about the villains of the show is that they were the only ones who ever seemed to derive any sort of enjoyment out of life. True, most of the villains
did try to bump off B&R on a frequent basis, but other than that, they rarely did anything truly heinous. More often than not, it seemed that their major "crimes" were that they were enjoying life too much.
And that's the thing. Time and time again, the show went overboard to portray anyone who wasn't working hard and mindlessly conforming to the Protestant work ethic as a bad person. Indeed, that was often the chief means by which B&R judged someone's worth. If a person was diligently working at a "proper" job, that person was automatically assumed to be a good person. If a person had no visible means of support, he or she was assumed to be a scofflaw and, therefore, lower than dirt.
The irony, of course, is that Bruce Wayne and Dick Grayson were independently wealthy and had never had real jobs in their lives. But then, the show consistently portrayed them as spending more or less literally every waking moment hovering over the Batphone, waiting to be called into action. So I guess the
did have jobs, of a sort. (It was also frequently mentioned in the show that they were "duly-deputized officers of the law.")
The ultimate example of this attitude came in the "Batman" movie. B&R found a bomb in a bar. Robin
actually tried to urge Batman to let the bomb go off and kill everyone in the bar, and
actually chided Batman for risking his life to save a bunch of "drunkards" -- making it clear in the process that he didn't regard them as worth saving. Had
any of these people done anything at all to suggest that they were bad people? No. Their only "crime" was that they were (legally!) consuming alcohol in the middle of the day, which implied that they didn't have regular jobs.
***
After seeing it again as an adult, it was pretty clear to me that the old "Batman" show was a satire. It mercilessly made fun of Batman and Robin for being so utterly rigid in their attitudes, so ruthlessly judgemental of others, so completely humorless, so arrogant as to assume that "Providence" favored and protected them, and so completely incapable of thinking in anything other than black-and-white terms.
As such, ham-fisted though it might have been, I think the sketch in the OP does illustrate a point. GW Bush frequently makes public statements suggesting that he, too, is a judgemental, black-and-white thinker who's incapable of understanding that real-world situations often involve shades of gray, and who seems to believe that "Providence" guides and supports his actions.
Cheers,
Michael
Re: Bush or Batman?
Linear Mode
