fails to mention how President Roosevelt used the newmedium very effectively to communicate his political

messages. In short, radio became “an agency of politi-cal and social reinforcement” (Douglas Craig, Fireside

Politics, 2000).But Elena Razlogova offers a pointed critique of

that model. Hers is a view from below that uncoversthe vibrant participatory culture of the 1920s, when

many broadcasters still understood that they wereresponsible to an audience on which they depended –and in which listeners vigorously fought for the “own-

ership” of the airwaves. Audiences, Razologovaargues, “were critical components in the making of

radio, the establishment of its genres and social opera-tions” (3). Her short, readable book compiles a fasci-

nating array of examples showing how Americansdemanded access to and participated in programming

choices, how these listeners’ responses inspiredchanges and how, ultimately, this participatory culture

was replaced by corporate demographics radio.Razlogova’s book lacks some of the structural con-

ventions that readers may expect from an academic

publication. Although the narrative follows a chrono-logical order, chapters rarely commence with a clear

introduction, and the “theme” of each chapter is notimmediately apparent. But these minor shortcomings

rarely distract from the fact that Razlogova’s is themost comprehensive study to date on active audience

participation in the making of contemporary radio. Theauthor has uncovered and evaluated a wealth of archivalsources, and she has provided a sound argument on

why these voices mattered then and still matter now.For that alone, her work should stand prominent in the

historiography of radio in the United States.Ultimately, the heroic tale told by Razlogova does

not have a happy ending. The standardization and com-mercialization of the 1920s and 1930s undoubtedly

impacted radio diversity, in particular the ability ofevery political and ethnic group to have a voice, not

only on the airwaves. As radio producers turned to sur-veys and national studies to determine the preferencesof the majority and the marketability of some programs

over others, even “limited relations of reciprocitybecame the exception rather than the rule. Radio genres

had standardized and networks and ad agencies cameto evaluate programs primarily by ratings averages

and market segments” (97). Researchers no longerdemanded qualitative evaluations but devised

machines, like one nicknamed “Little Annie,” whichmerely allowed listeners to approve or disapprove of a

program by pressing green or red buttons. “LittleAnnie,” writes Razlogova, “measured ‘likes’ instead of

open interpretations” (105). Users of contemporarysocial networking sites like Facebook may interject that

back then, at least, audiences could still “dislike.”

–-Christian Wilbers

The College of William and Mary

The Stan Lee Universe.Danny Fingeroth and Roy Thomas, Editors. Raleigh, NC:

TwoMorrows Publishing, 2011.

As the year 2012 brings a ninetieth birthday to StanLee, he continues to participate in media projects.

Beginning his career with Timely Comics in 1941 atnineteen, he has entertained kids and adults longer than

any other living American. He innovated in comicbook production methods and in the co-creation of

superhero archetypes for characters like Spider-Man,Silver Surfer, Sub-Mariner, Hulk, and The Fantastic

Four. Along the way he helped build a fantasy-basedfranchise that in several ways rivaled Disney’s—a factratified by Disney’s 2009 acquisition of Marvel Enter-

tainment for 4.24 billion dollars.The Stan Lee Universe is a unique collection made

possible by the credentials of its editors plus the factthat Lee and so many early collaborators are still alive

and friendly. Danny Fingeroth was a Spider-Manwriter/editor for a several years and wrote stories for

The Incredible Hulk and the entire Darkhawk series.He worked with Lee as did Roy Thomas, who wrote

X-Men and Avengers for Marvel, eventually serving atthe helm as Lee’s successor. Those relationships permitFingeroth and Thomas to create a festschrift that

focuses on production—the so-called “MarvelMethod”—and creative direction that Lee gave to

comic artist teams. Notable writers, pencilers, inkers,editors give testimonials and describe their work rela-

tionships with Lee. Another dimension of this book isthe reproduction of materials from the University of

Wyoming American Heritage Center archives of Lee.He donated ninety-one boxes of materials that includemanuscripts, drafts, interviews, correspondence with

comics professionals, fan mail and difficult to find sub-stantial articles about Lee such as a 1966 “A Comeback

for Comic Books” by Roger Ebert and “FindingMarvel’s Voice” by Dave Kasakove on the origins of

“Marvel Bullpen Bulletins” and “Stan’s Soap Box.”One especially significant archival inclusion from 1974

64 Book Reviews

is “the Saga of the Silver Surfer Graphic Novel,” whichreproduces amiable correspondence, Lee’s outline,

Kirby’s drawings and dialogue, then Lee’s editorialrevisions. Taken in its entirety, this book is exceptional

in its collection of photographs and reproductions ofcorrespondence, comics pages, and works-in-progress.

The value of the archival materials is also evidentwhen brought to bear on some of the maddeningly

vague, undocumented statements of Lee’s coauthoredbiography Excelsior (2002). One of its misstatementsabout Frederic Wertham is that he “debated with

him…[and] usually won—but that was rarely publi-cized” (92, Lee’s italics). The documented clarification

in this volume is that in 1968, Lee debated with Dr.Hilde Mosse, one of Wertham’s loyal and sophisticated

associates in child research and the anti-comics cru-sade. The extensive transcript reveals that Lee is

charming, thoughtful, and civil in an exchange ofseveral thousand words (57-70). Some of Lee’s critics

would call him glib and self-promotional. But for thisreader, it inspired a counterfactual comics history, inwhich Stan Lee, rather than William Gaines, testifies

before Senator Kefauver’s Senate Subcommittee onJuvenile Delinquency. Perhaps America would have

bypassed the Comics Code Authority and Gaines’sEC Comics would not have been reduced to its sole

survivor,Mad.As much as any figure in American culture, Lee

managed to find a large variety of venues for his crea-tivity. He attracted collaborators as notable as AlanResnais, who proposed a film project. Within comics

he scripted and edited funny animal stories, femaletitles like Millie the Model, and cartoon animations.

Lee edited a variety of magazines, including the pinuporiented The Male Home Companion (145) and Focus

(146)—both in the girlie mag genre pointing towardPlayboy. Such material conspicuously expresses the

thoroughly male dominance of the creative side incomics. There is a single page given to Flo Steinberg, a

woman who worked as Lee’s secretary and sometimeproof reader.

This book will sit comfortably in all collections that

deal with American comics history. Its archival repro-ductions and gathering of journal articles that have

never entered the world of electronic text insure itsvalue. For more critical assessments of Lee, it should

be paired with Raphael and Spurgeon’s Stan Lee: The

Rise and Fall of the American Comic Book (2003).

Their narrative treatment deals more frankly withissues of executive competence, credit taking, and com-

pensation central to some of the notable, ruptured rela-tionships at Marvel.

–-John Shelton Lawrence

Emeritus, Morningside College

The Truman Administration and Bolivia:

Making theWorld Safe for Liberal

Constitutional Oligarchy.Glenn J. Dorn. University Park: Penn State University Press,

2011.

Bolivia is frequently compared to a beggar on agolden chair, an impoverished state possessing tremendous

mineral resources. The silver mines of Potos�ı oncedrew the Spanish to the heart of South America, but by

the mid-twentieth century its tin resources were of fargreater interest to the US, which was the world’s larg-

est consumer of this metal for cans, solders and alloys.Tin is central to Glenn Dorn′s analysis of the relation-ship between the US and Bolivia during the sexenio,

the six-year period between the lynching of military

strongman Villarroel and the National Revolution of1952, a seminal event that still reverberates throughBolivian politics.

The book is structured as a series of chapters detail-ing the interactions between the Truman Administra-

tion and a rapid succession of Bolivian governments,all of which attempted to steer a middle course

between reform and violent repression to protect theoligarchic order. Dependence on tin, which Augusto

C�espedes named “El Metal del Diablo,” had stuntedthe growth of the economy as well as the civil societyin this landlocked state. As long as the proverbial

Bolivian beggar relied on his tin cup for foreignexchange, the fate of the nation lay in the hands of a

small landowning elite, the rosca, dominated by the tinbarons Aramayo, Hochschild and Pati~no. This feudal

social structure, along with the humiliating defeat inthe Chaco war, made fertile ground for opposition

movements such as Paz Estenssoro’sMovimiento Nac-

ionalista Revolucionario, and for a rich crop of work-

ers’ associations and secret military lodges. The sexeniowas the last stand of the rosca, but the attempt to stemthe revolution would be futile without the support of

the norteamericanos.The Truman Administration stepped clumsily into

the seething cauldron of Bolivian politics. Its ability tounderstand the country was impaired by overblown

fears of fascism, Peronism and communism, but also

Book Reviews 65