TO THE BATPOLES podcast #88: Holy hyperbole! It's Burt Ward's book!

[bat-rss]

Yes, it's our take on "Boy Wonder: My Life in Tights"! A few random adult situations from the book are discussed, so maybe not one for the kids.

While the book does give us some insight into what it was like to go from nothing to superfame to typecast purgatory, is indisuputabily full of inaccuracies and hyperbole -- not to mention much more (in terms of both quantity and cringe-inducing detail) about his sexual conquests and misadventures than there is material of use to Batman '66 scholars. Why? Is this what the majority of fans want?

Don't miss Paul's examination of how this fits into the pattern of books written by stars, and Tim's suggested alternate titles for the book!

http://tothebatpoles.libsyn.com/088-hol ... wards-book

[Bob Furmanek]

I always cringed to see this book (and inappropriate cover) on the table at conventions when Burt is meeting his young fans!

[AndyFish]

I lost a lot of respect for Burt for penning this trash. No offense but I'm going to skip this podcast, don't need to give it any more time than I already did.

[BATWINGED HORNET]

I'll get to the podcast shortly, but it was not Burt who constantly sexualized the TV series--the very thing audiences were/are more likely to see than a biography. It was not Burt who constantly told stories about the intention of the show being pockmarked with double entendres such as Catwoman causing "strange stirrings in my utility belt"(which was never said in the series), or oft-repeated "Golden P*ssy" line.

There's one source for that.

[bat-rss]

I always cringed to see this book (and inappropriate cover) on the table at conventions when Burt is meeting his young fans!

A cover which, you'll note, I couldn't bring myself to use as the image for this episode! (Can you name the episode I took this shot from?)

[AndyFish]

I'll get to the podcast shortly, but it was not Burt who constantly sexualized the TV series--the very thing audiences were/are more likely to see than a biography. It was not Burt who constantly told stories about the intention of the show being pockmarked with double entendres such as Catwoman causing "strange stirrings in my utility belt"(which was never said in the series), or oft-repeated "Golden P*ssy" line.

There's one source for that.

Adam was not at his best when he pulled those jokes out, but at least his book showed some class.

[BATWINGED HORNET]

Regarding the explosion in "Smack in the Middle", one must remember that there may have been several takes of that scene. The aired episode is only the end result--selecting what came close to being right, so Burt's memory could be about the entire experience, not just what one sees in the episode.

On the issue of on-set safety: certainly, there's evidence to support it as true that Dozier / Greenway was not so concerned with safety if one considers how often stuntmen were seriously hurt by Bruce Lee on The Green Hornet set. Greenway seemed to be all about results and not so much about caring for the people getting those results.

Paul: Yes, telling "tall tales" is common among actors from old TV and movies; for example, Star Trek's James Doohan, and George Takei made a living at conventions for several decades by telling endless, utterly bottom-scraping, character-assassinating stories about William Shatner. Yvonne Craig did the same by repeating wig stories about Shatner, "bad smell" stories about Bruce Dern from her appearance with him on Land of the Giants, and so on. West engaged in this kind of storytelling, too, so Ward is just a part of the club, not the founder, or its top member, so to speak.

The wedding: If Adam pulled a money con on Burt (about what it would it would take to be Burt's best man), that's very low-down.

Finally, about the bedroom details, you guys point out how instant fame can change a young man previously inexperienced with attention from women. Like it or not, that's the business, and that's the way it was for many guys in the entertainment business. Read any bio of famous rock groups, endless TV and movie stars of that era, and its a common story. Whether you were Mick Jagger, Bob Crane, Davy Jones, Steve McQueen, or endless other stars, its the same thing. They were not the manufactured image fans were sold--they were real people exercising desires they would have never been able to if they had been Joe Average instead of a face recognized around a nation, or the world.

Whether Burt exaggerated on some things can be debated, but his bio was never said to be a primer for kids, since most of that series fans could be estimated as being are anywhere between 40 and 70. Further, children are not the target audience for biographies, so he's not "soiling" or shattering any innocent image they might have about the TV characters.

As mentioned up-thread, Burt was not the one who repeatedly sexualized the TV show to the point where one might look at episodes in a different light, and for older fans who had to hear that at conventions, TV and car show appearances from the 1970s-forward, that would do more damage to the image of the series than any late-in-the-game book by Ward, the guy who--without question--helped make that series a classic and the influenced other versions of his character.

[Commodore Schmidlapp]

While the book does give us some insight into what it was like to go from nothing to superfame to typecast purgatory, is indisuputabily full of inaccuracies and hyperbole -- not to mention much more (in terms of both quantity and cringe-inducing detail) about his sexual conquests and misadventures than there is material of use to Batman '66 scholars. Why? Is this what the majority of fans want?

I think you hit on one of the reasons in the podcast - some men (Ward in this case) measure their masculinity by their sexual conquests. His insecurity may have been exacerbated by Ward's character playing second fiddle to West's, as well as the increased pay and adulation that went Batman's way.

Is it what fans want? I would say in this case, no, though part of the selling point may have been how a show that was perceived mostly as squeaky clean was actually lascivious behind the scenes.

But there are fans of certain entertainers that have either a hero-worship attraction, or they live vicariously through them.

I've encountered fans of classic rock bands that believe with every fiber of their being that their favorite rock stars never encounter financial issues and are greeted after every show with Victoria's Secret-caliber models, awaiting to serve them in every way, while the party never ends.

But reality is typically far from that. There's a Rolling Stones movie/documentary from the early 70's with a title not suitable to mention here, that's a real eye-opener. Throwing the TV out the hotel window? It's so premeditated and Keith can't even lift it. It reeks much more of desperation and boredom than living on the edge. As for the groupies, I felt more sympathy for the drugged out, lost women than anything sexy.

Also, CK Lendt, who worked for the band Kiss in the 70's and 80's, wrote a book called Kiss and Sell that exposed in detail how the band deliberately over-hyped themselves. Their solo albums that 'shipped platinum' were returned in droves, bankrupting their record company, and he said Gene's famous Polaroid collection was sketchy to say the least.

I know die hard fans of groups such as these, that want to read the Burt Ward-like hyperbolic biographies of their heroes, truth be darned.

[Keith Mayo]

I guess this week's podcast was a way of saying Happy Birthday to Burt.
Not one of my favorite episodes to be sure.

[Kamdan]

Thanks for the shout-out, guys! Wish I could have joined you in the discussion as a guest, but with your long distance situation, I can understand why you’d want to keep the show as a duo. Wanted to get a chance to say that even though Ward seems to exaggerate his stories and brag about his status as star, I understand that mostly that can be blamed on the ignorance of youth we all went through. It’s been said by Lorenzo Semple, Jr. that he was “annoying” and Stanley Ralph Ross recalled the incident what happens when you complain to the writer, so he definitely was falling into the traps of stardom without a thought of being humble until reality hit him. When I was in an acting class with a bunch of types that had their eye too much on stardom, I reminded them that it’s better in the long run to start off slow with supporting roles and work your way up the latter instead of skyrocketing to the top. His stories were also good examples of not being too green on your first shoot where they tell you to do something that you know is dangerous. Also to get an agent to find out what they’re paying you beforehand so you don’t get screwed at being paid minimum wage like Ward ended up with.

Ward had a one in million shot getting the co-starring role in a hit television series on his very first audition, because he fit the character type perfectly. Probably made other working actors frustrated that they didn’t get it, but that’s one thing you’ve got to prepare for is getting rejected in favor of someone else. It’s unfortunate that he had the door slam shut on him after that, but anyone in the business will tell you that’s what will happen. Ward’s used his enthusiastic nature to help his new business endeavors and has made a living telling these stories about the production for the last 50 years and it’s easy to mix up details when you’re telling a story to people at a convention or lecture, but as you guys said, once it goes to a printed medium, that’s when you open yourself up to libel lawsuits and fans looking at DVDs and Blu-rays of the series finding out that Ward’s stunt double did his fair share of work and your word is no good. It used to be said “when legend becomes fact, print the legend,” but in this day in age, it’s more like “believe the legend.”

[HELLOLARRY]

I think the picture is from "He Meets His Match the Grisly Ghoul".

I got the book when it first came out and aside from the first reading, I've never revisited it. IMO, I didn't buy most of it. Such as (and correct me if I'm wrong or please leave this part out), the claim that he did 7,000 public appearances by the time the book was published in 1995 (30 years). I wouldn't count 1965 for obvioius reasons so when you take that away it would be 242 appearances a year. I don't think so... It's a nice round number but probably not very accurate. Kind of like the claim that Johnny Carson had some 40,000 guests. Maybe - but 1500 of those were Charles Nelson Reilly. I'm playing with numbers of course but you get the point. I feel the sole purpose of this book was for Burt to solicit some attention for himself then use that platform to publicly humiliate Adam West. I'm not saying both of these men were saints as none of us really have any idea what went on but the book came off as typical guy ball busting. "Well she didn't care for Adam but I..oh I really charmed her" and statements to that effect. There was an interview Ward gave on the Conan O'Brien Show when the book came out and when he starts ripping on West - he comes across as kind of a d-bag and the audience responded accordingly. I find it strange (unless such things have happened and I'm not aware) that since the initial release of the book, it is rarely mentioned by him nor has he been asked about it in interviews. Holy Horse Hockey!

Digressing a bit as I also just listened to a few other podcasts and finished up the Riddler with John Astin. I'm glad to see some positive takes on this one as I feel he is unfairly maligned when we look at it with a revisionist and critical eye. At the time, I don't believe they thought of such things. They had a production schedule to meet and Gorshin or his agent was being a brat so it was recast. One only has to look at the third season episode Ring Around the Riddler to see how Gorshin's performance is horribly phoned in and I'm personally not that crazy about the last Riddler arc of the first season as he seems bored with it. I'm not sure if he would have made a difference if he played the role in the Astin arc. It was nice to see a different interpretation of it.

Also interesting about season two which may be another signal of people losing interest in the series is aside from the Catwoman arc in week two, we don't get an episode from one of the four major villains again until week nine's Hizzonner the Penguin.

Finally, I think Lee Meriwether was the perfect choice for Catwoman in the film as (and this may be sacrilege) I don't think Julie Newmar could have pulled off the Kitka performance. I think Lee did a great job in the role.

[BATWINGED HORNET]

I got the book when it first came out and aside from the first reading, I've never revisited it. IMO, I didn't buy most of it. Such as (and correct me if I'm wrong or please leave this part out), the claim that he did 7,000 public appearances by the time the book was published in 1995 (30 years). I wouldn't count 1965 for obvioius reasons so when you take that away it would be 242 appearances a year. I don't think so... It's a nice round number but probably not very accurate. Kind of like the claim that Johnny Carson had some 40,000 guests. Maybe - but 1500 of those were Charles Nelson Reilly. I'm playing with numbers of course but you get the point.

Honestly, does it matter if Carson had 40,000 guests or 400? What we do know is that the general public who followed him did not care, and enjoyed his show until the end. That's what he was there to do. His own account of guest numbers or anything else does not alter that fact.

I feel the sole purpose of this book was for Burt to solicit some attention for himself then use that platform to publicly humiliate Adam West. I'm not saying both of these men were saints as none of us really have any idea what went on but the book came off as typical guy ball busting. "Well she didn't care for Adam but I..oh I really charmed her" and statements to that effect. There was an interview Ward gave on the Conan O'Brien Show when the book came out and when he starts ripping on West

As you say, they were not saints, and West, Ross, Price and others have all taken their shots at Ward in print, TV and other venues over the years. To that end, if one cannot take it (Ward's former co-workers), then perhaps it would have been wise to avoid dishing it out--something Star Trek's James Doohan and George Takei in particular should have learned after spending decades trashing Shatner. The second Shatner said anything about them, it was the emotional end of the world, when they--not long after Star Trek was off the NBC schedule--started to use Shatner as their whipping boy / ticket attraction. Anyone doing the same to Ward either took that direction because they had an axe to grind, or they knew trash talk about a popular show and/or actor is exactly what fans, writers and publishers want to hear. Either direction is completely unethical, so they deserve as much criticism as Ward.

I find it strange (unless such things have happened and I'm not aware) that since the initial release of the book, it is rarely mentioned by him nor has he been asked about it in interviews. Holy Horse Hockey!

Probably because the book is not Batman Dearest, where shocking allegations are always fodder for the "do tell" set looking for something along the lines of--

"Adam beat me with a Bat-coat hanger---but it was so bent that a red-faced Dozier charged Adam two dollars for wrecking merchandise. Adam was so enraged, he...he beat me again!!! Holy Ice packs!".

No, its just a common bio about one of the stars of an old TV series.

But there's another reason...

Ward's post book release interviews usually cover the same ground that's been traveled for at least 30 years (interviewers rarely know how to get off the same train of thought), so that's what he's going to respond to. For example, take tennis legend John McEnroe: without fail, interviewers cannot stop themselves from asking him about the 1980 Wimbledon final vs Borg, did he and Jimmy Connors really hate each other, did he hate Ivan Lendl...does he think he can beat the Williams sisters in a match. The same old questions. the same old replies. Its no different with Ward--no one is going to ask him about his childhood, or his family because they are stuck in one mode of questioning used with him for countless years.

[robinboyblunderer]

Finally, about the bedroom details, you guys point out how instant fame can change a young man previously inexperienced with attention from women. Like it or not, that's the business, and that's the way it was for many guys in the entertainment business. Read any bio of famous rock groups, endless TV and movie stars of that era, and its a common story. Whether you were Mick Jagger, Bob Crane, Davy Jones, Steve McQueen, or endless other stars, its the same thing. They were not the manufactured image fans were sold--they were real people exercising desires they would have never been able to if they had been Joe Average instead of a face recognized around a nation, or the world.

Haven't listened to the podcast yet, but I agree; if anything I wouldn't be surprised if he low-balled his experiences or only mentioned the most over the top details in the book; as unrealistic as it may seem or exaggerated fame is a powerful attractor and for a while there he was on a massive hit show.

[Bob Furmanek]

Also interesting about season two which may be another signal of people losing interest in the series is aside from the Catwoman arc in week two, we don't get an episode from one of the four major villains again until week nine's Hizzonner the Penguin.

I think that had more to do with the movie still playing around the country and not wanting to diminish potential ticket sales.

[High C]

Also interesting about season two which may be another signal of people losing interest in the series is aside from the Catwoman arc in week two, we don't get an episode from one of the four major villains again until week nine's Hizzonner the Penguin.

I think that had more to do with the movie still playing around the country and not wanting to diminish potential ticket sales.

Exactly. If Julie hadn't been absent from the movie, I doubt we would've seen CW in the second arc of the season.

I can't prove it, but I think it was a classic example of chasing good money after bad. Dozier and Co. still were hoping to squeeze some more box office out of the movie, so I don't think it's a coincidence that the Pengy restaurant arc was the first one to be filmed, yet didn't run until December.

Of course, that meant starting the season with the Big 4 mostly absent until the election episodes, which certainly didn't help the already sagging ratings and buzz.