In Robin and the Making of American Adolescence, Lauren R. O’Connor argues that “reading Robin allows us to witness creators (intentionally or unintentionally) reinforcing the narrow pathway to idealized maturity through this adolescent figure, one who is ostensibly in line to inherit a heroic role and legacy” (pg. 10). Further, O’Connor writes, “Creators of Robin(s) indelibly link maturation and heterosexual development, bluntly illustrate the double marginalization of adolescent femininity, and struggle to center on Black adolescence in a society generally unwelcoming of Black teens; these images of Robin all reinforce dominant cultural notions of adolescence and maturation” (pg. 15). Thus, O’Connor further argues, “Robin is implicated in the ‘making’ of adolescence by reflecting what mainstream cultural producers think adolescence looks like back to his primarily youthful fans. Robin is simultaneously a reflection and a refiner” (pg. 19). In this way, O’Connor’s work draws upon the work of Michel Foucault and Judith Butler while also examining the intersections of sociology, capitalism, and mass culture.

O’Connor argues that sexuality, whether heterosexual or queer, defines the original Robin, Dick Grayson. She writes, “The notion of the child that dominated the American cultural landscape at the time of Robin’s introduction (and remains recognizable to us in the twenty-first century) was most closely associated with innocence, defined in large part by a lack of knowledge about or access to sexuality” (pg. 36). She argues that Robin’s place within this belief was only compounded following the 1950s moral panic about comic books and the Comics Code Authority’s code defining comic books as children’s literature. Dick Grayson only escaped these social expectations and definitions of adolescence when writers advanced his age and changed his identity, first to Nightwing and then to Batman (pgs. 49-52). In contrast to Dick Grayson, Jason Todd, Tim Drake, and Damien Wayne’s developing masculinity, O’Connor argues that writers of girl Robins like Carrie Kelley and Stephanie Brown “diminish[ed], objectify[ed], or dispose[d] of these adolescent girl Robins in service to affirming the ‘rightness’ of adult men” (pg. 62). She further writes, “Any investigation of female characters in the Modern Age of comics requires the understanding that these texts were not intended for young women; instead, they sought to appeal to young male audiences with stories of masculine power, intelligence, and athleticism” (pg. 67). O’Conner concludes, “Carrie and Stephanie’s unfortunate fates produce an image of adolescence as a never-ending-girl-hood, in which females continue the cultural work of reaffirming masculinity-as-maturity” (pg. 99). Writers only developed this even further when they interrogated America’s racial issues. O’Connor writes, “Whereas the solipsistic lawbreaking of white Robins – to say nothing of Batman! – has been portrayed as a character flaw at worst, [Lee] Bermejo and [Tom] King demonstrate that for a nonwhite character, such attitudes and actions take on different meanings” (pg. 116).

O’Connor concludes with an examination of Robin in film and television as these works “represent a broader avenue through which the character is implicated in the making of adolescence. After all, adolescence is continually being ‘made’ right before our eyes, and film and television capture many, many more eyes than comics” (pg. 124). She argues that all filmic portrayals of Robin must, in some way, respond to the 1966 Batman television series. O’Connor concludes, “Robin’s development and the development of our understanding of ‘adolescence’ parallel each other – he is both product and producer of ideas about adolescence” (pg. 149). O’Connor’s book is a brilliant work of cultural history, particularly in this moment when comic books and their adaptations reach global audiences, shaping perceptions and cultural references. As more diverse audiences seek meaning in comic books, O’Connor’s work demonstrates the shifting cultural impact of characters over time with Robin as a case study. Interestingly, shortly after O’Connor published her work, DC Comics further developed the character of Robin with their depiction of Tim Drake’s bisexuality in Batman: Urban Legends #6. ( )