Full Volume 2

Journal of Venture Studies -- Volume Two
1
To say that The Venture Bros. couldn’t exist without Ben

Edlund and the influence of The Tick would surely be pre-
suming too much, but it should not be such a stretch to say
that without the significant contribution that Edlund made
-- indirectly because of the impact of The Tick and di-
rectly through his scripting on episodes such as “Viva Los
Muertos!” -- The Venture Bros. would at least surely be
different. Through his reinvention and redefinition of the
superhero parody, Edlund paved the way for the sleek satire
and biting commentary that The Venture Bros. has become
known for, and his efforts as a writer on the show have
created an indelible link between the two properties that
goes far beneath the surface. With his work on The Venture
Bros., Edlund inverts es-
tablished examples of
success and failure to
create something impor-
tant to the mythos of the
characters involved and
thus leaves his mark on a
show that has seen little
outside influence from
writers not named Publick
or Hammer.
The relationship between

Edlund and The Venture
Bros. creators Jackson
“Venturestein” Illustration Publick and Doc Hammer is
by Jeff McComsey
well documented, as is
1
Publick’s contribution to The Tick in its various forms --

comic book, cartoon and live-action television program --
and it is surely because of this familiarity that Edlund
was able to make his direct contribution to The Venture
Bros. universe, though it still bears mentioning that Ed-
lund has the distinction of being, with “Viva Los Muer-
tos!”, the only individual other than Publick and Hammer to
write an episode entirely by himself.1 Even if there hadn’t
been an established professional and personal relationship,
though, Edlund would still have been the perfect outside
contributor to The Venture Bros. universe, with his psycho-
logically introspective, imaginative, and sometimes surre-
alist approach to writing scripts and other forms of enter-
tainment.
It is important to point out that Ben Edlund is not the

original innovator of the concept of the superhero parody
with The Tick. The idea of a parodic or satirical super-
hero had existed decades before 1988’s The Tick #1 was pub-
lished by Edlund and Boston’s New England Comics: there
were the Mad Magazine spoofs in the form of characters like
SuperduperMan and Captain Marbles; there were the Marvel
Comics publications Not Brand Echh! and Peter Porker, The
Spectacular Spider-Ham; there were cartoons such as Under-
dog and Captain Caveman. What Edlund did create, though,
was a parody that moved beyond the general conventions and
limitations that come with parodies such as those listed
1Edlund is also credited as a partial contributor on the episodes “Ca-

reers in Science” (production episode 102) and “Guess Who’s Coming to
State Dinner?” (production episode 209).
2
above; if Mighty Mouse finds its purpose in being a simpli-

fied, animal version of Superman, just as Groo is an ab-
surdist response to Conan, Edlund’s creations break those
quotidian conventions with the development of The Tick and
his surrounding universe.
With The Tick, Edlund created a character that was not a

specific parody of any preexisting superhero, but one who
was able to exist autonomously and comment on comic books
and superheroes in general while simultaneously building
his own mythos outside of and beyond what is available to
Spider-Ham, the Inferior Five or other such one-note char-
acters. Likewise, then, and in its own way, The Venture
Bros. is also able to succeed as something more than just a
parody of action/adventure cartoons for these same reasons:
it creates a meaningful, unique vision while it also sati-
rizes and comments. Both of these properties, interest-
ingly, are able to accomplish this feat while also incorpo-
rating direct parodies into the original works, interpolat-
ing Oedipus or Jefferson Twilight into a cast of original
characters. One of the first characters the Tick meets in
his comic book series is a Superman parody in the form of
Clark Oppenheimer; the cartoon and live-action series gave
us similar direct parodies in Die Fledermaus/Batmanuel and
American Maid/Captain Liberty. In the world of The Venture
Bros., there is the obvious nod to Jonny Quest with Action
Johnny and Race Bannon, Dr. Byron Orpheus is an admittedly
well-developed homage to Dr. Stephen Strange, and in the
Edlund-penned “Viva Los Muertos!”, we meet up with a direct
parody of the Scooby-Doo gang. The main characters in both
3
of these properties, though, remain distinct and unique,

able to exist next to and interact with the parodic charac-
ters while still moving forward in their own right, creat-
ing their own histories as their stories unfold. This
autonomy, despite the mingling of the different types of
characters, is a ringing testament to the overall vision
that both The Venture Bros. and The Tick benefit from.
When evaluating Ben Edlund’s major contribution to The Ven-

ture Bros. in the form of the episode “Viva Los Muertos!”2 ,
one must look at the work in its entirety as well as in
bits and pieces. To the latter, then, it is at least in-
teresting to note that “Viva Los Muertos!” includes a talk-
ing dog, or at least the illusion of a talking dog, as
2 As mentioned before, he is also credited as a co-‐writer on the sea-

son one episode “Careers in Science”, though Doc Hammer implied that
Edlund’s role in the collaboration was brief, saying that the two “nap-
kined it out”, referring to the episode’s plot.
4
there are significant characters in both this episode and

in The Tick universe that fit this description.
In “Sidekicks Don’t Kiss”, the 29th episode of The Tick car-

toon series, the Tick finds -- and keeps -- a gooey-eyed
dog that he names “Speak” after supposedly hearing the dog
talk to him. As it turns out, it is more likely that the
Tick imagined Speak’s voice as a result of a head injury
and, possibly, the Tick’s always-present casual relation-
ship with reality. We later additionally learn that not
only can the dog not talk of its own volition, but Speak is
not even an actual dog, but a capybara, a very large ro-
dent. In “Viva Los Muertos!”, we meet Ted, Sonny, Patty,
Val and Groovy -- parodies of their counterparts in the
Hanna-Barbera Scooby-Doo cartoon. Groovy, the Scooby-Doo
counterpart, is also depicted as a dog who can talk but
only be heard by one man. While this is also a reference
to the Son of Sam murders of the 1970s, it is at least
worth noting that there are similarities with the Tick and
Speak as well. While the Tick’s well-natured insanity
causes him at least in part to believe that Speak is a
talking dog, one that only he has heard, Sonny’s drug-
induced paranoia also pushes him in this direction, a
darker but nevertheless apt comparison that is brought to-
gether by a single creator in Ben Edlund.
It is in relation to the larger thematic elements of The

Venture Bros., though, that Edlund makes his most signifi-
cant contributions to the universe that Publick and Hammer
5
have created. On several occasions, the Venture Bros.

creators have noted that one of the central themes of the
show is that of failure. Speaking on this topic in the DVD
commentary on the episode “Home Insecurity”, Hammer says,
“It's about the beauty of failure. … Every character is not
only flawed, but sucks at what they do, and is beautiful at
it […]. It shows that failure's funny, and it's beautiful
and it's life, and it's okay […].” As Lea Rosen articu-
lates in the article “Success and ‘Failure’ in The Venture
Bros.”:
The failure that characterizes Hammer and

Publick’s creation is the failure of dreams,
or ambitions, or pie-in- the-sky promises.
It is the failure of adulthood to live up to
the dreams of childhood -- which is a !
reasonable interpretation, if you start from
the assumption that perpetual childhood is
the best anyone can hope for.3
If the Venture Bros. does follow a theme of failure, as has

been established, then a notable exception to this rule
would be made in the character of Brock Samson, the glue
that holds the otherwise dysfunctional Venture family to-
gether. Samson exists, on many levels, as a male power
fantasy, a James Bondian figure, a nigh-invincible killing
machine who is envied by men and irresistible to women.
3Rosen’s article, “’I’m Not a Boy Adventurer Anymore’: Success and

‘Failure’ in The Venture Bros.”, is a fascinating and articulate decon-
struction of the theme of failure in the show. In the article, Rosen
discusses the relationship between Jonas and Rusty Venture and comes to
a nuanced conclusion regarding the idea of failure, saying, “The defi-
nition of failure as a kind of self-‐reflective inability to live up
to one’s own admittedly distorted ambitions leaves open an another in-
terpretation: that failure is in the mind, and that persistent failure
is characterized by nothing so much as an inability to be objective
about one’s strengths. Failure, as Hammer and Publick use the term, is
associated more closely with banality than incapacity.”
6
While Rusty Venture, Sergeant Hatred, Action Johnny and so

many other characters are flawed to the point of being
emasculated and impotent, Samson eschews the show’s theme
and becomes an overcompensation of sorts to all of the in-
eptitude that surrounds him.
In “Viva Los Muertos!”, though, Edlund speaks to this theme

by inverting it, and thus he puts his mark on the program
through this inversion. In the episode, the character of
Rusty Venture, possibly the show’s greatest example of dys-
function and failure, comes upon what is perhaps his great-
est success in the program’s history, rivaled only by the
cloning process that he uses to keep his sons alive in some
form, though even that process was developed prior to the
first episode of the series. In the creation of the
Frankenstein-esque “Venturestein” character from the body
of a dead henchman named “Tex” (a subtle reference to an
episode of M*A*S*H), Dr. Venture has finally, as he put it,
managed to “beat God at His own game” in a way that even
cloning did not address. Rusty Venture, shown to be a man
known more for living off the ideas of his father than as a
more traditional mad (super) scientist, brings the dead
back to life and accomplishes what even perhaps Dr. Jonas
Venture could not (or would not) have imagined. This suc-
cess cannot be understated, and even though Venture contin-
ues to act in his more selfish and self-serving manner
throughout the episode in regards to Venturestein, it still
marks a significant inversion for a character who more of-
ten than not fails miserably.
7
If Rusty Venture finally experiences the joys of success in

“Viva Los Muertos!”, however, it is Brock Samson, the one
character usually impervious to such things, who feels the
greatest sting of failure and self-doubt. Instrumental in
the creation of Venturestein by killing Tex as the henchman
tried to flee the compound raid-gone-awry, Samson later re-
flects on the sequence of events, saying, “I could see it
in his eyes that if I let him get away this one time he’d
never come back. But then I also though, you know…kill
him. What kind of way is that to…” Soon after, he ex-
presses remorse for killing the henchman; in the DVD com-
mentary for the episode, Jackson Publick discusses Samson’s
state of remorse, saying, “We’re always equating his abil-
ity to murder with some form of potency. Like, when he
can’t kill, he’s just a mess.”
If Samson does indeed asso-

ciate his self-worth with
his effectiveness as a war-
rior, the failure that he
experiences in “Viva Los
Muertos!” can go a long way
in explaining his moments of
self doubt acted out in the
episode. It is this failure
that means more to him than
his contemplations on the
necessity of murder; through
the creation of Ventures-
tein, death no longer holds
8
as much sway as it once did. And this distinction is an

important one in relation to Samson and other operatives of
his ilk, for if killing is a major part of his job descrip-
tion, as it is, and if he defines himself by what he does,
and he largely does, how does he reconcile the new reality
that now stares him in the face? Samson is facing a loss of
purpose in a world that is less black and white than it was
the day before. How can a man so used to success -- so de-
fined by success in the Venture universe -- deal with this
new reality where his proficiency in creating death can be
undone by, of all people, Dr. Rusty Venture, a man so inept
that Samson’s OSI mission code name for his assignment with
the Ventures is “Operation Rusty’s Blanket”4 ?
It is this inversion of traditional roles in “Viva Los

Muertos” that stands as Ben Edlund’s greatest contribution
and gift to The Venture Bros. Dr. Venture, usually a fail-
ure, is elevated to the level of success while Brock Sam-
son, usually a success, is presented with a great failure.
Both characters deal with this development in different
fashions: Venture, as might be expected, squanders his dis-
covery with greed and a short-sighted approach; Samson
looks for companionship and introspection, leading to an
epiphany of sorts that stands as one of the more existen-
tial moments in the series. As he hallucinates while tak-
ing part in Dr. Orpheus’s self-reflective “death vine rit-
ual”, Samson struggles with his inner nature in the form of
4 The details of the operation are a bit more complex than might be let
on here, but the overall protective capacity in which Brock serves
nonetheless makes for an apt comparison.
9
a post-op Colonel Hunter Gathers:
HUNTER: What is all this namby-pamby feel

bad about good wet-work moose crap? You’re
beyond good and evil, Superman! You work
for the government.
SAMSON: What about, uh…humanity and empathy

and all that garbage?
HUNTER: Who cares? You’re going to special

ops heaven.
SAMSON: Really?
HUNTER: Really! And it’s God-damn great! A

G-man Valhalla! There’s trim and guns eve-
rywhere. We eat steak-flavored clouds and
poop secrets!
SAMSON: But you’re not even dead! You’re a

woman.
HUNTER: And you’re a tool, boy. A tool…

built for a single purpose by the United
States of shut your third God-damn eye for a
fucking reason! You can’t teach a hammer to
love nails, son. That dog don’t hunt!5
The Venture Bros. as a program has had the good fortune of

a singular focus; under the loving care and guidance of
Jackson Publick and Doc Hammer, the show has a clear vision
that many other productions, with endless strings of writ-
5 A clip including this scene was played at the “Spotlight on Ben Ed-
lund” panel at the 2012 Comic-‐Con in San Diego. After viewing the
clip, Edlund jested that a better title for the panel would have been
“What’s Ben Edlund’s Problem?”, adding, “I am so grateful that I have
found a space in time and a space like this that anyone pays any atten-
tion to anything I do. I know that if I didn’t have this aspect to my
life, I would be a complete -‐-‐ oh, my God -‐-‐ I would be the
kind of beachcomber that doesn’t get to go into the ATM without causing
a real issue for other people: ‘oh, sorry, it’s just I can’t pull it
together to get the sand out of my, you know, stuff.’”
10
ers and perspectives, simply cannot match. But the inclu-

sion of Ben Edlund into the creative process shows the
benefit of an occasional outside voice, even if the voice
in question comes in the form of a long-time friend and
creative confidant. With “Viva Los Muertos!”, Edlund has
added a new chapter into the Venture-verse, one that makes
subtle comments on established characters and asks ques-
tions that otherwise might never have been raised. The
show, the characters and the property in general are better
off because of it.
----
In addition to owning a fantastic Jet Boy and Jet Girl cos-

tume set, Jeff McClelland is an instructor at Waynesburg
University and a student at Indiana University of Pennsyl-
vania. He writes for comics such as FUBAR, Teddy and the
Yeti, and the Free Comic Book Day 2013 issue of The Tick.
He has an Internet sketch show that nobody watches called
Franks and Beans.
Jeff McComsey is the Editor in Chief of the historical zom-

bie anthology and New York Times bestseller FUBAR, now in
its third volume. He primarily spends his time illustrat-
ing funnybooks and anything else that comes within arm's
reach.
11
Introduction!
It is November 2nd 1974. In the New York studios of ABC

television, Dick Cavett asks his guest a question: ‘What is
black noise?’
The thin, visibly nervous man sitting beside Mr Cavett

answers:
‘Black-noise is something that Burroughs got

very interested in. It's a… one facet of
Black-noise is that… um… everything, like a
glass if an opera singer hits a particular
note, the vibrations of that hit the
metabolism of the glass and cracks it, yeah?
So a black-noise is the register within
which you can crack a city or people or…
it's a new control bomb. It's a noise — bomb
in fact, which can destroy… why do you ask
that?’
Mr Cavett does not reply to this question. He asks

instead, ‘I mean is it a real thing? Is it something…?’
The English gentleman insists, ‘Oh yeah it is. It was

invented in France…up until last year you could buy the
patent for it in the French patent-office for about 3-4
dollars.’
Mr Cavett: ‘And it would wipe out a…?’
1
Guest: ‘It depends how much money you put into it. I mean
a small one could probably kill about half the people
here. But a big one could … destroy a city. Or even more…’1
We have no way of knowing whether this part of the

interview generated greater interest from the audience
than other topics of conversation that night. It is
likely that the alien-looking man’s twentieth-century
viewers were more focussed on his recent change of image,
from glam-trash artist in spandex to plastic soul singer
in a suit. But for twenty first-century students of the
Venture-Verse, this excerpt is unsettling - exciting even.
This is because the guest expounding the terrors of black
noise bombs and French patents was David Bowie: aka the
Sovereign - leader of The Guild of Calamitous Intent.
Despite the obvious implication of this tele-visual

discovery, the aim of this paper is not to speculate
whether David Bowie is actually the Sovereign. Firstly,
this is because this paper assumes that its readers are
intelligent people who understand that current scientific
knowledge disproves the existence of human shape-shifters.
Secondly, this paper recognises that - given the belief
that Western society is a meritocracy where economic,
political and social freedom is enjoyed by all - anyone
wishing to create and lead a secret society such as the
Guild must, therefore, be able to do so. Thus, the
possibility that Bowie could become a Sovereign of sorts
in this universe is moot. Instead this paper will explore
1 “The Dick Cavett Show”, (1974), ABC TV, USA.

2
why we, the viewers of the Venture-Verse, would want David

Bowie to fulfil his apparent promise when he sings that,
‘Fame makes a man take things over’?2 It asks what are the
references, concepts and ideas that surround us to make
the Sovereign and the Guild of Calamitous Intent a
‘tangible fancy’, and so prompt our otherwise rational
minds to link a forty-year old interview to our favourite
animated series?
This paper will answer these questions in three sections.

It will compare the organised structure of the Guild to
one of Bowie’s famous personas in order to explain why the
Guild became ‘a haven for washed-out rock stars’.3 Next,
it will discuss common beliefs in secret societies. Are
there are any real-world references that lend legitimacy
to this phenomenon? In the final section it will attempt
a hypothesis: why we seek to change a hugely successful
figure such as David Bowie into something more, turning
him from being superb into super-being.
A Haven for Washed-Out Rock Stars?
In The Revenge Society,4 Phantom Limb (or Revenge as he

wishes to be known at this time) enters a corridor within
Guild headquarters. As we know, Limb has grand larceny on
2 D Bowie, “Fame”, by C. Alomar, D. Bowie, J. Lennon, Young Americans,

(RCA, Rykodisc/EMI, 1975).
3 “The Revenge Society”, season 4, episode 405 in The Venture Bros.,
(dir. Jackson Publick, 2009), Adult Swim, Cartoon Network.
4 “The Revenge Society”.
3
his mind, but as he and Chuck show off their perfect unity
of man and toaster, a framed listing on the wall also
catches our eye: it is the Guild directory. There are the
departments one might expect of a place providing ‘hate we
can trust’ – burials, armaments, medical – but there are
others seemingly at odds with its despicable image. There
is a library, a sports department, and on the first floor
members may take lunch in the canteen or join a guided tour.
We also know from other episodes that the Guild offers
partial medical and dental insurance and that it provides a
detailed induction programme for new recruits.5 In short,
this is a proper place of work: an organisation where a ‘job
for life’ is offered for that short period of time where a
member manages to evade capture or death. The Guild might
even be voted onto Fortune magazine’s ‘100 Best Companies to
Work For’ – it is that good.
So the Guild is an organisation with a multi-departmental

corporate structure and staff benefits to die for,
literally. If we apply the theories of business historian
Alfred D. Chandler Jr.6 we may surmise that this structure,
combined with the Guild’s scale of operations (some two-
thirds’ share of the world’s total villainy7 ) is likely the
result of placing professional managers in positions of
5“Are You There, God? It's Me, Dean”, season 1, episode 109 in The
Venture Bros (dir. Jackson Publick, 2004), Adult Swim, Cartoon Network,
USA. and “Shadowman 9: In the Cradle of Destiny”, season 3, episode 301
in The Venture Bros., (dir. Jackson Publick, 2008), Adult Swim, Cartoon
Network, USA.
6 A. D. Chandler Jr., The Visible Hand, (Harvard, 1977).
7 “Fallen Arches”, season 2, episode 208 in The Venture Bros., (dir.
Jackson Publick, 2006), Adult Swim, Cartoon Network, USA.
4
responsibility. The Guild requires measured, sober

management, therefore. However, Venturoos are aware that
rock musicians are in the Guild leadership. How can the
organisational requirements of the Guild be fulfilled by
such people who, by reputation, are somewhat chaotic?
An answer to this may be found in the real-life career of

its leader. When Phantom Limb addresses the Sovereign as,
‘The Thin White Douche’,8 he may well have a point. Bowie
described his Thin White Duke persona as “very nasty
indeed”. This was Bowie’s most powerful character. As
disturbing as he was beautiful, the Duke was everything that
Ziggy Stardust was not, all-too human and ancient: ‘the
“return” of a character you didn’t ever meet in the first
place, but who’s been lurking in your mind the whole time
because he’s as old and evil as evil itself.’9 The Duke
was weighted down by Europe’s dark past. As some see it, he
was Bowie’s flirtation with Nazi-chic. Indeed, the link
seems obvious. In the mid-Seventies, Bowie obsessed over
obscure Nazi philosophers and watched wartime fascist
propaganda films endlessly. In a notorious interview with
Cameron Crowe in February 1976, Bowie said, ‘I’d adore to be
prime minister. And I believe very strongly in fascism…I
dream of buying companies and TV stations, owning and
controlling them.’10 Though undoubtedly great publicity for
his forthcoming tour, such sentiments must have appalled

9 CJ Ryder, The Bowie Correspondence: Lessons for J. V. Krawec,
(Brighton, 2013).
10“Ground Control to Davy Jones” interview with David Bowie, by Cameron
Crowe, Rolling Stone, (1976).
5
fans who followed him from Hunky Dory,11 so at odds with the
bisexual champion of liberal society they thought they knew.
Pretensions of being a fascist overlord do not exclude Bowie

from being a suitable Sovereign.12 In fact, history proves
it could be an advantage. The satanic marriage of fascism
and bureaucracy which gave birth to the concentration camps
of the Second World War is well documented in the books of
Primo Levi, to name but one survivor to write about their
experience. However, Bowie’s behaviour at this time was not
the ordered actions of a Nazi officer commanding the state
machine. The Duke was the culmination of a period of
sustained and heavy cocaine abuse. Bowie’s drug dependency
first came to public notice in 1974. His appearance on The
Dick Cavett Show that year and the BBC documentary Cracked
Actor13 both portray an isolated and fragile Bowie, horribly
thin. He seemed barely capable of running himself, let alone
an operation like the Guild, and pronouncements like those
made to Rolling Stone magazine only fuelled speculation that
Bowie was, in his own words, “out of his gourd.”
However, scratch the drug-ravaged surface and a much more

complex picture emerges. At the height of the madness he
created Station to Station.14 It is one of the best (the
11 Hunky Dory, by David Bowie, prods. K Scott and D. Bowie, (RCA, 1971).
12The writer does not believe that the Guild is a fascist organisation.
Actually, the writer is not sure WHAT the Guild is. Material for future
articles, methinks.
13 “Cracked Actor”, in Omnibus, (dir. Alan Yentob, 1974), BBC, UK.
14Station to Station by David Bowie, prods. D. Bowie and H. Maslin,
(RCA, 1976).
6
best?) albums of his career, taken from a catalogue of

releases which, between 1970 and 1980, is legendary. Any
other singer would be proud to be the artist on one of
these, let alone all of them. Station to Station is not all
fascist posturing; it is as much a plea to be saved from the
influence of the Duke as a celebration of it. It is Bowie’s
declaration that he had reached an all-time low. It reveals
a breath-taking sense of self at a time when he should not
have been capable of such. Furthermore, far from being
some stumbling, dribbling pain-in-the-ass to work with,
those within Bowie’s music-making circle at that time attest
to his consummate professionalism, to his innate ability to
get into a studio and work hard in spite of those terrible
white lines. Even his Guildmate, Iggy Pop, said of him that,
‘he never showed bad form, even once.’15 Praise indeed from
a man who knows what bad form is all about.16
So the real wonder of it all is that Bowie managed to

produce anything. We take it for granted nowadays that some
of the most extreme popular music has a narcotic influence.
But for most of us, indulging in such substances makes life
impossible. It excludes us from meaningful interaction with
anything. But Bowie rose above the chemical excess and
pushed himself to the limits of human existence in order to
create something. Could it be that he did it all
deliberately so to scratch six tracks into a circle of
vinyl? We will never know. Regardless, what we do know is
15P. Trynka, Starman – David Bowie: The Definitive Biography, (London,

2011), p. 247.
16Look up: ‘stabs himself in chest with a blunt knife on stage in Los
Angeles, 11 August 1974’ for evidence of Mr. Pop’s bad form.
7
that imagining David Bowie leading the Guild Of Calamitous

Intent stems from this talent for success in excess.
Furthermore, Bowie didn’t die in a Paris hotel room or on
the toilet – obese and sweaty. Instead, he eventually
kicked the habit via a stint in Berlin with the
aforementioned Iggy Pop as his flatmate,17 emerging in the
Eighties to duet with Mick Jagger and Tina Turner
(collaborations that might be considered as evidence for the
virtues of narcotic dependency). The persona that sang
China Girl was not chaotic. It was professional, organised.
It wore a suit. A Guild man, you might say.
Our Enduring Belief in the Secret Society
We have established that the real life of Bowie lends

relevance to the portrayal of him as the leader of a
murderous band of super-villains. What then of our
underlying belief in the Guild itself? In his book, The
Mythology of the Secret Societies, J.M. Roberts provides a
useful definition of the scope of such belief:
It claims that the real makers of events are not the

statesmen who strut before the public, but secret
directors who manipulate them, sometimes with, sometimes
without, their knowledge….Examination of the events in
many countries in the light of this theory reveals (it is
17On reading this, you may be forgiven for thinking it the most
mistaken decision ever made. Surely the chances of success were low?
But it worked, and the story of two such men absorbing the culture and
atmosphere of post-war Berlin in order to learn how not to be idiots
makes for fantastic reading. That such friendship existed for a few
years is proof that there is something profoundly okay about our world.
8
believed) that the same patterns are to be seen

everywhere, running through both methods and aims. We may
therefore predicate not a scattered inexplicable series of
manipulations, but a central directing plan, a secret
organization which is international and integrates its
agents into many countries.18
Robert’s example is that of a secret organization with

political aims. Though some of its members seek world-
domination, the Guild mission may not be particularly
political: it appears to act merely as the licenser of
super-aggression. Nevertheless, the criteria defined by
Roberts still apply to the Guild. Known to super-scientists
and costumed antagonists, it seems to operate covertly
outside this knowing circle. For instance, its existence is
subject to speculation by Brock Samson and Colonel Hunter
Gathers before Samson’s placement with the Venture family.19
Admittedly, the Monarch’s trial and the existence of support
groups for henchmen do imply some overall awareness of the
eternal struggle between tights-wearing good and evil.
However, the Guild’s own structure is clouded in secrecy
(the Chamber Sub-Rosa) and Bowie’s role as the Sovereign
seems to be a secret, albeit a very badly-kept one. Guild
operations are also extensive with its agents posted in many
places. Furthermore, it controls the police force,20 so the
18J.M. Roberts, The Mythology of the Secret Societies, (London, 2008),

p. 29.
19“The Invisible Hand of Fate”, season 3, episode 303 in The Venture
Bros., (dir. Jackson Publick, 2008), Adult Swim, Cartoon Network, USA.
20“The Trial of the Monarch”, season 1, episode 112 in The Venture
Bros., (dir. Jackson Publick, 2004), Adult Swim, Cartoon Network, USA
9
‘puppet’ theory applies. The Guild is a secret society,

therefore.
Today, popular belief in the existence of secret societies

is endemic, though often founded on fantasy. A cursory
glance at the internet21 reveals a disturbing wealth of
crackpot-ery sufficient to send Roberts into fits of
academic apoplexy were he alive today. It is not just the
internet that groans under the weight of conspiracy
theories. The literary and film world is also overrun by
hoards of badly-written Jesuits intent on preserving
Christ’s bloodline and Nordic fascists attempting to hide
thirty-year old crimes from intrepid journalists and their
tattooed assistants. Given all this, is it any wonder that
voter turnout in America and Britain continues to be so low?
What is the point of democracy when all the candidates are
probably Cylons anyway?
This is not a new phenomenon. Turning again to J.M.

Roberts, he proposed that belief in secret societies came to
the forefront in the nineteenth century. Though there was
much hysteria at that time surrounding this issue, the fact
is that some secret societies did exist with varying degrees
21As the Alchemist says ‘Argh, internet. It’s only good for finding
out that your boyfriend is sleeping around.’ Just because a search
engine tells you something is there does not necessarily lend it
historic significance. But what the Alchemist could have continued to
say (though it would have been a painfully unfunny juncture) is that all
sources, digital or no, should be treated with caution. Anything a
person creates is biased and corrupt. Humans make things all wrong.
Still, sticking the words ‘secret’ and ‘society’ into a search engine
provides much entertainment. Try it and see.
10
of effectiveness. These included the Illuminati22 which for

the average reactionary seemed to embody the sinister aims
of the Enlightenment, as it succeeded in influencing certain
key individuals in Germany in to its intellectual cause of
‘liberty and equality’. More exciting was the Carbonari,23
which may have had a direct role in political agitation in
post-Napoleonic Italy. However, the body that prompted most
speculation is The Freemasons.24 It is hugely influential.
Its mythology and structure was copied by many other groups
and its lodges spread across Europe and America from the
eighteenth century onwards. In England, the Freemasons
boasted aristocracy amongst its members and it still
exists25 today with a focus on charitable works.
Widespread belief in these societies in the nineteenth

century is understandable, but this was not only due to the
proven existence of a few. Vast changes to the political
landscape had occurred. This was the century which
witnessed the rise and fall of Napoleon, the expansion of
the British Empire and the growing political and economic
power of the United States. All of this came out of the
extraordinary eighteenth century where, amongst many other
great events, the standard of rule by monarchy was refuted
by the French and American Revolutions. Little wonder that
22http://www.iisg.nl/collections/secretsocieties/illuminati.php,
retrieved 13 March 2013.
23http://www.iisg.nl/collections/secretsocieties/carbonari.php,
24http://www.iisg.nl/collections/secretsocieties/freemasons.php,
25 http://www.ugle.org.uk/, retrieved 13 March 2013.
11
people believed that something, someone, conspired to

overthrow monarchy, church and state. But this speculation
was also due to the nature of nineteenth-century society.
People lived in a world where the gap between the ruled and
the rulers appeared a gulf. In Europe - given the variances
in political rights, economic wealth, and low literacy rates
- it is not surprising that people did not understand how
their respective systems worked. The majority were not
allowed any influence over the way their state was governed:
they could not vote for it, could not participate in it.
But this leads us to ask: why would we buy into the concept
today? Except for those Venturoos who may also be
Steampunks, we do not live in the nineteenth century. There
is universal suffrage in Europe and America; our governments
operate a system of transparency whereby the spending of our
tax pounds and dollars is subject to public scrutiny. We
know everything, do we not?
Trouble is, we know this is not the case. Modern secrecy in

its most overt forms is the agencies of MI5 and MI6 in
Britain and the CIA in America. In return for the security
of our respective homelands, we accept spying and other
operations that may not be wholly lawful in the countries
where they are carried out. However, there are many more
real-world examples where decisions are made without our
express consent, even going against our wishes in some
cases. Examples of these are so everyday that we may be
perturbed by labelling these as ‘secret societies’.
Nevertheless they operate on an international scale, do not
permit unfettered access to their membership and commit acts
12
under a blanket of secrecy in order to influence those very

bodies we vote for and pay for.
The most prevalent example of this is corruption. This is

defined by Transparency International as the abuse of
entrusted power for private gain.26 Corruption exists – we
know it does. In most countries it is legislated against.
From Mafia families being awarded public construction
projects to sports matches being fixed, it is there and it
affects our lives in a negative way (unless we happen to be
betting on the same football team as the Yakuza). Political
lobbying is an example of corruption in public life. Though
legal in both the UK and US, it is subject to gross
manipulation. In the United Kingdom modern politics is
dogged by such allegations, so much so that the terms for
these scandals - ‘cash for questions’ ‘cash for honours’ –
are better known than the underlying structure of the
political system they corrupt. Citing just one example, a
2010 TV documentary exposed members politicians offering to
work for a fictitious lobbying firm for fees of £3,000 to
£5,000 per day, none of which they intended to declare as UK
law stipulates.27 Lobbying organisations are not the
murdering death squads of the Guild. They are most likely
to have corporate or focus group origins. But these groups
enable decisions to be made without our voting for it.
Hands are shaken, unseen, behind heavy wooden doors though
which you may just be able to make out the clinking of
26 http://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/, retrieved 13 March 2013.

27 “Politicians For Hire”, Dispatches, (22nd March 2010), Channel 4, UK.
13
filled glasses.28 The European canon29 is certainly here, as

is the American one.
The truth is that secret societies do exist and do influence

our lives, but the ones we can prove the existence of are
not the type of controlled venom perpetuated by the Bowie-
led Guild of Calamitous Intent. Instead, Bowie lives in the
real secret society - the one that operates right in front
of us. Secrets are perpetuated by those we place into
positions of authority. The reason why the Guild, the OSI
and Sphinx works is that those are the sort of secret
society myths we want to believe in. That kind of secrecy
we can handle. They give those with an overly-generous
portion of hate something to focus their aggression on. We
do not expect transparency from the Guild because it never
promised it to us in the first place. The Guild only comes
to those who go looking for it on its terms, as Dr Orpheus
found out.30 Phantom Limb will ruin your cousin Malcolm’s
wedding only if Malcolm happens to be marrying a girl called
Sheila with an amazingly deep voice.31 It is okay…really -
you may go back to the canapés now.
From Superb to Super
28 CJ Ryder, The Bowie Correspondence.

29“Station to Station”, David Bowie, by D. Bowie, Station to Station,
(prods. D. Bowie and H. Maslin, 1976) RCA.
30 “Fallen Arches”.
31“Showdown at Cremation Creek (Part I)”, season 2, episode 212 in The
Venture Bros., (dir. Jackson Publick, 2006), Adult Swim, Cartoon
Network, USA.
14
We have established that David Bowie has a superb ability to

overcome his physical limitations to create art and that
those achievements appear to lend him the credibility to
lead a legion of organised villainy. However, this begs the
question: Why ask him to fulfil that potential? Hasn’t he
done enough for us already? Bowie is an icon of the
twentieth century and yet we push him further. We demand
that he turns into an eagle at will. We expect him to house
a panda called Li-Li in spite of any allergies the man might
suffer.32 Why expect more of someone who has already
attained the pinnacle of human endeavour?
The obvious answer is that this is not real; that the

Sovereign exists in the Venture-Verse where references to
pop culture abound to make fun of this world in the confines
of another. The other blatant answer is that the Venture
writers are sincere Bowie fans. This paper does not seek to
refute or take anything away from that fandom, but Venturoos
appear to like this concept too. After all, we watch the
show and have demanded its return. There must be some
reason for this.
Pushing brilliant people even further is not confined to

Venture. There are two interesting case studies to explore,
both linked to the series. Firstly, let us examine a recent
use of Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln’s ghost helps to thwart the
attempted assassination of the President in Guess Who’s
32“The Incredible Mr. Brisby”, season 1, episode 104 in The Venture

Bros., (dir. Jackson Publick, 2004), Adult Swim, Cartoon Network, USA.
15
Coming to State Dinner?33 This example of a superb person

becoming super is tied to the life of the man. Lincoln
helps another President avoid the fate he suffered, thus the
cosmic string between our universe and the Venture-Verse is
quite strong in this case - imagination’s leap is not so
great when the plotline comes from bitter experience.
However in Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter,34 Lincoln

secretly weeds out Nosferatu hiding in the disguise of slave
owners. This interesting use is further away from the
actual life of Lincoln, a real leap from superb to super.
The analogy of vampire to slave owner is striking. Here we
see the identification of one kind of monster with another –
one not real, one all too real. The shame of people being
kept as slaves is palpable, abolished in America only 150
years ago. The author of this paper’s great-grandfather was
alive during the American Abolition,35 a man whom living
relatives talked to. Perhaps one reason we make Lincoln a
vampire hunter rather than merely a champion of human
rights, is the fact that Americans and Britons owned slaves
so recently is hard to swallow. We should be incapable of
33“Guess Who’s Coming to State Dinner”, season 2, episode 209 in The

Venture Bros., (dir. Jackson Publick, 2006), Adult Swim, Cartoon
Network, USA.
34Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter, (dir. Timur Bekmambetov, 2012), 20th
Century Fox, USA.
35Though not yet born at the United Kingdom’s 1833 Abolition of Slavery
Act. Great Britain has a shameful slave owning and trading history. In
fact, we made a profession of it. The great wealth of cities with
ports, notably Bristol and Liverpool, was gained from the slave trade.
A legacy from this time is the British love of chocolate and tea with
one lump or two of sugar; products brought to this sceptred isle by the
blood, sweat and tears of owned people.
16
such evil. Slavery is an inhuman act; therefore it must

have been carried out by something not human.
The second case study is Nikola Tesla. Tesla was a

brilliant man, a pioneer in electricity and also radio. In
short, Tesla is one of the men responsible for making the
modern world. So far, Tesla has not appeared in Venture
though the Tesla coil is mentioned.36 The (admittedly
tenuous) link here is that David Bowie played Tesla in the
2006 film The Prestige.37 Judging by the number of Tesla
references in popular culture, it is somewhat surprising
that he has not appeared in the Venture-Verse by now. Tesla
is immortalised in song, comic book, novel and video game.
There is seemingly nothing that Tesla cannot do and these
appearances sometimes border on the fantastical, even the
occult. In Bowie’s portrayal for instance, he is the
inventor of a machine that is able to replicate a man.
Tesla has thusly become a kind of geek touchstone; a pin-up

for the Steampunk generation (minus the steam). This is in
stark contrast to his lifetime. Though successful for much
of his life, Tesla suffered badly in the end, dying broke
and in a poor mental state. As the world rediscovers Tesla
we celebrate everything he did and also everything he did
not do. By doing this, popular culture over-compensates for
the lack of appreciation shown to Tesla during his lifetime.
36“Escape to the House of Mummies Part II”, season 2, episode 204 in

The Venture Bros., (dir. Jackson Publick, 2006), Adult Swim, Cartoon
Network, USA.
37The Prestige, (dir. Christopher Nolan, 2006), Touchstone Pictures,
USA.
17
We need to make him a nerd-superman in order to atone for

his death in anonymity, a fate we perceive he did not
deserve.
So it appears that this process of turning the superb into

the super is a means to overcome the apparent cruelty of
this life (such as the atrocity of slave owning), or where
our sense of fairness is not met (as in the fate of Tesla).
We see this type of compensation occur in the Venture-Verse
under the guise of Councilmen 3 and 8. Known by their
monikers Red Mantle and Dragoon respectively, it is implied
that they are in fact Buddy Holly and the Big Bopper.38 In
our universe, these men died in an aviation accident along
with Ritchie Valens on the Winter Dance Party Tour in 1959.
It is an event that shaped popular culture, commemorated in
song as the loss of an age of innocence,39 and another
example of an abrupt end to the lives of talented people. We
feel that they could have gone on to do more. Just as fans
insist that: Elvis Lives! so too the deaths of Buddy Holly
and The Big Bopper are wiped out by their inclusion in the
Venture-Verse. It only appeared they died because they
disappeared into the shadow-world of the Guild. To a
Venturoo, this makes more sense than a twenty-two year old
man singing to us of love from the beyond the grave - ‘Once
you get it, you’re in an awful fix. After you’ve had it,

39“American Pie”, Don McLean, by D. McLean, (prod. E. Freeman, 1971),
United Artists, USA.
18
you never want to quit,’40 – via a posthumously-released

recording.
Indeed, Bowie’s appearance could be interpreted in much the

same way. Bowie’s later career is subject to criticism,
‘That would be Tin Machine,’41 but he is nevertheless hugely
appreciated by fans. In 2000 at the age of 53, he made a
triumphant appearance at the Glastonbury Festival, but after
touring to promote his 2003 album Reality, Bowie underwent
heart surgery and disappeared from music making. It was
assumed by many that he had retired from music writing
altogether. As the real Bowie quietly melted into the
background of the real world, Sovereign Bowie made his first
physical appearance in ‘Showdown at Cremation Creek’. The
original airdate of this episode was October 8th 2006.
Could it be that this was the Venture-Verse’s way of
compensating for a lack of Bowie in the real world? That we
needed to add another string to his already impressive bow
because the thought of an ageing, non-musical Bowie in this
universe was too cruel to bear? Perhaps.
Conclusion
In this tour through the Venture-Verse and our own, we

explored the reasons why a Venturoo might link a 1973 video
of David Bowie discussing a reference from the novels of
William Burroughs to his portrayal as the Sovereign. To do
this, we analysed the character of Bowie’s final and most
40“Love is Strange”, recorded by Buddy Holly in 1957, posthumously

released in 1969, written by M Baker, S Vanderpool, E Smith.
19
controversial persona. In doing so, we witnessed Bowie at

his most vulnerable, yet at the same time Bowie displayed
strength, stamina and charisma - all necessary qualities in
a megalomaniac leader of a secret society. We next explored
our enduring beliefs in secret societies and concluded that,
whilst there is much irrational belief in their existence,
some organisations do cause great damage to our more-
necessary belief in democracy. By comparison, the Guild
appears more acceptable, likeable even, so the Venturoo
readily enters the Venture-Verse to confront the Guild on
its terms. Finally we explained why we make super-people
out of those who are already superb. By drawing parallels
with other examples from popular culture, we surmised that
this is our attempt to redress the cosmic imbalance caused
by the awful and bewildering actions of human beings, or by
the fickleness of fate. In acting this way we all become a
little bit Dr. Orpheus, so to speak.
Much of this paper has not been about The Venture Bros. at
all. Instead, its reference material was taken from our
universe. But to understand the Venture-Verse means we have
to explore own. This animated dimension does not exist in
isolation - in fact it is entirely fuelled by material from
our plane of existence. The whole premise of the Venture-
Verse is to make possible that which is impossible by using
the familiar to get there. This is not idle wish-
fulfilment: it is the holding up of mirrors, the reflecting
of our current forms to portray what is good and bad, funny
and sad. It could be said that Venture rarely seeks to put
anything ‘right’. Instead, it merely offers up its images
to say ‘isn’t this ridiculous?’ Happily though, as this
20
paper draws to a close, our own dimension has righted one

universal wrong – that of Bowie’s silence. His first studio
album in ten years – The Next Day – is being released. 42
----
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank CJ Ryder and Sam Rosenthal

(Projekt Records) for the inspiration behind this paper.
42But that does not mean that Bowie will disappear from Venture. Of
course not! Just because David Bowie vanished in the real world but
then popped up in the Guild of Calamitous Intent does not imply that he
is actually the Sovereign. That would just be silly. The author of
this paper would never believe such nonsense. Otherwise you might think
that the whole premise of this essay came about when the writer got
completely freaked out whilst watching a YouTube video of David Bowie
talking about a super-scary music weapon designed to bring the world to
its knees unless we all assuage to his demands to put on our red shoes
and dance the blues. And then that she ran round her house shouting,
‘OH MY GOD! BOWIE REALLY IS THE SOVEREIGN!’ or some other such
nonsense, and no way would that ever happen…
21
1
In this essay, suggestions will be made as to what sort of

technologies are implemented in H.E.L.P.eR, along with
general comments on him. I will attempt to keep as close
to the official lore of the show as possible, with all
claims having a basis in episodes. Because of this,
episodes will often be referred to, although not by name.
This is because I am too lazy to seek out the names of
every episode being referenced.
H.E.L.P.eR was originally created by the late Dr. Jonas

Venture to care for his son, Rusty Venture. As H.E.L.P.eR
appears in Rusty Venture's flashbacks to his childhood,
this places H.E.L.P.eR at around 40 years old. Presumably
Jonas Venture maintained H.E.L.P.eR until his death
(occuring when Rusty was in College), meaning that he has
been cared for by Rusty for the past 30 or so. In an early
episode, Hank asks Brock if he will fix H.E.L.P.eR after
Dr. Orpheus broke him. Due to Rusty's track record of
maintaining technology it is likely that Brock is one of
the main reasons that H.E.L.P.eR continues to run. After
Brock ceased to be the Venture Bodyguard and H.E.L.P.eR was
blown up, Rusty was left to repair H.E.L.P.eR on his own.
This lead to H.E.L.P.eR being combined with the Walking
Eye, to create a terrible monstrosity. As H.E.L.P.eR had
been destroyed previously (such as by guild blackout
agents, and by Jonas Junior) yet always appeared to be
repaired by the next episode, it is possible that Brock was
behind these repairs more than he is given credit for. In
the episode in which the walking eye débuts, Rusty admits
that the thing hardly works anyway. This implies that the
H.E.L.P.eR/walking eye creature does not work to anywhere
near the standard that it should do, and that without Brock
it is possible that it never will. Henchman 21 was seen to
1
be able to overpower the new H.E.L.P.eR, although this

could just be because he is Henchman 21. As Brock has
returned towards the end of season 4, it is possible that
he is working on H.E.L.P.eR again, and as a result a normal
H.E.L.P.eR will be seen again in season 5. Alternatively,
H.E.L.P.eR may be left as a walking eye. Hank and Dermot's
band, Shallow Gravy seem to have incorporated H.E.L.P.eR in
a much bigger way than they did when he was just plain
H.E.L.P.eR. Although Dean fears the new H.E.L.P.eR, he
would likely be able to learn to accept him.
Judging by the capabilities of H.E.L.P.eR seen in

flashbacks to Rusty's childhood, it is likely that the
time-scale of the development of computing technologies in
the Ventureverse differ to those seen in ours. It is
possible that these developments were made by Jonas Venture
himself. A man that was able to create an illegal cloning
facility in what was likely the 1960s or 1970s should have
been more than capable of developing more powerful
computers than were available around such dates in our
universe. That being said, M.U.T.H.E.R was represented
graphically in a very low quality manner (despite having a
very large screen to be utilised). She was also fooled in
to thinking that footage of Jonas talking about personal
hygiene was the actual Jonas. In contrast, H.E.L.P.eR seems
to have a very human like level of intelligence and would
likely not be fooled by a video. It is possible that
H.E.L.P.eR initially functioned to a similar standard as
M.U.T.H.E.R, but developed to become the H.E.L.P.eR seen
today as time went on. M.U.T.H.E.R has not been maintained
at all since creation. This if nothing else speaks well for
the quality of the technologies developed by Jonas Venture,
as they can survive autonomously for so long. This could
also contribute to the longevity of H.E.L.P.eR. However, as
basic as M.U.T.H.E.R seems, she does seem to have some form
2
of personality. This caused her to flood tunnels containing

a party of children and the original Team Venture with mood
altering drugs. It is pretty safe to assume that Jonas
Venture would not have hard coded in such behaviours,
instead trying to program in a mother like personality.
This does suggest that Jonas was capable of creating “true”
artificial intelligence, as M.U.T.H.E.R was able to reach a
(psychotic) human-like decision as to what to do, something
which she was able to plan and execute without being
programmed to do so. As a side note, this raises the
question of if Rusty's mother had this personality set. If
the phrase “Every man grows up to marry his own mother”
stands in the Ventureverse, although Rusty Venture did not
marry Myra, she certainly has a level of destructive
instability similar that seen in M.U.T.H.E.R. It is still
possible that Brock's story of events about Myra are true
and Myra is not infact the mother of the Venture boys, but
Rusty does admit to sleeping with her. As for Jonas
Junior, although Sally seems reasonably sane, she can turn
her skin invisible. It is also possible that she has some
residual issues that have not been shown yet from how it is
implied that Professor Impossible treated her.
The voice synthesiser of H.E.L.P.eR is perhaps one of the

more basic parts of his hardware. Anything that makes
beeping noises could be used to create his voice. Although
he does have a range of different toned beeps (along with a
beat generator used by Shallow Gravy), this could still be
provided by a very basic system. The lacking of perfect
voice synthesising seems to be a common theme in the
Ventureverse. The contents of Ghost Robot's verbalisations
are very human (such as attempting to comfort Captain
Sunshine over the death of Wonder Boy), but the
synthesisation itself sounds very robotic. G.U.A.R.D.O has
perhaps the most human sounding speech of any robot seen so
3
far in the Ventureverse, but seems to only play sound clips

of Rusty Venture's voice. The voice used by Brock's car,
Adrian, is also probably pre-recorded. M.U.T.H.E.R is
similar to Ghost Robot. The Venture family seems to have
no problem with understanding H.E.L.P.eR, much like C-3PO
being able to understand R2-D2. When H.E.L.P.eR was
captured and tortured by The Monarch (and Henchmen), it was
implied that only the Venture Family can understand
H.E.L.P.eR completely. Henchman 21 was able to estimate the
nature of what H.E.L.P.eR was saying by the inflection of
his voice, but ultimately could not understand what was
being said. In this scene, H.E.L.P.eR's head was also
knocked off. This seemed to be done clearly without causing
any issues to his functionality. This implies that the head
and body of H.E.L.P.eR are separate entities, perhaps with
the head being able to remotely control the body. This
would also explain why H.E.L.P.eR was able to continue
functioning while embedded in Brock's chest, and is
possibly the only reason that Rusty was able to integrate
H.E.L.P.eR's head with the walking eye.
H.E.L.P.eR spends his days caring for the Venture Family.

Although H.E.L.P.eR was created to care for a young Rusty,
he has expanded his repertoire to care for Hank/Dean
Venture and Brock. That being said, his name would imply
that he was also initially designed to act as a lab partner
for Jonas. It is possible that this acronym was created at
a later date, as Jonas Venture did not appear to be short
of super scientist associates to act as a lab partners for
him. Alternatively, perhaps Jonas considered Rusty to be
just another experiment (and did indeed describe him as
such in Jonas Junior's memorial to him), and so considered
H.E.L.P.eR to be his lab partner in that experiment. Or
maybe he just liked the name H.E.L.P.eR and struggled to
find anything sensible that it could stand for. Rusty may
4
however have had a use for a robotic lab partner that his
father did. In a flashback, it was revealed that in an
early attempt to arch Rusty, The Monarch planted an
explosive device which accidentally blew off Baron
Ünderbheit IV's jaw, causing Baron Ünderbheit to begin
arching Rusty. This could have caused Rusty to have some
future psychological issues with having human lab partners,
leading to the H.E.L.P.eR becoming his lab partner, and so
the acronym. However, when Rusty was transformed in to a
caterpillar and asked H.E.L.P.eR to assist him in creating
a cure, H.E.L.P.eR proved to be of little help as a lab
assistant, ignoring Rusty and instead eating chemicals.
Why does H.E.L.P.eR care for the Venture family? He was

programmed by Jonas Venture to care for Rusty, and so cared
for Rusty. Rusty then during maintenance of H.E.L.P.eR
could have updated H.E.L.P.eR to care for Hank and Dean,
and Brock to an extent. H.E.L.P.eR exhibits many very
human-like methods of caring for the Venture family, from
attempting to mop Dean's face through a spacesuit to giving
Brock a lucky rabbit foot before his secret agent exam.
This could all have been done purely based his coding.
Perhaps H.E.L.P.eR observers how humans care for each-other
and can then re-use these gestures on the people specified
by his code. However, it is possible that H.E.L.P.eR has
developed some degree of “true” AI. When H.E.L.P.eR's
feelings were hurt by the creation of G.U.A.R.D.O, Rusty
went to say that robots don't have feelings, before
remembering all of the human caring gestures that
H.E.L.P.eR has made. This implies that Rusty did not
simply program them in, and was not aware of his father
doing so either. H.E.L.P.eR has began to develop in
unexpected ways. H.E.L.P.eR also gave in to Henchman 21's
threats of violence, despite this meaning that the Venture
Compound would be vulnerable to attack. This would go
5
against a hard coded system which tells H.E.L.P.eR to

simply care for the Venture family. H.E.L.P.eR prioritised
his own survival over the family. In an earlier torture
attempt on H.E.L.P.eR by the Monarch (which Henchman 21
assisted in), H.E.L.P.eR did not give in. This suggests
that H.E.L.P.eR could even have developed a sense of self
preservation over the time-scale of the show, which is a
good marker of a true AI.
At numerous points in the series, the Venture family

communicates with H.E.L.P.eR wirelessly, generally using
their two-way communicator wrist watches. Based on Rusty's
apparent skills, these were likely developed by Jonas
Venture, who also allowed for H.E.L.P.eR to communicate
with them. Based on the estimate that H.E.L.P.eR was
developed in the '60s or '70s, it is likely that cell phone
technologies were not used as the first cell phone call was
made in 1973. It was much more likely that communications
used a long range walkie-talkie system. It is also said by
Brock that H.E.L.P.eR can override the X-1's flight
computer. This would likely have used the same technologies
for H.E.L.P.eR to be able to communicate with it from where
he sits on the outside of the jet. This could also be how
H.E.L.P.eR's head communicates with his body.
H.E.L.P.eR has various utilities within him, such as a

retractable set of helicopter-like blades. This allows him
to fly. He is also able to carry Brock while in flight.
Judging by the size of H.E.L.P.eR and the size of the
blades, this is likely another one of Jonas Venture's
developments. The amount of power that such an action
would take along with the duration of time that H.E.L.P.eR
seems to be able to run for implies that he also created
some new form of super compact battery. That being said,
6
H.E.L.P.eR is never seen to be charging in an episode. It

is perhaps possible that Jonas developed a form of wireless
charger. Wireless hand-held device charging plates are
beginning to appear in our world, and so it is possible
that Jonas developed this technology and integrated it with
the flooring of the Venture Compound, allowing for
H.E.L.P.eR to apparently never need charging. The X-1 is
“nuclear powered”, and so it possible that this has also
somehow been implemented with H.E.L.P.eR. Along with the
helicopter blades, H.E.L.P.eR's chest also contains
multiple machine guns, with a plasma cutter and rotating
blade on his arms. H.E.L.P.eR is however described as
being useless in a fight, with it being suggested that his
weapons are generally offline. His weapons cannot be too
terrible though as they were sufficient to hold off Guild
black-out agents long enough for Rusty to make it to the
panic room.
Until then, all we can do is look on with amazement and

wonder as H.E.L.P.eR performs the mundane activities and
conveniences we someday hope to have via personalized
robots in our own lives. When this day does come, we can
only hope that whatever acronym we come up with can be as
apt or convenient as H.E.L.P.eR.
7
1
When represented on American television, LGBT characters

are often shown with similar conventions, regardless of the
show they appear on or the context of their inclusion.
Many of these conventions are based on a correlation
between one’s sexual identity/orientation and one’s sexual
behavior/activity. For many, the definition of one
necessitates a certain definition of the other. This,
however, is not always true – both in television and
reality. For The Venture Bros., sexual behavior is
presented as separate from sexual identity in a post-gay
environment within broadcast television conventions. In
addition, while their sexual behavior is a tool used to
show the dysfunctionality of the characters, their sexual
identity is seen as part of their character and not as
something that contributes to this dysfunction. Sexual
behavior, not sexual identity, is used to describe both the
character and his/her development. This representation of
sexual behavior and sexual identity within The Venture
Bros. ultimately allows the characters greater freedom in
their actions and development, creating ever changing and
complex characters to inhabit the world of Team Venture.
However, before one can adequately analyze this television

show and its themes, it is important to understand the
terms used within this essay. For the purposes of this
essay, sexual identity is defined as how “one thinks of
oneself, in terms of being significantly attracted to
members of the same or the other sex; based on one’s
internal experience, as opposed to which gender one’s
actual sexual partners belong to” (“Sexual Identity and
Gender Identity Glossary”). Sexual behavior is simply
1
defined as “the stimulation and excitation of the sex

organs…[with several] causes, motives, and purposes of such
behavior” (Haeberle). It is important to note the
distinction between these two terms. Sexual identity
relates more to internal experience and thought; not much
is done externally or acted upon. In contrast, sexual
behavior is a heavily external experience in which the body
plays an important role. It is also important to note that
each definition does not mention the other, even if they do
affect each other. So while sexual identity and sexual
behavior may often occur together and play roles for each
other, there is no evidence that one causes or necessitates
the other. At most, sexual identity and sexual behavior
are descriptions of one’s sexuality internally and
externally.1
It is based on these definitions and this conclusion that

The Venture Bros. characters interact with each other and
their world. Though a complex and ever-growing mythology
with intertwining character backstories often complicate
the Venture universe, some of the show’s characteristics
are very conventional and continue common themes found in
other television shows. The Venture Bros. currently airs
1 Although this is the conclusion argued in this essay, it should be

noted that any correlation or differences found between sexual identity
and sexual behavior is fundamentally inaccurate. As with both The
Venture Bros. characters and real people, sexual identity is a highly
personal, internal, and malleable trait, and thus, is impossible to
obtain without the person explicitly (verbally or otherwise) stating
his/her own sexual identity. Therefore, much of the following analysis
is based upon a) the characters’ actions and dialogue, their
interactions with other characters, and how other characters talk about
each other; and b) how these actions, dialogues, and interactions are
coded as “straight” or “gay” within the Venture universe.
2
on Adult Swim, a timeshare cable television network bundled

with Cartoon Network. As a basic cable channel, Adult
Swim’s audience is smaller, but is able to have more
freedom in the type of content that is aired. This can be
seen in not only the content aired on The Venture Bros.,
but also the other types of shows Adult Swim airs and
produces. Even so, this does not mean that Adult Swim does
not have characteristics often found in broadcast
television shows. The most noticeable of these
characteristics in The Venture Bros. is the “post-gay”
world the characters live in. In The Venture Bros. post-
gay world, LGBT characters are able to define their
identities by something other than their sexual preferences
or actions (K). Ironically enough, this quality found in
broadcast television, which is often criticized for
ignoring the realities of many LGBT people, is what makes
the distinction between sexual identity and sexual behavior
possible. Since sexual identity and behavior are
represented as separate qualities, LGBT characters (whether
they self-identify as queer or not) are viewed as
characters participating in non-heterosexual activities,
rather than just simply “LGBT characters.” Conversely,
heterosexual characters (self-identifying or not) are also
viewed as characters participating in (sometimes
non-)heterosexual activities, rather than just simply
“straight characters.” Thus, the characters’ sexual
behaviors do not always overlap with their sexual
identities, allowing them more freedom within their post-
gay world to do as they wish and not be judged or defined
by their sexual identities, but by their sexual behaviors.
3
As stated before, it can be very difficult to define any

Venture Bros. character’s sexual identity. Even so, there
are at least four characters who have clearly stated their
sexual identities, either by their own admission or
allowing themselves to be spoken for. These characters
include: Shore Leave2, a former O.S.I agent; The Alchemist3,
friend and colleague of Dr. Orpheus; Colonel Horace
Gentleman4, member of the original Team Venture; and King
Gorilla5 , professional archenemy and member of the Guild of
Calamitous Intent. These characters share several
characteristics seen amongst broadcast television’s
representations of LGBT characters. All these characters
are white, relatively young men (with the exception of King
Gorilla, who is an actual, sentient gorilla). Even The
Alchemist and Colonel Gentleman, two of the older
characters amongst the cast, are presented as young in
spirit and action, if not in age. In addition, none of
these characters seem to be consistently connected to a
larger gay community; they appear to only be friends with
heterosexuals (Walters 61). When an outside, gay community
is mentioned, it is only mentioned in passing and is often
spoken of in the past tense (for example, The Alchemist’s
comments about his ex-boyfriends, and Shore Leave revealing
2 “The Family That Slays Together, Stays Together (Part 1)” (S03E12) and
“Any Which Way But Zeus” (S04E11).
3 “Fallen Arches” (S02E08).

4 Though never explicitly stated within the show by Colonel Gentleman,
this has been confirmed by Jackson and Doc several times, including the
commentary for “Now Museum – Now You Don’t” (S03E09).
5 “Return to Spider-Skull Island” (S01E13).
4
to Dr. Venture the popularity of The Rusty Venture Show

among the LGBT community).
However, the representations of these characters are as

complex as their heterosexual counterparts. While Shore
Leave tends to act in a stereotypically “prissy” and
feminine manner, both in speech and in body language, he
seems to do this intentionally because he feels most
comfortable doing so and wishes to flaunt his mannerisms in
order to provoke a reaction out of others. In this way,
Shore Leave is very aware of his stereotypical behavior and
chooses to perform them rather than hide them. These self-
identified characters are also presented as “normal” in the
sense that they participate in sexual activities, but not
in the sense that they desire the same things as the
heterosexual characters – or even desire the same things as
each other (Walters 75). For example, The Alchemist
greatly wishes for a steady, loving relationship, while
King Gorilla is happy going from partner to partner and
having a harem of men. While for these characters their
sexual identity is not much different from their sexual
behaviors, it is important to note that other characters
base their judgment of them on their non-sexual
characteristics. If their sexual activities do come into
question, it is the activity itself (the act of sex), not
the nature of the activity (with whom/how they are having
sex) that is questioned. The few times these characters
are judged based on their sexual identity, the offender is
met with a heated diatribe or is simply dismissed. This is
best seen during the argument between Pete White and Shore
5
Leave in “Any Which Way But Zeus” (S04E11):
Pete White: I’m not gonna fight him. They

can’t make me fight him!
Shore Leave: White, you are such a

sissy!
Pete White: I’m a sissy? You’re

! calling me a sissy?
Shore Leave: Oh yeah, I get it. I’m

out and proud and I’m the sissy. I’m
brave enough to be who I am in the face
of assholes like you – and I’m the
sissy. Maybe when you come out of the
closet, you can walk a mile in my Jimmy
Choos.
Shore Leave’s claim of White being a “sissy” is based on

White’s cowardly behavior, but when White attempts to base
his claim on Shore Leave’s identity, Shore Leave quickly
shuts him down, continuing to use behavior as the basis for
defining “sissy” and to both defend himself and attack
White.6 Therefore, while there is not much difference for
these characters between their sexual identities and their
sexual behaviors, using them for bases of judgment is met
with completely different reactions.
6 It is important to note that these are important secondary characters

having this argument, and not “anonymous and ruthless bigots,” which is
often the case in broadcast television (Walters 71). It is also
important to recognize that while Shore Leave uses behavior as a base
for judgment, he also later uses stereotypical physical traits to judge
White and define White’s sexual identity, which is an interesting (and
perhaps hypocritical, especially coming from a character such as Shore
Leave) yet conventionally broadcast tactic.
6
In contrast with sexual identity, the sexual behaviors of

the majority of The Venture Bros. characters are much
easier to ascertain. However, it is the sexual behaviors
of the heterosexual (or at least the non-self-identified)
characters that are much more interesting and difficult to
analyze. More specifically, their assumed sexual identity
does not often correlate with their sexual behavior.
Indeed, several characters who express or act upon
heterosexual desires just as often participate in non-
heterosexual behaviors, though they give no indication of
which, or if both, behaviors reflect their sexual identity.
This makes for rather complex characters that perform a
wide range of sexual behaviors, from threesomes and open
relationships, to performative cross-dressing and genital
configuration. The most notable of these characters
include The Monarch and Dr. Mrs. The Monarch7, Rusty
Venture’s archenemies; Colonel Hunter Gathers8, Brock’s
former O.S.I commanding officer; Mile High9 , a former O.S.I
agent; and The Master10, Dr. Orpheus’ teacher. Similar to
7 Their sex life is mentioned in various episodes, though some of the

most notable mentions of their non-mainstream, non-exclusively
heterosexual activities include “The Buddy System” (S03E05) and
“Operation P.R.O.M.” (S04E16).
8 Colonel Gathers is a study in non-conforming (trans)gender and sexual

desires, which he best expresses in “Assassinanny 911” (S02E03), “The
Invisible Hand of Fate” (S03E03), and “The Silent Partners” (S04E15).
9 “The Family That Slays Together, Stays Together (Part 1)” (S03E12) and
“Pinstripes & Poltergeists” (S04E08). Although he is not given much
screen time, he is perhaps the best example of a character whose sexual
identity and sexual behavior barely overlap, if at all.
10“Escape to the House of Mummies Part II” (S02E04), “I Know Why the
Caged Bird Kills” (S02E10), and “The Better Man” (S04E07). As with
Mile High, he does not have much screen time, but has shown the most
extreme examples of non-mainstream sexual behavior.
7
those self-identified characters, these characters are

represented and judged based on their behaviors rather than
their sexual identities. In addition, the characters’
sexual behaviors often show their character development.
This use of sexual behavior as character development is
best seen in the characters of The Monarch and Dr. Mrs. The
Monarch. Throughout the series, this couple encounters
many issues within their relationship, the biggest being
commitment and trust (especially in season two). One of
the sources of this lack of commitment and trust is the
fact that both have had multiple partners in the past, and
continue to engage in sexual activities or have sexualized
relationships (leading to emotional attachment) with
others. As their relationship (and later marriage) grows
stronger, they mutually decide to engage in swinging, with
males and females, which forces them to be honest about
their past sexual behavior and present sexual desires.
Thus, their non-heterosexual behavior is neither condemned
nor even explicitly related to their sexual identities
(which have not been stated), but is used as a tool to
strengthen their relationship and as an indicator to the
audience on the progress of their relationship.
At the same time, thanks to the post-gay environment of The

Venture Bros., sexual behavior can also be seen as
inconsequential and not included at all in a character’s
identity. Instead of these behaviors defining their
characters, they are merely aspects of these characters,
which can change over time just like any other
characteristic and still not change their own sense of
sexual identity. For example, Mile High was in a
8
relationship with Shore Leave for many years, though this

was to keep his cover on an undercover mission. In
“Pinstripes & Poltergeists” (S04E08), though they admit to
having had sex with each other during this time, Mile High
also explains that he was only “pretend[ing] to be in love
with Shore Leave,” implying that his sexual behavior at the
time did not match his sexual identity. Though Shore Leave
is annoyed by this admission, both characters seem to
understand that Mile High’s sexual behavior did not reflect
his sexual identity – it was merely an action he chose to
perform that could be judged or dismissed like any other
human action. As such, for these characters, sexual
behavior is merely an aspect or action. It is, in fact,
something as simple as a type of behavior that they choose
to participate in which does not necessarily define their
identities.
As one can see, The Venture Bros. universe contains a large

and diverse cast of characters thanks to its ever-growing
mythology. Among this cast are characters that seem to fit
within a conventional representation of an LGBT character,
and those that do not seem to fit into any archetype. This
is largely due to Publick and Hammer’s use of their
characters’ sexual identities and sexual behaviors. Since
they chose to not assume a correlation between the two,
they are able to create characters that define and act upon
their sexuality in incredibly complex ways. Ironically, it
is not the self-identified LGBT characters that make the
most use of the distinction between sexual identity and
sexual behavior. Nevertheless, all these characters, and
by extension the audience, recognize this distinction and
9
manipulate it to reach their own goals, while at the same

time recognizing that these definitions do not necessarily
also define themselves – or give them the right to define
others.11
11While not directly cited, this interview with Jackson and Doc with
The Huffington Post was a large inspiration to the writing and tone of
this essay: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/09/the-venture-bros-
talk-gay-characters_n_1659006.html
10
Sources
Haeberle, Erwin J. “Human Sexual Behavior.” Magnus

Hirschfeld Archive for Sexology. The Continuum
Publishing Company, n.d. Web. 09 Dec. 2012. <http://
www2.hu-berlin.de/sexology/ATLAS_EN/html/
human_sexual_behavior.html>.
K, Emily. “Properly Defining The Term ‘Post-Gay’.” Ex-Gay

Watch. Ex-Gay Watch, 16 Oct. 2009. Web. 11 Apr. 2013.
“Sexual Identity and Gender Identity Glossary.” Feminism

and Women's Studies. Iowa State University, n.d. Web.
09 Dec. 2012. <http://feminism.eserver.org/sexual-
gender-identity.txt>.
The Venture Bros. Cartoon Network. Adult Swim, Atlanta, GA,

n.d. Television.
Walters, Suzanna Danuta. All the Rage: The Story of Gay

Visibility in America. Chicago: University of Chicago,
2001. Print.
11
1
Becoming a fan, whether it be for a sports team, an artist,

or a TV show is a bit like being in a relationship. You
enter it because it promises warmth, comfort, and a sense
of belonging. Like any relationship, things change over
time. Priorities shift, people come and go, and sometimes
things get challenging. As part of this fandom, passions
are almost certainly bound to rise. “The Venture Bros.” is
no stranger to this. While the show has managed to steer
clear of any overt controversy or accusations of declining
quality, no single element of the show has divided the
fandom as sharply as the character of Sergeant Hatred.
Hatred, a loud, boisterous, recovering pedophile, was the
subject of heavy criticism upon his upgrade from supporting
player to main character in the show’s fourth season, which
not only saw a number of changes to the show’s traditional
structure, but also had Hatred filling the role previously
played by the show’s breakout character, Brock Samson. To
say that the fandom is split on the character would be a
gross understatement. However, now that a significant
amount of time has passed since Hatred’s initial promotion
to starring player, perhaps now is the time for a critical
re-appraisal. The goal of this essay is threefold: to
explore the intense critical and fan reaction to the
character, re-build the character’s worth by broaching the
difficult subject of Hatred’s narrative arc, and to discuss
co-creators Doc Hammer and Jackson Publick’s purpose for
him within the context of the show itself.
In the interest of acknowledging the inherent bias of this

paper, I love Sgt. Hatred. Since the show introduced the
character, I’ve always found him to be a welcome addition,
1
a counterbalance to the more downtrodden and weary

personalities of the rest of the Venture cast. From his
first truly substantial appearance in Season 3’s “Home Is
Where the Hate Is” onward, Hatred demonstrates a lust for
life and passion that simply isn’t present in other
characters. While a diabolical mixture of passion and self-
hatred fuels the Monarch’s arching of Dr. Venture, there is
hardly any evidence to suggest that he takes any overt
pleasure from the arrangement, seeing it more as a fact of
life than a hobby or pastime. On the other hand, Hatred
takes a visible joy in his arching, if - given his goal is
to make Dr. Venture’s life wonderful - it can even be
called that. Although it is motivated by his desire to
spite the Monarch, Hatred takes pride in his line of work
and approaches the role of villain with all of the bombast
and pomp he can muster, as seen by his dramatic entrances
on the Venture Compound in “Home Is Where the Hate Is” and
“The Buddy System”. On the off-occasion the Monarch does
gain access to the Venture’s inner sanctum, he cannot be
bothered to do anything more “villainous” than spit on a
petri dish or dry hump a robot in a misguided attempt to
transmit chlamydia. The stark contrast in Hatred’s
enthusiasm and the Monarch’s apathy in their roles as
villains can also be seen in the differences between
Hatred’s approach to being the Venture bodyguard and
Brock’s. Although Brock comes to love the Venture family
over the course of the nearly twenty years he spends with
them, he embraces his later role as an agent of
S.P.H.I.N.X. with wider arms than he ever did being a
bodyguard. Conversely, Hatred is just happy to have a
steady line of employment and a roof over his head.
2
Additionally, as the attached photo of me circa Halloween

2010 would suggest, I’m rather fond of his character
design, a pitch perfect parody of any army themed Marvel or
DC Comics super-villain from the last thirty years.
Fig. 1. Not pictured: The author trying to explain why

there’s a misshapen ‘H’ on his face to confused partygoers
That being said, these opinions represent the exception

rather than the rule. Although it would appear that the
overall reception to the character is now one of
indifference, dwarfed by that of much more popular
characters such as Brock, Dr. Venture, the Monarch, or even
the Grand Galactic Inquisitor, the fact remains that during
Hatred’s initial time in a starring capacity, the fervor
over the shift in status quo was loud and substantial.
Culling through message boards on popular “Venture Bros.”
fan sites circa 2009 such as “The Mantis-Eye Experiment,”
3
“The People’s Republic of Venture,” and even the Onion’s

pop culture oriented sister site “The A.V. Club,” a clear
and substantial amount of fans voice their displeasure for
Hatred. One particularly pointed comment from “Joe” on the
Mantis Eye discussion for the Season 4 episode “Self-
Medication” reads thusly: “I'll probably take some heat for
this, but in my opinion, I think we'll look back at Sgt
Hatred in general, and especially his pedophilia in
particular, as the Venture Bros. shark-jumping moment. I
sure hope I'm wrong.” Others wished to see Hatred promptly
killed off, such as Adam Warlock on Mantis-Eye (“Man, I
hate Hatred!! Please let him die a most ignoble death. I
mean really, wasn't he supposed to be this bad ass? Has he
even punched anybody yet?”) and S. Jerusalem, a
Transmetropolitan fan if there ever was one, on A.V. Club
(“I don't think Hatred's going to last beyond this half of
the season [which is almost over, btw]. There's certainly a
well of pedophile-related jokes, and that well is bigger
than I thought possible.”) The A.V. Club itself even
included Hatred as an entry on it’s Inventory
“Showblockers!: 22 characters who stop good TV shows in
their tracks”. “His character isn’t aided much by a
performance (by Jackson Publick) that goes from shouting to
bellowing with no in-between, but the worst thing about him
is that he’s portrayed as a pedophile, albeit a reluctant
one. And in a show where the main characters are underage
boys, that’s automatically going to turn off a lot of
viewers, no matter how much the creators try to finesse
it,” the entry reads. “(Series creators) Publick and co-
creator Doc Hammer have made it clear that they think it’s
an exciting challenge to make a sympathetic, even admirable
4
figure out of a child molester, but while setting up an

extreme narrative challenge is a worthy goal, their
instincts are way off” (A.V. Club 16).
From these quotes, as well as the abundance of complaints

regarding Hatred scattered across the depths of the
Internet, it becomes apparent that the criticism leveled at
the character stems from two primary factors: the
prevalence, and some would add, one-note joke, of his
pedophilia and two, his lacking in badassery, which can be
read directly as a complaint regarding him not being Brock.
Given that Hatred was never meant to occupy the role of
stoic badass in lieu of Brock, this complaint is rendered
null. In order to properly address the first point however,
it becomes necessary to examine Hatred’s history on the
show. In spite of accusations of being a one trick
character, Hatred undergoes one of the more notable
character progressions seen thus far.
Hatred, as is the case of many of the show’s supporting

characters, began as an off-handed mention. In the second
episode of Season 2, “Hate Floats,” Henchmen 21 & 24
explain the reconstruction of the Monarch’s Flying Cocoon
headquarters as a result of what would be the first of many
unseen raids on Hatred’s equipment over the course of the
season. The next time the audience hears about him, in
“Fallen Arches,” Henchman 21 has robbed him of jetpacks,
referring to them as “spoils of war”. The final time he’s
mentioned in an off hand capacity in “I Know Why the Caged
Bird Kills,” it comes out that at one point he had molested
Hank and Dean. Most of it was awful. Although appearing as
5
an incidental background character in “Fallen Arches,”

something that can be attributed to the show’s tight budget
rather than any narrative purpose, Hatred finally gains
screen-time and a full blown speaking role in part one of
the Season 2 finale, “Showdown at Cremation Creek”. His
appearance acknowledges and builds upon both his status as
a victim of theft and as a pedophile by presenting his
overall demeanor as a stereotypical drill sergeant, as well
as introducing his wife Princess Tinyfeet.
At this point in the show, Hatred is still a one-note

character, his inappropriate behaviors being his only
identifiable trait. This would change significantly with
the episode “The Invisible Hand of Fate,” the third episode
of Season 3. In some ways the crux of the entire series,
“The Invisible Hand of Fate,” a flashback heavy story
centered around Master Billy Quizboy’s past, establishes
the backstories for a significant number of the show’s
cast, while simultaneously planting the seeds for future
storylines along the way. As the episode draws to a close
and Brock and Colonel Hunter Gathers’ attempted
infiltration into the Guild of Calamitous Intent has gone
south, Brock is seen getting reprimanded and ultimately
reassigned to the Venture family by a loud, unusually
intense redheaded superior with a familiar frame. During
the episode’s final scene, a series of shots highlighting
several characters and their prospective futures, said
superior is seen slipping on a ring with the Guild of
Calamitous Intent insignia on it. Although never named in
the episode, the credits list the character as Sgt. Haine.
In case it wasn’t already on the nose, Haine is the French
6
translation of Hatred. Suddenly, Hatred is given a

compelling backstory that firmly asserts him as an
important piece in the Venture canon: not only was he a
traitor to the Office of Secret Intelligence, but he may
have been the very person who assigned Brock to the Venture
family, essentially setting the series in motion.
When Hatred is finally given the spotlight in the next

episode “Home Is Where the Hate Is,” his persona is the
polar opposite of that shown in “Invisible Hand”- whereas
before his loudness is meant to be off-putting and
abrasive, here he is welcoming and cheerful to a fault,
beginning his arching of Venture by presenting him with “a
basket of howdy-do,” which happens to be okra. Hatred,
unlike the Monarch, sees Guild-sanctioned arching for what
it is- a role to be played, noting that it does not have to
be a completely unpleasant experience for either him or Dr.
Venture. Hatred even holds a party celebrating he and
Venture’s new arrangement, although in typical sitcom
fashion, things quickly spiral into chaos. Despite these
new dimensions to his personality, Hatred’s “problem,” that
being his attraction to under-aged boys, remains
pronounced, with him quickly announcing upon the Venture
family’s arrival to his soiree that Hank and Dean cannot be
there, what with him not legally allowed to be within 50
feet of a minor. As the episode draws to a conclusion, the
Monarch and Hatred get into a heated argument in a
thematically appropriate hot tub. This scene is important
for a number of reasons. Visually, it reveals that Hatred
has the word ‘Hatred’ tattooed vertically down his body, an
inventive joke whose payoff will come later in the 4th
7
season finale. In the context of the show’s narrative, it

reveals Hatred’s purpose in accepting Dr. Venture as an
arching assignment: to spite the Monarch for he and his
henchmen’s previous transgressions, namely robbing him
blind. Hatred never had any intentions of treating Dr.
Venture as an archenemy- in his words, he’s going to treat
him “like a goddamn king,” just to watch the Monarch look
on in contempt. Hatred has now shown a heretofore unseen
dimension of his personality, that of a master manipulator.
If this interpretation is correct, it casts his earlier
actions in “Invisible Hand” in a more sinister light.
Rather than reassigning Brock and Colonel Gathers merely
for their incompetence, there is a strong likelihood that
Hatred saw it as a convenient opportunity to put an end to
their investigation into the re-emergence of The Guild of
Calamitous Intent and proceed with his infiltration of the
OSI.
Other than a brief appearance menacing Dr. Venture’s day

camp in “The Buddy System,” Hatred is a virtual non-
presence in the remainder of Season 3 until the finale,
“The Family That Slays Together, Stays Together”. Given Doc
Hammer and Jackson Publick’s well-known writing
proclivities, it can be assumed that this was not due to a
lack of story to tell, but rather from the abundance of
other compelling plot lines running through the show. It is
incredibly likely that Hatred arched Venture throughout the
season, especially when taken into consideration that
Publick has been on record as saying that the episodes of
the show are not the Venture families only escapades, with
many misadventures and mishaps taking place off-screen.
8
When we next find Hatred, he is disconsolate over his wife

Princess Tinyfeet leaving him off-screen. As the audience
is reminded constantly throughout Season 4, Princess
Tinyfeet was his rock, and helped him to overcome his
pedophilic urges, so her departure has a profound effect on
his emotional stability, or lack thereof. He locks himself
in the Venture compound in the hope that whenever the
Ventures return, Dr. Venture will kill him and put an end
to his misery. Unbeknownst to him, the Ventures are
currently on the lam from three super assassins in pursuit
of Brock, so the likelihood of that occurring is nil. When
Hatred does finally confront the Ventures, they’ve locked
themselves in the panic room whilst the Monarch’s flying
horde squares off with the OSI outside due to Brock’s
machinations. After a misguided suicide attempt with the
plot device that keeps on giving, the Venture’s shrink ray
device, and an equally half-hearted effort by Dr. Venture
to strangle him, Hank manages to raise troop morale and
stir them into action. In addition to foreshadowing the
Hatred-Venture family dynamics that propel the first half
of Season 4, this scene also manages to touch upon the
show’s broader themes about failure and one’s failure to
realize inner potential. Hatred instantly becomes endeared
to what he refers to as Hank’s “guts,” and despite Dean’s
nervous breakdown, sees potential in the boy. Although this
leads to the destruction of Dr. Venture’s cache of Hank and
Dean clone-slugs, at least they gave it the old college
try. Upon Brock quitting his role as the Venture bodyguard,
Hatred immediately turns to General Treister, OSI’s Officer
in Command, and says that he could use a job. Seeing as
9
Hatred never took any action that would preclude him from
continuing his job in the Guild of Calamitous Intent, it
would seem natural to conclude that his defection stems
from one desire: to be with the Ventures. After having been
left by his wife, he has found companionship in the
unlikeliest of places: that of his archenemy and his two
teenage boys.
Ignoring the anachronistic timeline of the Season 4

premiere “Blood of the Father, Heart of Steel,” Season 4
begins with Hatred firmly entrenched in his new role as
Venture bodyguard. One of the subtlest indicators of both
Hatred’s way of running things and his desire for the
family to be a unit is the family’s new attire: matching
baby blue speed suits with their names stitched on. Hatred
views his role as bodyguard as akin to that of a drill
sergeant, describing it in a conversation with Hank as
“Tony Danza to your spunky Alyssa Milano,” and treats the
boys accordingly. Unlike Brock, who had the cushion of the
boy’s clones to fall back on, Hatred has no such luxury,
and is seen throughout the season teaching Hank and Dean to
be more self-reliant. In “Blood of the Father, Heart of
Steel,” Hatred attempts to teach Dean how to construct a
handgun, which predictably ends with Dean somehow managing
to put the trigger in the barrel. Later in “Return to
Malice,” the audience learns that Hatred has made it a
routine to wake up and fake murder the boys every night,
hoping that this will teach them to become more reactive
and press the button on their beds that drops them into the
relative safety of the panic room.
10
One of the major threads of the fourth season is Hatred’s

attempts to make Hank more amenable to him. Because of the
boy’s incredibly sheltered upbringings, Hank viewed Brock
as the closest thing he had to a friend, at least until he
met Dermott Fictel, which is a subject for a whole other
paper. In Brock’s absence, Hank undergoes a rebellious teen
phase, growing out his hair, altering his choice in
clothing and becoming more openly defiant than he had been
in the series thus far. Because of his close relationship
with Brock, Hank views Hatred with contempt and an
unsuitable candidate for Venture bodyguard. As shown in
“The Family That Slays Together, Stays Together, Pt. II,”
Hatred admires the boy’s spirit and passion, and only seeks
his approval. This leads him to take measures that could be
described as mildly drastic, such as having Hank shoot him
in the shoulder in “Blood of the Father, Heart of Steel,”
in an effort to instill a sense of trust between the two.
The relationship comes to a head in “The Revenge Society,”
which begins with Hatred sobbing uncontrollably in the
bathroom, bemoaning the fact that Hank hates him. As the
episode progresses and Hank tries to show Hatred how
“Batman” he is, the two come to an understanding, and the
two lead a peaceful co-existence for the rest of the
season, although this could all change with the as of yet
unreleased fifth season.
Although many episodes dedicate time to focus on a single

character, it can be said that no one character develops in
these 22-minute time spans as much as Hatred does in the
fourth season’s sixth episode, “Self-Medication”. “Self-
Medication” forces Hatred to confront his repressed
11
pedophilic urges head on after seeing a “Lord of the Rings”

inspired adventure film with Hank and Dean in a theater
filled with young children. While watching the film, Hatred
relapses and retreats into the theater’s bathroom to take
his OSI-prescribed medication for his affliction,
“Nomolestol”. Other than being an extremely dark joke, this
scene establishes both Hatred’s extreme shame for his
behavior, and his chemical dependence. Leaving the boys
behind at the theater, Hatred drives back to the compound
in order to lock himself in the panic room to protect Hank
and Dean from himself. After getting a ride back from
Henchman 21, the boys attempt to talk to Hatred, who at
this point has turned to alcohol to ease his pain. Despite
Hank and Dean’s best efforts to assuage him, Hatred remains
steadfast in his belief that he cannot work through his
problem without his medication or Princess Tinyfeet in his
life. Eventually, the boys are able to lure him out and
knock him out with the help of Henchman 21 and some
subterfuge by Hank. Although the episode also follows Dr.
Venture’s participation in a therapy group for boy
adventurers and both he and Hatred make profound progress
in their respective character flaws, it is ultimately
Hatred who grows the most by the episode’s conclusion.
Despite the fact that Hatred’s plot does not end on a
particularly hopeful note, with Hatred only leaving the
panic room after thinking a disguised Hank was Princess
Tinyfeet and having to be subdued by a net and seven
tranquilizer darts, the proceedings have a feeling of
catharsis about them. Indeed, other than a throwaway
reference in the half-season finale “Pinstripes and
Poltergeists,” Hatred’s pedophilia has yet to come up again
12
in the show thus far. Unless it suddenly becomes a plot

point in Season 5, it appears as though Hatred’s terrible
urges received the treatment of a full narrative arc: an
introduction, a body, and a conclusion.
Outside of the show’s narrative, Hatred has consistently

been a talking point in discussions with Doc Hammer and
Jackson Publick. Hammer and Publick’s interactions with
fans have ascended to legendary status, party because of
their openness to engage in frank conversation, but mainly
because they often end up being debates between the two
creators over whether Anne Frank or Helen Keller would win
in a fight. Conducted at New York Comic Con 2010, in one of
their few interviews that does not consist solely of pop
culture quips and tangents, Hammer and Publick directly
address the Hatred ‘issue’. Responding to a question by an
interviewer from the press asking how they deal with
writing Sgt. Hatred as a character who is inherently in a
morally gray area, Doc and Jackson address how the
character originated, how they are able to reconcile his
personality with his pedophilia, and the fact that at the
end of the day, he is only a cartoon character.
Doc Hammer: Well as you know, all our

characters come from a conversation that
somebody had almost off-camera. Or, it was
somebody that walked through a background
and we were like ‘What’s his life story?
Let’s bother people about that-‘
Jackson Publick: Let’s make him a main

character now.
Doc Hammer: So Sgt. Hatred was a reference

from an episode where someone was talking
13
about a bad touch. So in the first

reference, he was ‘bad touch’. And that was
baggage that we brought with us. So he’s…
through with recovery. He is an ex-
pedophile. And in this cartoon world where
there can be ex-pedophiles, you can kind of
deal with it. You have to forgive him. We
forgave him.
Jackson Publick: We just like him as a guy,

as a super enthusiastic boob who instead of
being like Brock who just goes ‘Eh,’ about
everything, it became fun to write for a guy
who goes ‘Yes! Let’s get the submarine!’…
So, that’s how we write him and then we
remember that he’s an ex-pedophile and it
comes up once in a while. Some say too much.
This interview illuminates not only Hatred as a character,

but also how he embodies so many elements of what make the
show such a beautiful anomaly in the late night television
landscape. Addressing Hatred’s origins as a reference, Doc
notes that one of the first things the audience was told
about was that at some point, a ‘bad touch’ had occurred
between him and the boys. Due to the serious nature of such
an accusation, it would have been a grievous error to
introduce the character and not address it, so the
challenge then becomes making a sympathetic character out
of a pedophile. I believe it would be fair to say that this
is an unenviable pursuit for any writer. Yet, on a
relatively obscure late night cartoon, the most sympathetic
portrayal of a pedophile in any current media is not only
being portrayed, but it is being done with finesse. As Doc
states, the audience is meant to forgive Hatred for his
past transgressions, and in a way, accept them, move on and
14
love the character for his other wonderful traits. Although

the show does not have any overt political leanings, this
is an incredibly progressive position on one of today’s
most taboo subjects. The interview also addresses the
contrast between him and Brock, which, more than any other
element of the show, represents Doc and Jackson’s sheer
ambition and confidence in their vision. As his upcoming
appearance in Telltale Games’ “Poker Night 2,” would
attest, being the first appearance of a Venture character
outside of the show, Brock Samson is easily “Venture Bros.”
breakout character. Given that this is the highest profile
promotion the show has received in a medium outside of
television, Brock’s presence speaks volumes about the
strength of the character. John Walsh, the former host of
“America’s Most Wanted,” cited Brock as one of his favorite
fictional characters in an Entertainment Weekly interview.
Given the extremely vocal fanbase, Doc and Jackson are more
than aware how beloved Brock is. So what is their response?
Have him disappear for half of a season and put a character
that first appeared in throwaway dialogue and is a known
pedophile in his place. It is only through the skill of
their craft and dedication to the idea that Hatred was not
the show’s watershed decline in quality.
In short, if waxing analytical about Sgt. Hatred for the

last 4,000 words has not made you come around to loving the
poor lug, chances are you never will. Whether or not the
character ever achieves any approval from the greater
Venture fanbase at large, he remains a singular testament
to the show’s ambition and dedication to superb
characterization.
15
Works Cited
Hyden, Steven, et al. "Showblockers!: 22 characters who

stop good TV shows in their tracks." The A.V. Club.
The Onion, 16 Aug. 2010. Web. 11 Apr. 2013.
"Self-Medication Discussion." The Mantis-Eye Experiment.

N.p., 23 Nov. 2009. Web. 11 Apr. 2013.
Suvudu. NYCC The Venture Bros Press Panel: Jackson Publick

and Doc Hammer. Vimeo. IAC, 2010. Web. 11
Apr. 2013. <http://vimeo.com/15693780>.
16

Full Volume 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Full Volume 2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Full Volume 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Venture Studies -- Volume Two

To say that The Venture Bros. couldn’t exist without Ben

The relationship between

Publick’s contribution to The Tick in its various forms --

It is important to point out that Ben Edlund is not the

1Edlund is also credited as a partial contributor on the episodes “Ca-

above; if Mighty Mouse finds its purpose in being a simpli-

With The Tick, Edlund created a character that was not a

of these properties, though, remain distinct and unique,

When evaluating Ben Edlund’s major contribution to The Ven-

2 As mentioned before, he is also credited as a co-­‐writer on the sea-

there are significant characters in both this episode and

In “Sidekicks Don’t Kiss”, the 29th episode of The Tick car-

It is in relation to the larger thematic elements of The

have created. On several occasions, the Venture Bros.

The failure that characterizes Hammer and

If the Venture Bros. does follow a theme of failure, as has

3Rosen’s article, “’I’m Not a Boy Adventurer Anymore’: Success and

While Rusty Venture, Sergeant Hatred, Action Johnny and so

In “Viva Los Muertos!”, though, Edlund speaks to this theme

If Rusty Venture finally experiences the joys of success in

If Samson does indeed asso-

as much sway as it once did. And this distinction is an

It is this inversion of traditional roles in “Viva Los

a post-op Colonel Hunter Gathers:

HUNTER: What is all this namby-pamby feel

SAMSON: What about, uh…humanity and empathy

HUNTER: Who cares? You’re going to special

HUNTER: Really! And it’s God-damn great! A

SAMSON: But you’re not even dead! You’re a

HUNTER: And you’re a tool, boy. A tool…

The Venture Bros. as a program has had the good fortune of

ers and perspectives, simply cannot match. But the inclu-

In addition to owning a fantastic Jet Boy and Jet Girl cos-

Jeff McComsey is the Editor in Chief of the historical zom-

It is November 2nd 1974. In the New York studios of ABC

The thin, visibly nervous man sitting beside Mr Cavett

‘Black-noise is something that Burroughs got

Mr Cavett does not reply to this question. He asks

The English gentleman insists, ‘Oh yeah it is. It was

Mr Cavett: ‘And it would wipe out a…?’

We have no way of knowing whether this part of the

Despite the obvious implication of this tele-visual

1 “The Dick Cavett Show”, (1974), ABC TV, USA.

why we, the viewers of the Venture-Verse, would want David

This paper will answer these questions in three sections.

A Haven for Washed-Out Rock Stars?

In The Revenge Society,4 Phantom Limb (or Revenge as he

2 D Bowie, “Fame”, by C. Alomar, D. Bowie, J. Lennon, Young Americans,

So the Guild is an organisation with a multi-departmental

responsibility. The Guild requires measured, sober

An answer to this may be found in the real-life career of

8 “The Revenge Society”.

Pretensions of being a fascist overlord do not exclude Bowie

However, scratch the drug-ravaged surface and a much more

best?) albums of his career, taken from a catalogue of

So the real wonder of it all is that Bowie managed to

15P. Trynka, Starman – David Bowie: The Definitive Biography, (London,

that imagining David Bowie leading the Guild Of Calamitous

Our Enduring Belief in the Secret Society

2 As mentioned before, he is also credited as a co-‐writer on the sea-