Cool News
‘Hilton Sent Him To Every Armpit He Has!!’ Sunday Brings MAD MEN 3.8!!
SPOILER ALERT !!
I am – Hercules!!
Don Draper: Mr. Bad Example! Enjoys a cocktail behind the wheel, picks up a pair of hitchhikers, then washes down some barbiturates with a glass of delicious scotch. I bet he wasn’t wearing a safety belt either!
Loved the scene with Hilton waiting in Don's office. Maybe I was reading the Bible with my family.
Peggy and Duck: creepy power couple! The logline for 3.10 below suggests Peggy is sticking with Sterling Cooper. Will she serve as Duck’s sex puppet and spy?
An eclipse set off everybody’s hormones! Like it was “Heroes” or something!
And Bert Cooper served his British masters by putting Don back in his cage!
Is Joan absent again this week? And when, I wonder, does Freddy Rumson return?
Tonight and beyond:
3.8 "Souvenir"
Don and Betty go on a business trip. Pete helps a neighbor.
3.9 "Wee Small Hours"
Don and Sal have trouble giving the clients what they want. Betty hosts a fundraiser.
3.10 "The Color Blue"
The firm celebrates a milestone. Peggy and Paul compete on an account.
3.11 "The Gypsy and the Hobo"
A former client returns; Betty goes on a trip with the kids; and Joan and Greg plan for their future.
3.12 " The Grown-Ups"
Don meets with a candidate; Peggy second guesses her taste in men; Pete makes a big decision.
3.13 " Shut the Door and Have a Seat" Don has a meeting with Connie; Betty gets some advice; Pete talks to his clients.
10 p.m. Sunday. AMC.
Follow Herc on Twitter!!
$10.49 Blu-ray Beetlejuice!!
Halloween Sale!!
Kubrick’s
Masterpiece!!
$8.99 Blu-ray!!
Don and Betty go on a business trip. Pete helps a neighbor.
Don and Sal have trouble giving the clients what they want. Betty hosts a fundraiser.
The firm celebrates a milestone. Peggy and Paul compete on an account.
A former client returns; Betty goes on a trip with the kids; and Joan and Greg plan for their future.
Don meets with a candidate; Peggy second guesses her taste in men; Pete makes a big decision.
$10.49 Blu-ray Beetlejuice!!
Halloween Sale!!
Kubrick’s
Masterpiece!!
$8.99 Blu-ray!!
-
+ Expand All
-
The old man had some serious sack to take on the Draper and win that decisively and quickly.
-
but this is the best show on tv.
-
Oct 04, 2009 9:36:56 AM CDT
I forgot to check these TBs the last couple episodes
by thunderbolt ross
Shame on me
-
That I haven't seen yet but will probably do blind purchase just because I hear how great it is.
-
have they changed since last week? i remember the finale being entitled "the silo" at some point in the past.
-
I would rent first. I heard how amazing the show was before season two started and rented all of the discs. I made it through 3 1/2 episodes before calling it quits. If it is your favorite show on TV then God Bless, but to each their own. Very disappointed.
-
Just last week in the list herc posted an episode was called that. Not too surprising that they changed it though since it wasn't very good for a title.
-
but why did they change 3.12 from "The Greatest Generation" ?
such a great episode title... -
I knew of it, but didn't want to invest in a new show. Nevertheless, I downloaded the first episode off iTunes about a week ago and now I've seen the entire series. Can't believe how good it is.
Just wish they made more than 13 episodes a season. Every season they skip a couple years so pretty soon we'll be in the 70s. -
I like "shut the door and have a seat", it sound ominous. It looks like they come up with a few variations for each ep title and decide which one to go with at the last minute. The Sopranos used to change around episode titles late in the game as well.
-
I *think* Weiner's plan from here on out is to cover the key points in the 60s (this season is clearly leading up to November 63), next season is full on to the initial Vietnam deployments and protests, etc... we'll get the 70s, but the early 70s
-
Otherwise why would we be expecting him to return?
-
i liked how mysterious 'the silo' was as a title, but 'shut the door and have a seat' is definitely ominous and that works too. didn't know show runners commonly futzed with episode titles. that's interesting.if the show went into the 70's i would find that a little odd... it's about the extremely sudden culture shift that occurred in the US in the '60s; woodstock would be a pretty iconic, and chronologically fitting, place to end the entire series if you ask me. going further than (what seemed at the time to be) the cultural triumph of the hippies seems sort of gratuitous.
-
was he the dude whose foot was run over by the lawnmower? i'd like to see him come back, because if he doesn't, nearly everything that happened in that episode (great as it was) would be random as fuck.
-
There is enough as we bridge from RFK/MLK to the Moon, to Woodstock, through Vietnam, through Nixon that I actually think Watergate and/or Ford is where this show could end... that's 9 more "years" of pop cultury goodness to cypher through
-
And got fired. I think it was the second season, but it was have been way back in the first. Either way, he was an ad man in charge of Peggy's team. Before a meeting he passed out and pissed himself, they told on him, and he got fired. It was a pretty big deal for Peggy.
-
Though I do DVR it and watch them up when I can't fall asleep.
-
Will it be all Stone's JFK style with someone from SC chatting up Zapruder and then flinching hearing the shot or will Roger walk in the office and say "well looks like his hats won't fit anymore" with everyone having a nice laugh.
-
Didn't they also say that each season is every two years? i thought this season would be 1964 since the other ones so far have been 60 and 62. I remember reading they would skip past the JFK assassination since it has been covered too much by other movies/tv but looks like they are using it as a season finisher. This makes me wonder now whether the every 2 years thing is gone and next season could be 64 or 65 who knows.
-
The last episode will take place on Nov 22. The whole world will be completely up-ended the next day, and we will just be left to imagine what that may entail.
-
Really, most of these article title quotes are casually spoken throw away lines. But you try to make them sound . . . IMPORTANT!
-
timely much?
-
Dec. 23rd, 1970...the firm of Sterling Cooper & Draper try to make some deals at the topping out ceremony for the World Trade Center.
-
King of the late night drunken booty-call. I see another little Petey in his future.
-
Rumson will return, but he did not say when.
-
Wonder how long that will last...
-
Oct 04, 2009 11:10:01 PM CDT
Can't believe some morons are calling Pete a rapist!
by hollywoodhellraiser
WTH!?!? Some people are damn fools!
-
He had leverage, and used it to force himself on her. Money and a secret instead of a roofie but the same result.
-
Mostly filler. One scene in the office. Everyone good on vacation. Too many boring scenes of home life.
Reminded me of one of those later-season Sopranos episodes where you forget that they're even in the mob... -
The whole Rome scenario was like a Sinatra song. Don sitting at the next table? perfect. And Betty's cosmo italiano. Gotta love educated girls from eastern schools..360 days of unbearable frost punctuated by 5 days of scorching smoking repressed heat..
When I was thirty-five
It was a very good year
It was a very good year
for blue-blooded girls
Of independent means
We'd ride in limousines
Their chauffeurs would drive
When I was thirty-five...
And with that I leave you with the sweet styling of the above..
As performed by Bill Shatner:
http://tinyurl.com/qj4o5
-
This is the first episode where we see Betty cheat on Don rather than the other way around, that's a big thing. Betty has had lots of moments with other men throughout the show but this is the first where it's got physical. It's odd how there's something far more depressing about Betty cheating than Don. It seems like far more of a betrayal in some ways. That their time in Italy, where we actually see them work as a couple and have fun - is tarnished with the knowledge that Betty only went there out of some sense of guilt or need to escape after kissing another man.
And then we get a great Pete episode as well, I've missed Pete centric episodes, and this one was great. Pete has slowly become my favourite character on the show after Don. -
I wonder how they will manage to work her back into the show in a meaningful way. She can't possibly stay in the dreary store. I'll be very sad if we start getting less Joan instead of more. It's so depressing a woman as cunning and intelligent as her made the mistake of marrying such a douche. Do you guys think she genuinely regrets marrying him and doesn't love him, or is just upset that things haven't turned out how she expected, but she does actually love him? I find it difficult to believe Joan actually loves that guy.
In terms of being placeholder, I would agree to a mild extent and say it certainly wasn't as incredibly thrilling as the last two or three episodes, and didn't have the giant "bomb dropping" moments of drama, but was still a fantastic episode, not boring or "placeholder" at all. I can't get over Pete Campbell. My views on him swing so widely from one episode to the next. Is he a piece of shit or not? So complicated. Then again, I guess you could ask the same of whether Don is actually a piece of shit or not right? I found this episode fascinating, as always. -
Betty banged a random dude in a bar's bathroom last season.
-
Dilemma solved. Hehehehehe...
-
But I think a slight difference exists in the fact that her banging the guy at the bar was revenge. She didn't really want to because she was interested in the guy or out of pure passion. She was scorned, and angry, and felt she deserved to find out what Don was out there doing every night. This time, she feels guilty because she liked it. She wanted it, even if she tells herself she didn't. You only feel guilt when what you did actually meant something. I don't think what happened in the bar meant anything to her. This event did, and that is significant, as LexRomero was saying. It was true adultery.
On a side note, we haven't seen Roger Sterling since Don said he didn't want any connection with him any longer. I can't fucking stand that. I hope its not because Slattery is getting big on Broadway and other places, and hes being phased out of importance on Mad Men. Roger Sterling is by far my favorite character, and if he ceases to be a presence, I will be one extremely sad viewer. I need more Roger even more than I want Joan to come back. Don and Roger together are such a wonderful duo, I really hope they kiss and make up..for the second time. Though somehow, this time, I get the feeling I'm going to be disappointed, and that sucks. The scene between the two of them at the fancy barber's earlier this season was one of the best scenes this series has had. If they lose Roger Sterling...they lose some of my enthusiasm for this show. -
It's going to happen sooner, rather than later.
-
I don't want to hear that. However, I'd rather have his death happen during the season than come back next season to learn in the 2 years between he seasons he died. You think his new trophy wife will try to assert herself in some sort of position in the company after he is gone?
-
Pete forced himself on the au pair. She was clearly under duress. I vote rape.
Like Crow, my feelings on Pete tend to range, and I wonder how conscious the writers are of audience reaction in this regard. To wit: I bring a slightly left of center but still very conventional American middle class sensibility to my watching of the show (versus what I think is a probably far left of center, cosmopolitian sensibility of the writers; and the "...but we know better now, don't we?" enlightened undertone of the series). Rather than leave roles in the modern capitalist socioeconomic structure as dead ends, antithical to self-actualization (which the show seems to posit), I would like to see the characters succeed in these roles.
I want Don and Betty not to cheat on each other and be happy together. I want Pete to graduate from weasel to being a good man. And I don't think I'm alone in feeling this way. Again, I think this might be counter to the show's big picture agenda, but I wonder if the writers are aware to the degree that they and the audience are working at cross-purposes. I wonder if they're aware at how much we want to like Pete.
And so, on the heels of his attempts to bring African-Americans into the target audience demo, for Pete to sit back reading an Ebony magazine, even for just research, seemed positive. Feelings were good for Pete at the begining of the episode. By the end, not so much. Even his grief with Trudy seemed to show more guilt about his betrayal of her rather than for the traumatized German girl in the next apartment over. Pete is still a major weasel, no matter how many Ebony magazines he reads. -
...i think you're forgetting when Betty went to the bar last season and banged the guy in the back room.
And yes, Pete is one fascinating mofo. -
The very reason we are so torn about Pete is exactly BECAUSE the writers have written him that way. There are no cross-purposes, unless you're wanting Pete to have some kind of epiphany and turn either all good or all bad. But how interesting would that be?
-
And how Don is trying his damndest to be a good husband and keeping his wife (IS she bipolar?) happy. AND how Pete can't curtail his horndog ways, he did have that one night stand also last season. The big difference is his stifling guilt over it. And he in turn may be trying to be a better husband, by his promise to his wife to want to join her on her trips.
-
the writers have made Pete a dick all along. All the moves he's made throught the series -- moves that audience members have called out as making him more endearing -- could easily be read as self-serving.
For example, the conversation with the elevator operator. Half of the audience commentary I've read described it as Pete awkwardly but well-intentionedly reaching out. The other half saw it as Pete pompously exploiting the guy while missing out on the true message the guy was trying to convey. What were the writers trying to say with that scene? Could go either way. I'm sure they'd be thrilled with the ambiguity, but I doubt they planned it that way. To the degree they intended to convey the latter instead of the former, the audience and the writers are working at cross-purposes.
Maxwell, your point about what would be "interesting" also brings up another issue involving *rooting interest* when it comes to entertainment. I think that if dramatists do their job well enough, you find youself connected to characters enough to where your rooting for their success regardless of whether it's interesting or not. I can liken it to sports: Would you rather your favorite team win the game, or that the game be exciting with the increased possibility or likelyhood of them losing? Sure, entertainment is the whole goal of both entertainment and sports, but I don't think that this changes the emotional agenda for many viewers. I.e., we still hope, with each episode, even in reruns, that the castaways will manage to get off Gilligan's Island. -
That is all
-
...Just set up is all. a lot of things happened in this episode ut they happened so slowly and subtley that some of yall didnt even notice them. the conversation that Pete has with his wife when he tells her that he doesnt want to be away from her anymore...and she forgives him for every thing!...genius. lets not forget that Pete is basicaly a complete coward right now. he cant get up the nerve to close the deal with the french girl, so he gets drunk to numb himself, then rapes the girl; finnally when his wife comes home he cant even nut up and LIE for christ's sake!...he has to break down and confess and he cant even say it out loud just look at her all guilty....the acting and writing in that scene...flawless...
-
Pete wants to be Don so badly..but thier not cut from the same clothe...Pete knows that deep down....and it kills him.
-
...i think its kind of arrogant that you give the writers absolutuly no credit in successfully creating a fascinatingly ambigious character like Pete. You honestly think the ambiguity of the elevator scene was just an accident? What were the writers trying to say? That Pete can be awkward and annoying, almost childlike, in his bluntless, but that his actions are seldom underlied by maliciousness, rather than by childlike naivte. Ergo: Pete can be a total douche-bag, until you realize that he doesn't know any better, so you almost forgive him...in most cases...
...because also like a child, he is selfish and whiney, and (probably due to his wealthy upbringing) has a sometimes destructive sense of entitlement which, moments after you find yourself rooting for him, leads him to take advantage of defenseless young girls like Peggy or Gertrude.
As a writer, your job is to create a character with multiple facets (remember middle school English: round vs. flat characters?) that tug the viewer's reactions is many directions. That's what Pete is, and that is what the writers purposefully created. Stop pretending you're smarter than they are. -
the unsung Murray brothers, the othe character I miss the most this season is Jimmy Barrett. The actor who portrayed him and the character was perfect.
-
You took the words right out of my mouth regarding Pete and Don. No surprise that it was an episode that cross cut between the two. Question..? Did Joan know that Pete was lying..?
-
at the beginning something was fishy with Pete's story. The line pete said about discression sealed the deal. That's when Joan knew it wasn't his wife's dress.
-
Joan noted the dress didn't seem to be Trudy's size. Pete's "It doesn't fit well" probably doesn't really make sense. I think Joan saw right through it at that point.
-
Sorry for being such an arrogant dick by discussing the themes of the series, how those themes may be presented by the writers, and how they may be interpreted or misinterpreted by the audience. I suppose I thought I was being clever by couching my remarks in terms of "I wonder" and "I think the argument could be made," trying to fool people into believing that I was just thinking out loud or trying to explore my own thoughts. But Maxwell's Hammer, you saw right through this ruse and called me out for being the pompous philistine I am. Good job!
Forgive me if I continue to fall back on further non-commital terms like "I think" and "could" out of habit, and don't fall into the trap of thinking I'm just sounding out an interpretation.
With regard to the multi-dimensional Pete, I think that the elevator scene was ambiguous to a point; but I think the best takeaway that's consistent with the show's theme (and I'll plant a flag and identify the show's main theme as "sociological alienation") is that Pete was driven to speak to the elevator operator not from any naive benevolence -- qualities that would reflect well on his character -- but on the capitalistic drive to innovate regardless of moral content. Capitalism, and the society it produces, will do the right thing for the wrong reasons; the same reasons will often lead it to do the wrong thing. Indeed, the conversation in the elevator could be seen as a collision of these two issues: market driven innovation (Pete) versus moral implication (elevator guy).
I think the writers are fashioning multidimensional characters, but to the degree that the takeaway in this scene was missed, and speaking to the overall attitude of the audience towards Pete (including me), I think the writers may be misfiring a bit. It's the difference between Kartheiser's description of Pete in interviews as "a down, dirty douchebag," which may reflect the creator's intent, and the audience's interpretation as occasional douchebag driven by childlike naivete. -
These could all be daytime soap plots. Weird how people get so much into this stylized nonsense...
-
The scene of Pete in the elevator directly relates to the first scene of the entire series, where Don Draper asks a black guy about his cigarettes. Don's exchange goes smoothly and without incident, unlike Pete's. This is due to the core differences in their characters that are constantly being illustrated throughout the series.
This is what the entire last episode "Souvenir" was doing (and what most of the series has been doing)... It's comparing and contrasting Pete and Don. The old school vs. the new school, generational differences, and the inevitable conflict that arises due to those differences.
Don getting it on with his wife despite his past infidelities vs. Pete being alone without his wife and not even really knowing how to have an affair. Don's smooth vs. Pete's awkward and clunky. Don's willing conquests vs. Pete's unwilling ones. The list goes on and on...
Also, Pete's scene of returning the dress is in relation to the previous scene of him attempting to return something and failing, only this time Joan was there to make it happen for him, otherwise he probably would have failed again. Pete probably realizes this and then asserts himself with the rape of the au pair.
I agree that Pete is a total weasel, but also that his character is extremely complex and well-rounded. I don't think that the two are mutually exclusive. -
Your point about Pete's motivation in the elevator scene is a really good one, and shows how it's also about his similarities to Don as well as their differences.
I would disagree with the "misfiring" though. What drives a douchebag doesn't change the end result of douchebagginess. You make good points, but I think that the writers are more concerned with creating something complex and great rather than audience expectations and that sort of thing. -
How does civilly presenting a discussion equal arrogance? What in his wording set you off? Apparently even shows like Mad Men attract hypersensitive fanboys.
-
It's weird that there are people illiterate enough to not be able to tell the difference between Mad Men and Days Of Our Lives. Read much?
-
Maybe I'm optimistic and I want the Drapers to survive as a marriage, but I don't think Betty liked the kiss from Francis last night. I think she knew that was where it was going at some point and she was using him to elevate her status in the community, but I think after the kiss she felt it was a mistake and recommitted herself to Don. I don't think she likes adultery. She is tough to read sometimes. I also think her speech about how "all kisses after the first kiss are shadows" to Sally was perhaps her realizing that pursuing anything with him was a waste of time since the thrill is now gone. It was actually a mature admission for her to make. I don't know. I might be looking for some good in her and some loyalty in her. I didn't think she was thrilled after that kiss in the car. I thought she was a bit disgusted. I think her comment about leaving the community and the people might have been her realizing that in order to elevate her status she invited a flirtation with adultery and she didn't like that.
-
at the beginning of the episode. As it may have been stated before, Pete may be a douche, but he is a forward-thinking douche.
-
"I'm sure they'd be thrilled with the ambiguity, but I doubt they planned it that way."
To assume this seems rather arrogant, and shows no respect for the writers, whose sole job it is to do exactly what Greggers said he doubts they did.
Also Greggers: thank you for apologizing. -
...i know I'm kind of being a dick, and for that, I apologize, but really: you're basically saying that Pete's complexity is unintentional. Hasn't Mad Men proven itself in 3 seasons to be smarter than that?
-
He is a complete douche.
Think about villains in any one of our various lores.
They are usually filled with moral dilemmas and ambiguity... specially early on in their life.
Doesnt mean they dont have a strong evil streak in them, they just arent pure evil... because few things are pure anything in the world.
But Pete is an evil SOB, even when he has psyched himself out and thinks he is being "good", nope... still being evil, he just doesnt realize it yet.
The fact that he sometimes shows remorse for his deeds is also not really proof that he is redeemable.
Look at his remorse a bit more closely.
What was he remorseful about?
Did he offer a sincere apology?
Did he feel bad for hurting Trudy?
Or was his remorse more internal, personal... and all about how he had let HIMSELF down?
He certainly internalized even his "confession" to Trudy.
It didnt go past a look on his face.
And his plead for her to no longer leave him alone when she goes away... was that because he did not want to be away from her? Hardly.
Was it because he didnt want to cheat on her? Sure... but its not out of the love he has for her, or the respect for the marriage vows.
No, he realizes he has a giant weakness/fault. And being alone only brings out the fault even more. He knows that he cant help himself from self destructive behavior... like using his position of control over the foreign girl in order for her to allow him to have his way with her. Only to later realize the giant mistakes he made that could have brought his whole house of cards crashing down on top of him.
Pete realized this as soon as the the girls boss showed up at his door. He thought he was about to be accused of rape... and the only reason he would think that is if deep down he realized that his actions were wrong.
He went into the classic Pete damage control/freak out phase as soon as the guy walked in.
Whats worse of course for him is that he also "shit where he eats" so to say. A cardinal sin that someone like Don would never have committed.
So its another failure on top of the previous ones.
Pete does not care about what he did to the girl, he does not care about how he might have hurt Trudy.
He cares that he personally fucked up, yet again due to his weakness of character... and he almost got caught bad.
Thats what he is remorseful for... and thats what he cares about.
Brilliant character, great writing, and just as great performance by the actor... who i think has improved exponentially more than anyone else in the cast.
-
I agree with Greggers here.
Its pretty straightforward to me that Pete is not interested in the plight of the 60's era black man.
There is already a guy like that in the office... (although he probably is more interested in 60's era black booty).
Pete wants any edge he can get.
He see's a potential pot of gold in the black community. And we know of course that this pot of gold does exist, because black culture was then exploited to the nth degree in the years that follwed.
To the point where black culture is now completely a stereotype that paints all blacks with this commercial "blackwash" that people in suits have decreed to be "what black people want".
The show is portraying Pete as the possible genesis of that phenomena. And therefore a guy who may rise to great heights in the company down the line... due very much to his success in capturing and molding the black market.
Greggers point about the writers is a valid one.
I believe that what he and I are talking about is the intended point they are trying to convey.
But that there is so much inner contradiction and ambiguity seemingly shown in the character... that some people view him in a sympathetic and almost positive light.
Im guessing that they may have foreseen this... but its of course possible that its simply a natural accidental byproduct of the way things play out on screen and in the viewers eye.
-
with the death of kennedy it has to
-
We're even #6 in the rankings! Maxwell's Hammer, maybe you and I should square off more often!
Seriously though, I accept your apology, and for the record, I do think the writers are intending Pete to be multi-dimensional, complex, and contradictory, just like any good character, and just like any person in real life. I just worry that the extent of the sympathy for the character might not be what they really intended. I mean, do you think they intended for there to be Pete/Peggy'shippers? (See: Television Without Pity Mad Men Message Board)
This is a common tv phenomenon. Luke Spenser Syndrome. Barnabas Collins
Syndrome. Spike from BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER Syndrome: The tendency for the audience to take characters that were created to be intentionally unsympathetic or at least largely unsympathetic, and then embue them with undue sympathy.
I think the writers of MAD MEN are shrewd enough to have created Pete with ambiguity, and at times, even sympathy. But I also think Kartheiser can be a charismatic actor, even when he's being a creep. Anthony Geary charisma? You tell me. -
This is not "Father Knows Best" nor "The Dick Van Dyke Show." The show is the early 1960's as they truly were. Betty does not want to be stuck with 3 kids home alone all day and night. She will become the bored housewife that gets into swinging circa 1971 (as played by Sigourney Weaver in "The Ice Storm") or follow Erica Jong into the world of "divorce your unfaithful and ungrateful husband, have wild monkey sex with other men and don't worry about the kids (who will become addicts.) She already took one step into that world last season with the "bathroom fuck." BTW, Betty does not know who the father of her 3rd child is. She fucked bathroom guy and Don the same week.Really consider Betty. She went to Bryn Mawr, has a fantastic education, but in Pre-1960 US high society you went to university to find a man. "Nice of you to have that education, too bad you will NEVER use it." That's what Grandpa Gene was teaching Sally not to do. He could now teach Sally she has possibilities because his harpy first wife was dead.Don's blue-coller roots failed him when he gave Betty the souvenir. Upper-class people do not buy souveniers of their trips, especially from the gift shop at the last minute as they are leaving for home.Oh, another thing is the episode is titled "Souvenir." Sometimes a child conceived during a vacation is called "A Souvenir." Maybe Betty gets pregnant again?----later-----m
-
As I suggested way upthread, I think a lot of us see Pete *not* as corrupted by his role in a dysfunctional society and confined to that corruption as long as he stays confined to that role, but *redeemable within that role*. And we have the same attitudes towards Don, Betty, and everyone else on the show.
I think this is an understandable interpretation of the drama, again, coming from the typical default middle-class values of most Americans. The writers are probably aware of this. (At least I hope they're aware of it.) Meanwhile, I think the show, overall, is trying to employ, more of a Marxist-type critique of society; the roles we play in the social structure often run counter to our true nature, creating lives of frustration and quiet desperation; a critique that won't be The Key to Everything, but yet still The Key to A Lot of Things; a lesson we'll perhaps more fully grasp by the end of the series. I'm trying not to be too reductionist here, but I think this is where a lot of the show's head is at thematically.
But for the sake of history, I've known a few families from the 60s -- real ones, not Drapers -- and they weren't quite the sinkhole of misery, repression, and alienation that MAD MEN, REVOLUTIONARY ROAD, even PLEASANTVILLE would have you believe. Maybe not as interesting, but not quite as unhappy. -
All of your thoughts are excellent and fun to read, and I'm just happy because this is the firs time the Mad Men talkback has been anything but stale and boring. It's usually a lot of boilerplate one-offs saying "Great Show! Great Episode!" etc and then leaving. Just wanted to thank all of you for sharing your thoughts. As always, many interesting things I hadn't thought of have been brought up.
Exie, I think I now agree with what you said about Betty, and revise my thoughts from before. I think you are right that she maybe she didn't fully enjoy it, and realized the mistake later, so I would revise and say that she allowed it to happen, at least. With the guy in the bar it was revenge, and wanting to do what Don does to her and know what that is like, and it was impulsive, but this time, she knew what was coming, sooner or later, and allowed things to play out. She was aware of what she was doing to George, and liked that. She might not have liked the kiss, but she liked leading him on, and she liked fantasizing about what it might be like that's for sure.
Also, I hope all of you return next week. -
I concur. I didn't mean to come off sounding so dickish, and I do appreciate a little bit of honest and rigerous back-and-forth. But I honestly don't think Pete was ever intended to be an intentionally unsympathetic character. I think he's an annoying, self-centered douche, but I think there are enough intentional beats written into his character that urge you to want to have sympathy for him even when he's at his weasally worst. the elevator scene included. I don't think he's callously exploiting the elevator operator, as much as his attempts to get his opinions are awkward and clunky.
He's very childlike in the way he deals with everything, and I think that's very intentional, and it allows you to get both frustrated with him while still rooting for him. And believe me, I'm a middle school teacher, so I know a little about the love/hate relationship with someone with the emotional maturity of a 12 year old. This is why I love Pete as a character. i don't think the sympathy for him is undue. -
He has a really hot wife but he doesn't have the slightest idea what to do with her. Hell, he's worse than Sal is with HIS wife!
I wanna be a milkman or a travelling salesman in the Mad Men universe. Fuck!
Think Weiner would give me the job? -
...about the show is how we all see different things in these characters. That's rare. Maybe it happened some times in 6 Feet Under. Other than that, I've never seen a show that was this open to interpretation week after week. I find Betty the most interesting since it's all internal for the most part. There are times you think she's about to go off and fuck everything with a dick and then there are times when you think she wouldn't do that and does like with the guy in the bar. I do think the new baby was conceived with the guy in the bar. I'd almost bank on it. It would completely play into Don's past with his "family" and how he didn't belong there. Is it too on the nose for Don's third son not to actually be his son? A little, but I think at some point Don is going to have to know she did that to him. I think Betty likes the power she has over men but doesn't like what she has to do to keep the power, i.e. actually fuck them. I could be wrong and she might fuck the Governor's guy next week for all I know, but I thought last night was all about her realizing that it's not going to be better with him. It's not going to be different. It's only going to fade and whatever spark she was feeling towards him had already passed. I don't think she'll ever give up her life and lifestyle with Don. The only thing that would force that, perhaps, is if the baby gets sick and needs a blood test or something and that reveals Don isn't the father....I tend to think that's too soapy for these writers though. Great catch by the poster who mentioned Don giving Betty a trinket from the gift shop was blue collar. As for Pete Campbell, he's completely loathsome and laughable and truly a fun character to watch. Whoever wrote that he will rise to the top is exactly right.
-
Who started out wanting to kill his father, slept with his "stepmom" and helped father a super demon. But he has still been a revelation and really feel that he instead of John Slattery should have gotten the Emmy noms.
-
its not keeping my interest as much as season 1 and 2. The epic moments of advertising creativity are gone and replaced with everyone meandering around brooding. And no Don banging chicks!!
-
But it did have a foot run over by a lawn mower. Not many prime time dramas can make that claim.
-
In the first two seasons he was seen as a real douchebag, in this season they are showing more of his positive aspects (well this rape aside), on the racism issue i thought it was interesting his and Don's reactions to Roger's blackface, Don just seemed disgusted while Pete was confused while the others were laughing, also anyone notice he's barely seen drinking or i can't remember when i saw him smoke either. Funniest moment of the ep was Pete laughing at the cartoon.
-
That wife of his is smoking damn hot (and, as far as I'm concerned, doesn't get nearly enough screen time) yet he risks everything to force himself on this offensively plain German au pair (Gertrude? Ugh!). The only thing she had going for her was a damn fine rack and little else. Then wife Trudy comes home apparently horny as Hell and Pete folds like a little girl under the stress of his "guilt." Man, I wanted to reach right through my TV screen and bitch slap that little a-hole into next week's episode - and then drag his hottie wife into the bedroom and make Pete watch as Trudy and I made the beast with two backs! I guess none of us can resist the call of Strange no matter how strange it might be, but at least have the testicular weight to keep a straight face in front of your significant other in the aftermath of your...um..."transgression."
-
His wife and the au pair have the same name. Should we read anything into that choice by the writers? Maybe not but I'm sure they were aware of it.
-
Clearly a case of PCS (Prince Charles Syndrome). Someday, science will find a cure.
-
The significance of this series is in its pre-sexual revolution, pre-feminism, pre-civil rights struggle, pre-Vietnam quagmire setting...the last gasp of the old, patriarchal order and their "wisdom".
I can't even see it making it to '68. -
January Jones and Christina Hendricks being sexier fully dressed than all the naked women on HBO combined.
-
Betty finds out she is pregnant from her doctor before she has has random bar sex with that guy. That was just revenge sex so she could allow herself to take Don back. The baby is Dons.
-
Would have seemed like a stereotype if I hadn't been to Italy. And that definetely hasn't changed in 40+ years
-
Pete hit the jackpot with her and he doesn't realize how good he has it. When her character was introduced I thought she was just a pretentious, spoiled woman, but it turns out that she is the classiest and most sincere of all the wives in the show.
Most of the time it seems that he's trying to convince himself he is attracted to or loves her. He probably feels affection for her, but she worships the ground he walks on.
He's so wrapped up in his own world and his own insecurities that he can't truly appreciate what he has.
Which is another contrast to Don, who DOES love and appreciate what he has with Betty. He realizes how important she is to him, but he is simply unwilling to deny himself what he sees as his birthright of being a man: free access to all women, even though his unwillingness to deny his own attraction to women causes him immense guilt (for a time.) I think Don feels a bit guilty over how freaking easy it is for him to get any woman he wants, because he knows that what he does hurts people. Pete doesn't have that ability to empathize with others, even if he'd like to.
-
January Jones, has a comic book character name, and looks like a princess.
There might be more endowed women on TV, but surely she would be up there as the most beautiful. -
they both want attention and praise, scatch "want", they need attention and praise.
-
One of things that this show does for me is really question the way I view/viewed my grandparents.
Specifically how simplistic I did, and how I wish I had got to know them better as people, rather than me defining/viewing them as their relationship to me.
Am sure it sounds strange to some people, but am sure most of us view how our parents are differently than when we were young or a teenager, we start to see them more as people than that relationship and role.
My grandparents (two deceased, two alive) were basically born around the same time as Betty and Don and since watching the show I am starting to ask them more and more about their life.
Obvioulsy I had thought about this before the show, but watching the show, really gets the brain ticking over.
-
Oct 06, 2009 3:14:48 AM CDT
BurnHollywood it doesn't matter that you can't see it
by takingscorpioscalls
going into the 70s. because from Weiner's own damn mouth he said he's taking Don to 1972.
-
You're probably referring to the Matt Weiner interview by TV Squad http://tinyurl.com/ycg47cs :
"A two year pace gives you a chance to really cover things. As much as I talk about people not changing, things are so different from 1960 to 1972. And yet for a lot of people, it didn't change at all. I don't know if Don is going to be the guy with muttonchops in an ashram or Don's going to be the guy who looks exactly like he does now with a touch of gray and voted for Goldwater and is looking at the world and saying, 'Where did everything go?' "
The show skipped forward in season 2 to 1962 from season 1's 1960. However, season 3 is clearly set in 1963...JFK's still alive, and his assassination will probably cap the season same as the missile crisis capped season two.
It's not outlandish to expect a similar pace for future seasons...season four will open with The Beatles on Sullivan, end with Goldwater's defeat in '64, season five will probably culminate in the Watts Riots, season six will have LBJ's disastrous escalation of the war in Vietnam through 1966 in the background...
It was prudent to move the series ahead to 1962, but given the upheaval on the horizon, I doubt that pace will continue...which is a good thing. So much changed in such a few years, any more jumps would be disorienting. But I CAN see a series coda/finale set in the 70s.
Brilliant series. Love it. -
I'm just curious, guys, but do any of you suspect - as I do - that both Peggy Olson and her mentor, Don, are closet sociopaths? Now I don't mean homicidal serial killers, I'm defining 'sociopath' as someone who was simply born without the neural wiring for deep empathy. Peggy actually frightens me; she's like some early 1960s Nancy Grace prototype: I'd ask her to pull the stick out of her ass, but I'm scared of what might happen when she does! Also, gentlemen, thanks for addressing the question of whether or not the series was going to proceed into a realtime future. I was curious as to how Matthew Weiner might handle a Sterling-Cooper filled with guys sporting long sideburns, Nehru jackets, bell-bottom pants and love beads. I realize that so much of the show's attraction and popularity is based on its retro-sixties cool (plus the fact that we know what's ahead for these characters: a world where every deep value they cherish and live their lives by will be turned completely on its head). Still, as one talk-backer just mentioned, it would be interesting to see a final episode set in the 70s or even 1980, where we can see where these characters finally end up after the massive cultural shifts of those decades have beached them all.
-
It took them two days to make the most recent episode available!WHAT THE BLOODY FUCKING HELL IS UP WITH THAT?!?!?!
-
He cares too much (and hallucinates too often) about his troubled childhood to be a sociopath.
He's neurotic, for sure, but he still feels human emotion.
There might be a case to be made for Peggy though. I don't think I've ever seen her exhibit any human emotion other than "insecurity" or "ambition". -
The National Association of Milkmen and Travelling Salesmen
-
I think my theory about every episode taking place in a consecutive month is paying off.
-
Oct 06, 2009 11:39:49 AM CDT
Anyone hope Ken Cosgrove gets given something to do?
by therootstheroots
He seems to be the only character that we know only so much about. Is Matthew Weiner going to trick us, and have the final season be from the point of view of Ken? Maybe he is just one of those guys who is an all round decent person, with not much drama to play with. Anyway, a Ken episode would be cool. One of the great things about mad men is that they have all these secondary characters who are all interesting in them selves.
-
Don is about the only character o nthe show who isn't a sociopath. Pete? HE is a sociopath.
-
Soooooooooo HOT. Glad I'm not the only one who realizes this. The actress is on the sitcom Community now. Alas, that show is so god awful tat not even her extraordinary beauty can get me to watch it.
-
And I don't know if I'll watch it either. Pilot episode wasn't too great. She's a hottie though.
-
They really like to yank the audience's chain re: Pete, eh? As much a weasel as he's been, most people were warming up a little to him ... then he pulls this stunt, which may not have been rape per se, but what do you call it when you have sex with a girl who doesn't want to have sex with you, and in fact already rejected your advances once, and she ends up crying all day about it? Whatever it is, it's dickish.
-
Yeah I wouldn't characterize it as "rape" either. At least not in the strictest sense. I'd call it coerced consensual sex or an extreme form of sexual harassment. Rape is a strong word that shouldn't be thrown about carelessly.
Now what happened to Joan last season where her husband forced himself upon her and inside of her while she kept saying NO and trying to push him off? THAT was rape. -
Hey, Greggers... thanks for pointing out that everyone living the life of say, Don and Betty, were miserable in that life. Some people were actually happy living a "traditional" suburban family lifestyle, and still are. Granted, the films mentioned focus on characters who didn't want that, because it seemed in some cases society pushed that on them and presumed everyone does and should want that. And these types of shows show us those kinds of people who didn't want it and wondered why they weren't happy with it. But the various social revolutions that have come and gone I think sometimes made people feel like they were stupid to want and like that life.
While it might not make for a very interesting character, I would like to see someone on Mad Men who actually is happy with their lives and that lifestyle. It would at least make an interesting foil for the other characters. Maybe Ken will be that person, since he seems so happy with everything. -
Is that this show makes me want a woman staying at home and making my dinner and raising my kids (if I ever have them).
What man (besides Sal) wouldn't want to come home to Betty or Trudy, looking beautiful, smiles on their faces, with hot food, ready to give you a massage and pour you a stiff drink? This show makes me think that's the natural order of things.
This show is subversive in the sense it turns political correctness on its ear... I think it's trying to take a swipe at the housewife thing, but from my perspective, it just makes it that much more desirable.
-
Oct 06, 2009 3:06:05 PM CDT
I think Trudy is perfectly content with her lifestyle
by cylon_conspiracy
She enjoys being a homemaker and worshiping her husband. Only problem is she picked a complete asshole to marry.
-
Oct 06, 2009 4:15:43 PM CDT
Cylon: Trudy wasn't happy with her lifestyle. What changed?
by royston lodge
Now that you mention it, Trudy does seem pretty even-keeled this season.
But she was trés-frustrated last season by Pete's lack of "attention", nudge nudge wink wink say no more say no more.
So what changed?
Did Pete finally start putting out?
Has Trudy found a tennis instructor she's happy with?
Did Trudy's mom teach her about the magic of 1960s tranquilizers?
The producers have really let that particular storyline fall into disuse, eh? -
I kind of like that the producers have given us so little information about Ken Cosgrove, even though he has become an important player at Sterling Cooper this season.
I think it reinforces the idea that nobody really knows anything about each other at Sterling Cooper.
It's like the producers and forcing us to see Ken through Pete's eyes.
I bet Pete is just an anxious as you are to find out more about Ken, so he could use the information against him!
The same idea could be used for the episode last season where Sal invited Ken over for "dinner" nudge nudge wink wink say no more say no more. We were seeing Ken through Sal's eyes in that instance.
Since nobody really knows anything about Ken, they superimpose their own wants/needs/fantasies/delusions on top of him. -
You've brought to mind the one thing that frequently pisses me off about the show.
Betty. Trudy. Joan. Kitty (Sal's wife)
All of 'em really are written as "perfect wives". They's freakishly hot. They're waiting patiently at home with dinner waiting. They do everything they can to "please their man".
And, of course, everything that goes wrong in their marriages are written as the husband's fault.
Sal's gay. Don's a philanderer. Pete's an emotional toddler. Greg's simply a prick.
So if the women ever cheat or get angry or rebel or whatever, it's always going to be because of something their husband did.
Even Roger's wife and Duck's wife have been written as innocent bystanders to their husbands' fuck-ups.
So far, Jane's the only wife that has been written as villainous in her own right, and even her villainy could be interpreted as "punishment" for Roger's filandering.
I'd like to see ONE relationship on the show where the husband's the all-around-good-person and the wife's the manipulative-parasite.
Apparently that never happened in 1963 Manhattan? -
you were thanking me for pointing out that NOT everyone were "miserable in that life." Cuz that was the point I was making upthread.
Like I said before, I think there's a very soft Marxist lean to the show insofar as I think it's trying to teach us that, to a degree that we rarely think about, we're all fucked up because of our market-based society and social structure. But I also think that, at the end of the day, the show will say that we're all fucked up because of our own personalities and pecadillos as well -- life's great pageant, blah, blah, blah. Life is a complex interaction of different elements, some of which we can address, some of which we can't, and MAD MEN is here to document it at a certain point in history. -
because it's more dramatic. Not every salesman was Willie Loman.
-
aint that the truth cylon!
-
(Didn't Matthew Weiner once say that if he'd read Revolutionary Road first he never would have created Mad Men?)
I dunno if I've ever noticed a Marxist subtext to the show. There hasn't been much in the show about wealth and materialism being the cause of these peoples' problems.
1) Much analysis claims an obvious liberal bias with the show, since everybody's so repressed and "following the rules", and that's supposedly what causes all their problems.But that could be argued against because nobody seems to BELIEVE in the rules they are following, they seem to suffer from very little guilt when they break the rules, and it's often when they break the rules that they get into trouble.
If anything, you could argue a implicit conservative subtext since the zeitgeist within the show's fictional universe seems to explicitly be, "you are free to do what you want. Just don't get caught."
As such, the culture within the show is explictly corrupt (as opposed to being either "liberal" or "conservative").As society within the show offers more and more options (both for virtue and for vice) to the characters, it's not like their lives are going to get better or their behaviour is going to become more acceptable. It's just that their behaviour is going to become harder and harder to keep hidden because people will know better what signs to look for!
So it wouldn't be hard to argue that these characters would be much better off if they actually believed in a few more of the rules that they're rebelling against.
The trick, as always, is figuring out which rules are for your own good and which rules are for the good of the people who make the rules.
(The primary exception to this theory is poor 'ol Sal, who's pretty well fucked through no fault of his own.)
2) My other argument against a Marxist subtext is that Sterling Cooper doesn't actually appear to be a very good advertising agency! The Marxist analysis would say that it's the admen who create demand and fuck with people's beliefs, but I don't see Sterling Cooper being very good at driving demand or influencing the culture around them.
In fact, when one character sees opportunities for the firm to be more influential in the public "ideasphere", the firm stomps on him. Not only does Pete recognize the opportunity to exploit the hell out of the African-American market (which would give the firm the ability to SHAPE the African-American community's own identity), it's Pete that recognizes the wisdom in the german shrink's analysis that they could sell MORE cigarettes by subtly promoting them as dangerous (as Newport later did with their ads featuring happy smokers engaged in dangerous sports like skydiving, or skiing, or even archery!).
But the firm is more interested in slapping together the retarded ideas that their clients throw at them, even though their clients don't actually know anything about advertising!
So, if the show had a Marxist subtext, I would think that Sterling Cooper would be far more skilled at actually fucking with consumers' minds, as opposed to the firm's lazy strategy of focusing on maximizing the QUANTITY of the ads they sell, treating the creative department as merely a tool for hoodwinking their clients. -
Betty hates being a housewife... she does it begrudgingly because it's expected of her. Even though Don is a cheater, they both love each other. Their relationship isn't the problem as much as her feeling like her freedom is being stifled.
Trudy on the other hand loves being a housewife. Possibly because it's early in her marriage, but she seems thrilled with the idea of playing that role, of looking after her man. Even to the point that she'd practically whore herself out to an old boyfriend just to get Pete's story published. But, she loves Pete and he does not give a damn about her either way... that is the problem. Not being a housewife, but she picked the wrong man (though she could be one of those girls who loves a cruel jerk).
As far as how Trudy and Betty approach their marriages, all of Trudy's emotional responses to her marriage are perfectly appropriate to the situation (Pete acts like an asshole, and she calls him out on it, every time) she says exactly what she means, and she EXPECTS Pete to treat her well (which doesn't seem to be working out) which shows that she has some sort of standards.
Betty on the other hand took years to finally tell Don that she doesn't like being a housewife. She rarely tells Don how she feels, or what she wants, and when she does, she usually softens the blow. She wants to be an empowered woman, but she is still scared. Trudy already is an empowered woman, the only "strange" thing about her is that to her, being empowered and happy means being a loving housewife.
Another interesting thing is how Trudy and Betty responded to being cheated on. Betty had to make this long, elaborate deal out of it (checking the phone bill to see it was her shrink Don had been talking to) screwing that guy in the bar, then finally kicking Don out of the house for quite awhile. Big, dramatic gestures.
Trudy shows her sadness directly to Pete when she sees he's cheated on her, and she INSTANTLY forgives him, with only a small amount of remorse on Pete's part to seal the deal. Life goes on, Pete holds onto the perfect woman... and she is probably fine with the whole thing because she sees her proper role in the relationship as the submissive.
In closing, Trudy is the perfect woman. -
In spite of Mad Men's intrinsic brilliance as a show, I feel that it needs far more female nudity than we've been getting so far. Let the letter writing campaign begin...
-
Oct 06, 2009 7:05:48 PM CDT
cylon: I'm gonna go ahead and disagree with you there...
by royston lodge
Depending on one's point-of-view, and depending on the episode, I think one could interpret Don as more of a scumbag than Pete.
Pete, being younger and arguably more in touch with the zeitgeist, has sometimes shown more willingness to work through problems in his marriage, and to be more open to Trudy's opinions. While FAR from being an open and honest relationship, Pete does seem to see Trudy as something closer to an equal and/or a partner.
Don, on the other hand, seems to have zero respect for Betty's perspective. To him, she's eye-candy. She's a baby-factory. She's his ticket to respectability. Yes, they MAY love each other (an arguable point, by the way), but he speaks to her with barely-disguised contempt. He issues orders to her with the same tone he uses with his secretary.
Pete doesn't do that with Trudy. When they fight, Pete expresses frustration that he doesn't understand his wife. But he doesn't tend to belittle her and he doesn't tend to abandon her. That implies that he WANTS to understand his wife, and that he values her contribution even though he's not fully-equipped to understand her contribution.
When Don and Betty have a fight, on the other hand, Don simply puts his foot down and blasts Betty's opinion out of the water with no discussion required. She's there to do a job, and the writers have made it clear he's willing to bail on her if she stops doing her job. And when Betty refuses to back down during a fight, Don can't think of anything better to do than get in his car and find a couple of teenagers with booze and barbituates.
Betty would love to have more of the kind of relationship that Trudy and Pete seem to have (or potentially could have if only Pete could get past his subconscious desire to emulate Don Draper). Remember the episode where Don takes Betty to a business dinner with him, apparently for the first time, and she tells him how much she enjoyed being a part of his world?
It's not like Don suddenly decided to include Betty more. If anything, he pushed her away even harder.
If Pete was in the same sort of situation and Trudy has said something like that to him, I can totally imagine him saying something like, "huh. You know, you might have a good idea there Trud."
Of course, he'd be doing it for the good of his own career and not just because he wants to make Trudy happy. But if she's happier in the process, then it's win-win!
Pete is more likely to seek the "win-win" solution than Don is. Don is more likely to go for the "scortched earth" strategy. -
See, I disagree on the way to see Don and Pete, but I sorta agree on the way you see Trudy and Betty, to a point.
Betty was a model, living with a roomate and living the swinging life in Manhattan when she met Don. The transition to suburban life was not automatic for her. She's much like a dumber version of Joan that way. Also, while her family's more upper-class than Don is, she's not quite "upper crust". I get the feeling she wasn't exactly groomed for the life she has.
Trudy and Pete, on the other hand, are both from the sort of blue-blooded families where the parents left NOTHING to chance where child-development is concerned. Trudy and Pete were trained from birth regarding their responsibilities in live, and were given the skills they need (as much as possible considering it's 1963) to succeed in their relationship.
Trudy isn't a struggling suburban housewife. She's a well-trained upper-east-side matriarch-in-progress.
Trudy's role-models are the powerful elder women who actually run their clans. The men are merely there to pay the bills, really.
Betty's family was dominated by her father, and there isn't much sense that she had much of an extended family. Everything about her background (and her life with Don) is confined within "The Draper Residence". On the one hand it's stifling, but it also means they have fewer people to answer to.
Pete and Trudy have a much wider support network with family and college buddies, etc. So they aren't completely left to their own devices when they "hit a rough patch", and it also means there are more people in their lives who could potentially disown them if they become too much of an embarrassment. That should be a moderating factor which would encourage them to work together, which Don and Betty might feel like they have less to lose since they're more isolated, socially-speaking. -
...when Betty asks Don for his opinion on how the living room has been redecorated. After all, he's the creative head for an advertising agency, for crying out loud. You'd think he'd be happier to provide some input on the aesthetic choices of his own home.
But Don is annoyed. It's an imposition on him. He doesn't care. He isn't emotionally invested in his own home. He just wants Betty to make safe decisions and not embarrass him.
When Pete and Trudy decorate their eventual dream home, you know it's going to be a fight. But it won't be a fight about something mundane like the price of some chair or whatever. It'll be an honest difference of opinion on some aesthetic point. Don doesn't give a shit as long as he's kept out of it, so Betty gets any material good she wants cuz Don's too indifferent to care.Pete cares enough about Trudy's opinion that he tries to reason with her when they disagree. She's not really "submissive" to Pete. In fact, I think Pete would loathe Trudy if her default response was always, "whatever you want dear." -
I figure Don and Betty were in love when they met. And their early years were basically what we see in Rome. They like flirting and they like screwing and they like being beautiful and sophisticated, etc, etc. Then they followed through with the married life they're expected to have. And they don't want it. Note that their families were various types of terrible. Betty had a cold hearted, nitpicking mother and something of a jerk as a father. Don, well, Don's family was so terrible he became someone else. These are not people who learned to value family.
-
...to paraphrase Whoopi Goldberg.
If you notice, I've been qualifying the use of the term "Marxist" with "leaning towards" and "light." Which is to say that I'm using the term to refer to Marxist critique in its most general, almost Rousseauvian sense: Identifying where patterns of behavior and the overall social structure -- patterns and structures created and maintained by an ultimately corrupt economic system -- may be dysfunctional and/or bringing us into conflict with our true natures.
To answer your points more specifically within this context, the characters don't believe in the rules because the rules are incapable of being followed by healthy human beings. The rules are simply there to keep us aspiring, to keep us consuming; consuming in prescribed little consuming units known as middle-class families. Don, Betty, et al were sold like everybody else, an image of what life should be like: suburban home, 2.5 kids, Cadillac on the driveway. Materialism is so embedded in this culture (and ours), that we don't even realize it. This disconnect makes us miserable, but in response to this misery, we blame ourselves, commit to our roles even harder, making us more miserable, or causing us to act out in unhealthy ways or in ways that betray others. (See: Don Draper)
The connection that this all has with Sterling Cooper is one of irony: Advertising is the propaganda wing of the capitalist system -- the system that is making Don and perhaps all of the characters on the show miserable -- and yet Don has savant-like brilliance for creating it himself. Thus, Don is the engine of his own destruction on various levels.
Kudos for anyone brave enough to skim this sociology lecture. Quiz on Friday. -
This is AICN, man...you're either supposed to think the show sucks or it rules man...
Seriously, what you're saying reminds me of an amazing documentary series I caught on YouTube a few months back...Adam Curtis's THE CENTURY OF SELF. It explains in rigorous detail how the ideal American existence of the 50s (so lovingly celebrated by conservatives) was actually just another product created and marketed by Madison Avenue. This ideal then falls to pieces in the face of the social upheaval of the 60s, before those challenges are themselves co-opted into the narcissism of the 70s and 80s.
Amazingly well-done documentary...I recommend it to all MAD MEN fans as a kind of primer on the societal background the show explores. -
Nice catch on the "irony" of Sterling Cooper. The firm's logo should be a stylized Ouroboros...
-
That is interesting but wouldn't it more 80s with that whole corporate Reaganism thing? I thought 70s was still hippy era.
-
Curtis shows in the documentary how the rebelliousness of the 60s was tamed and converted into the "self-help" era of the 70s.
Disillusioned Boomers, convinced that the 60s hadn't changed the world after all, turned their focus inwards and spawned a secondary wave of fad "self discovery" techniques, like "primal scream therapy" and EST. This came of age in the 80s, as the narcissism this fostered was more blatantly displayed via the conspicuous consumption that debuted in that era. -
Oct 07, 2009 5:32:54 AM CDT
Every TV show has a liberal bias if you look at it analytically.
by dailysportspages
Every TV show has a liberal bias if you look at it analytically.
And thats because its writers have a liberal bias.
And thats because humanity has a liberal bias.
Because what is liberal than simply another word for progressive, right?
And humanity is all about progress.
Even conservatives have a liberal bias.
Is conservatism today what it was 30 years ago... or even worse 60 years ago?
You can go as far back as you want, but the conservative movement has always moved more to the left with each passing generation.
And thats because we are all wired to be progressive.
So fighting progress is kinda going against nature.
The conservatives who fight for the status quo will end up defending the very things they fought against in a decade or two from now.
Because by then it will be the new status quo.
For example... who is the Republican Party today?
Nothing more than the old southern Democratic party.
The old Republicans have mostly become Independents of some stripe or color.
Life is progress, and therefore the world has a liberal bias.
Its just plain dumb to fight progress.
BTW... this is a lifelong conservative talking :)
-
Oct 07, 2009 9:48:45 AM CDT
"the rules are incapable of being followed by healthy human bein
by royston lodge
So far, the rules seem to be limited to "don't cheat on your wife". Surely that can't be that difficult a rule to follow.
-
... how hard is it to not get drunk and rape your neighbours' nanny?
I think the conservative interpretation of the show could be that the characters convince themselves that a healthy person can't follow the rules in order to give themselves license to be complete fucking assholes. -
...this season they've really throttled back on anycommentary about the world these characters live in, and instead have been focusing on each character's douche-like personality. That change of focus may be tainting my point-of-view vis-a-vis the show.
-
It can be argued that the series is a multi-season meditation on what it means to be human. If you relax and just watch the characters and their actions without trying to squeeze those actions into ill-fitting, preconceived "moral" world-views, you can actually see where they transcend such judgments. These folks, much like ourselves, are a mass of contradictions. Witness the hapless Pete performing a good deed for the teenage au pair, then turning that deed into quasi-rape without even breaking stride. He first meets her when she's weeping and, afterwards, he leaves her weeping. Betty and Don? Jesus, what a horrorshow that is. Neither of these people have any idea of who they really are. They've assumed the nuclear family mask that the zeitgeist demands of them, but that mask is an exceedingly poor fit for both of them and they fumble around from day to day utterly bewildered by their own suffering and wondering why - even though they have "everything" - they aren't happy yet. Betty is a complete cipher to me, a cold, distant Stepford Wife who desperately wants to transcend her own programming but has no idea how to do so. And Don is much the same, constantly trying to find his true self in other women or at the bottom of a bottle, but forever failing to do so. It's Roger Sterling who's my favorite character here. Yes, he's a jerk and God knows he has his flaws, but in the sly way actor John Slattery portrays him, there's a bone-deep humanity and humane-ness to Roger that the other characters sorely lack. But I totally agree with my fellow talk-backers upstring who've suggested a final episode/coda showing how these characters end up decades hence. I almost can't wait. Some fates are obvious. The tormented Sal will finally come out and move to San Francisco where he ends up making experimental films. If Pete can outgrow his intrinsic tendency to be an asshole, then I think that he and Trudy might make it to the finish line as a married couple, content if not quite happy. The beautiful, buxom Joan will go back to college, go into law, join a Manhattan firm and, because she's smarter and got larger testicles than most of the people she meets, will go on to become partner. Roger Sterling will, of course, be long dead by 1980. The tubby guy with the glasses (I forget his name at the moment) who's just been promoted as head of media will go on to become the most powerful guy at Sterling-Cooper (he actually is now, he just doesn't know it yet). Peggy, in spite of the fact that her naked ambition will take her far, will end up a suicide. Betty? Who knows. Will she ever be able to pull the stick out? Will she run across of a copy of Germaine Greer's The Female Eunach and morph into a 70s-style uber feminist? Will she experiment with weed? Acid? Will she up and leave Don and the kids as so many newly "liberated" women did back in those days? And what about Don himself? Will he rise to become the head of the ad agency or will he find peace and fulfillment growing his hair long and making surfboards in California with a new wife half his age? Stay tuned, guys...
-
Her name is Gudrun according to the official site's episode guide. Gudrun is a major figure in Norse mythology apparently.
-
That is interesting but i think this Curtis fellow might not be the all knowing wiseman on this subject, how can he just cut up different 10 year periods into distinct cultural movements? The conterculture didn't even start until around halfway in the 60s, around 64 coinciding with post-JFK/british invasion. How could the 70s be about narcissism when culturally it was thriving, musically and cinematically? Everyone nowadays speaks of if only we returned to the 70s. Also those self discovery techniques seem like namedrops to legitimize his position when in reality they were fads, does anyone even remember about those things nowadays?
-
Oct 07, 2009 8:00:54 PM CDT
I want this season to end 1 second before kennedy is shot
by mrnightingale
Maybe we're at the rehearsal dinner for Roger's daughter (and yes, Roger needs to comeback somehow) and someone is watching a TV of JFK in dallas. That way next season jumps ahead in terms of time and emotional frustration. The country at war, etc, etc.
The more I think about it, there's one character that takes the lead each season. 1st season it's Don, 2nd Season it's Betty and this season I think it's Pete that we're seeing put in the most devastating situations. He's in a life he hates, a job he loves but can't get respect in and with a wife he has no interest in. Betty used to be as ambiguous as he was, but she's been very Madame Bovary for the last 10 episodes or more. I missed Peggy last week and want to see more of her. Also, can we place bets on if anyone from the office going to the war? MAYBE that's where Ken Cosgrove goes. He's got all this going for him and then blam! Wartime! Pete would move up. Next season is when the bodies start. -
but this show does that to me. It gives me talkback motor mouth.
-
Oct 07, 2009 9:14:14 PM CDT
The Rules: Time-Tested Secrets for Capturing the Heart of Mr. Ri
by greggers
What are The Rules of 20th Century Post-Industrial Society? I think some of them could be (and this is very crude, so forgive me):
The goals of life are directly connected to material wealth. Security, recreation, status, and fulfillment can only be attained through purchase, therefore striving for wealth is a key aspect of your life. This striving will very often be at the expense of other avenues of security, recreation, status, and fulfillment, such as familial bonds and other personal relationships, avocations, and communal works.
If you are a man, you will achieve this wealth by working for other people. If you physically create something, you will not own what you have created. For some, work will be intangible (or even absurd). Regardless, you must still strive within this work environment, competing with others. Lack of success is a result of personal inadequacy.
Work and home are two separate realms. If you are man, home should be a respite from work, where you exercise the wealth you've accumulated, and created requirements for more wealth (and more striving, ad infinitum). If you are a woman, your job is make sure the home is a suitable sactuary for the man, and sacrafice your needs for fulfillment to his productivity and well-being. Offspring are a key component of this sanctuary, and must be welcomed as soon as possible.
This partnership between the working man and sanctuary-creating woman should be embarked upon as soon as you reach adulthood. In order to make this partnership more binding and attractive, it should be created under the pretense of a deep and almost magical connection known as romantic love. This romantic love bond should be complete, all-powerful, and eternal.
None of the above will be realized on directly conscious level. None of it will necessarily lead to actual happiness. Little will be offered in the way of acceptable alteranatives. Failure to be happy or successful within this context is, again, a result of personal inadequacy, and will lead to either a redoubling of effort (doomed to frustration) or erratic behavior. The best that can be hoped for is a surrender of hope and relative peace. Like a rat, in a cage, on antibiotics. -
I agree with you on a lot of stuff in your "spastic" post, but in some ways I hope they don't end just before JFK is assassinated because they already did that. Last season ended just as they were headed into the Cuban Missile Crisis, and we didn't really get to see any of the effects or fall out of that. I think taking the same approach to JFKs assassination would be doing a disservice to the show and the event. Jumping ahead a year or more after that would be skipping the whole thing. I hope it happens in the second to last episode. But, that's just my opinion. Either way, I'm sure whatever they do will be as brilliant as everything else in the show.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 325 total posts 322 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 106 total posts 106 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 63 total posts 60 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 74 total posts 58 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 159 total posts 51 posts
- If the Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day drops her pen, pick it up, but don’t look at her legs or else it will be on your record. -- 47 total posts 41 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 161 total posts 34 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 488 total posts 33 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 121 total posts 23 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 70 total posts 20 posts