"Mad Men" on AMC (US) - (Spoilers Within)

[AmateisGal]

"Decay" is in the eye of the beholder; folks said the "modern" and wild shenanigans of the Roaring '20's was a downfall for mankind, too. I don't think the series in any way promotes itself to chronicle "the typical businessman of the early 1960's" or to be cultural history (that's better left to the documentarians). It a portrayal of characters who behave in such ways, that's all. And you know it's fascinating to watch.

Exactly. It's not a documentary. I think a lot of people who want flawless period accuracy would probably have the same problem with historical fiction. The important thing to note is that it is *fiction* first and foremost.

 

[AtomicEraTom]

I like the aesthetic a lot, the historical end, that of which is accurate is interesting. The drama keeps my friends interested. It works well for me and them.

 

[Angus Forbes]

Interesting comments. People who populate this forum probably know more than enough cultural history to distinguish between good and bad accounts without my input. However, I have met numerous people elsewhere who have expressed surprise about "how people lived" in the 1950's-1960's based on watching MadMen. This bothers me.

Their mistaken impression, or inability to sort fact and fiction, may be exacerbated by the otherwise excellent aspects of the show. It is so good that it does have the feel of a documentary. My feeling is that it may be a deliberately constructed Trojan Horse carrying a message intended to discredit the people and times, perhaps written by someone who doesn't like traditional American culture or, perhaps, male WASPs, which would not be an unusual attitude for modern-day TV writers.

In contrast, consider "The Wire," which is at least as good technically as MadMen, and arguably even better. My opinion, having grown up in pre-apocalyptic Baltimore, is that the cultural or societal aspect of the Wire is accurate down to the last detail concerning a large swath of the present-day city.

Which brings me to my final point here: anyone who doubts that we are experiencing cultural decay would profit from a long vacation in the Baltimore neighborhoods shown in The Wire. Even better would be a "before and after" vacation, the "before" part occurring about 1940 and the "after" part taking place today.

 

[AmateisGal]

I have no doubt that we are experiencing cultural decay - but as a historian, I know that society has experienced cultural decay before.

 

[Angus Forbes]

It sure has. An engaging account is Winston Churchill's "History of the English Speaking Peoples." Up and down for periods lasting hundreds of years . . .

 

[Worf]

Some things to start.

1. I was born and raised in the period.
2. I remember it well because I LIVED it.
3. I've watched the show in its entirety from start to last nights episode (great one had the family crying when Peg bid adieu).

Now with that out of the way. Mad Men is not "History" if it were it would be akin to "Eyes on the Prize" or some other PBS documentary. Nor is it "Peyton Place" for it touches themes and things that no one would've dared discuss back then but were going on at the time. I "believe" because I cannot truly "know" (because I wasn't an ad man in period) that it portrays it's time honestly as it can being that it is a piece of ENTERTAINMENT" not a doctoral thesis nor a documentary. Don's reality wasn't mine nor was the drivel portrayed in "Happy Days" but time has shown me over the years that because I didn't live a particular "life" doesn't mean that it wasn't true or didn't happen.

As for the decline of America or Western civilization... get over it! All empires fall, all kingdoms of man crumble into dust. Why is ours any better or different than ancient Egypt, the Greek City States, Rome, Carthage, Persia or Britain for that matter. Empires rise, flourish, whither, decay and DIE! It's as inexorable as time or death. To lay the blame for it at the feet of Madison Avenue is pure sophistry. A thinking person could more rightly lay the beginning of the end at the feet of World War II or Viet Nam or any number of more reasonable causes. No, in my "informed" opinion, Mad Men is entertainment, first class, ripping good, intelligently presented entertainment but nothing more and nothing less. Go back 50 some odd years and they blaming the coming destruction of America on Communist inspired "Jive Nigra Bop" (Rock n Roll) and that's probably closer to the truth than some other wild theories. There's my take. Make of it what you will.

Worf

 

[C-dot]

The Peggy and Don scene...I actually cried. I thought Don was going to start crying, too. Wow. Powerful stuff.

As she was walking out the door after he kissed her hand, I remembered all the harrowing times they've had together, like when he visited her in the hospital after the baby, and the time they spent all night together in the office and she saw him break down. Watching them part was worse than when he and Betty broke up!

My favorite part of last night's episode was the dual versions of Don going to Joan's home to speak to let her know she didn't have to go through with Pete's suggestion on how to land the Jaguar account - the first time we think he's discouraging her and the second time... well, it was so sad to know it was too late and to see the look on her face when she cast her eyes downward.

It was my favourite part, too. Poor Joan... My heart went out to her. I was glad Don believed in her intangible worth even when no one else did, including Joan herself.

 

[Red Diabla]

I used to be fairly ambivalent about Pete because I find Vincent to be an interesting actor, but last night made me hate that little jerk SO MUCH. What he and Lane did to convince Joan to sleep with the car man was so, SO vile. Both Pete and Lane were so self-serving, it made me ill...and it also made remember that the current greed we're seeing in today's executives isn't new or unique. It's always been there, and it always needs to have a leash on it.

I wonder how Joan's actions will screw with the Joan/Don camraderie we've seen recently.

And Peggy. Oh man. I hope her character isn't leaving the show. I would be so sad!

As for all the talk about how authentic Mad Men is...isn't that naive? Does Leave It To Beaver accurately describe the entire 1950's? No. Some people think that it does, but others who dig a little deeper don't. Same as Mad Men. Some people get it, some people don't. I don't think either outlook changes things one way or the other as a whole.

RD

 

[Gene]

It's a television show. It's supposed to entertain. It does just that for a lot of people. End of story.

 

[William Stratford]

It's a television show. It's supposed to entertain. It does just that for a lot of people. End of story.

You could equally say the same of porn, prostitution and drugs.... Nothing is ever 'just' entertainment.

 

[dandelion-vint]

We're talking about a tv show, it is JUST entertainment. It's not going to potentially alter or destroy someone's life like drugs.

It's not a documentary, of course it's not accurate, was Happy Days, was M*A*S*H? Did everyone live in Mayberry? No.

Of course things like all the smoking and drinking are exaggerated, that's to get people talking, and it worked during the first season didn't it? Everyone was talking about all the smoking and drinking on Mad Men, mainly because you didn't see that on other shows. But now you don't see nearly as much smoking and drinking because it's no big deal now, people aren't talking about it like they did during season one.

It's a waste of your time to worry about how other people are going to think or feel about this era from watching a tv show. If they can't figure out that it's only entertainment, that's their problem.

Everyone has different life experiences. Just because you never saw any of the things that happen on Mad Men in your own life doesn't mean that some version of it didn't happen in someone else's. I live in New Jersey and I don't know anyone like the people on the Jersey Housewives or the Jersey Shore, but obviously (and unfortunately) those type of people are out there.

 

[Angus Forbes]

My guess is that there would not be a MM thread on FL if MM were not a retro creature. MM trades heavily on being retro. Therefore, in my opinion, it is indeed important that they get the cultural part right, as well as the sets and clothes. Otherwise, it's nothing more than a fashion show and a soap opera. A good program can accurately portray both aspects, as does The Wire.

Several people have compared MM to Beaver. But Beaver was not (then) retro. It is today only because it has survived the passing of time. Suppose that Beaver were re-made today, as a meticulously done retro piece intended for an audience that had not lived through the 50's-60's. In that case, would it not be relevant to ask if the remake "got it right" culturally, concerning upper-middle-class, small-town America?

 

[William Stratford]

We're talking about a tv show, it is JUST entertainment. It's not going to potentially alter or destroy someone's life like drugs.

If you do not think that "entertainment" affects behaviour and opinion, with people taking traits from such, I wonder where you have been for the last 50 years (most ironically of all, the adverts that the real life "Mad Men" create, which is a multimillion pound/dollar industry based entirely on that principle).

My point about drugs/prostitution/porn is that you can use the "its just entertainment" argument about pretty much anything - I'm sure that the people who enjoy reading (sorry, cliche) paedophilic fiction (in which, obviously, no one is actually "hurt" because its just words on a page) would say the same thing. I'm not comparing forms of entertainment - I'm showing how the argument you are relying upon equally applies to some truly noxious things as well. Nothing is "just entertainment", not is "its just entertainment" ever reason to accept something.

 

[dandelion-vint]

To me it's just a tv show, I can take it for just that and not worry about how it might be affecting how some people view the era. People have different views on life today so why worry about what they think about the 1960s if they are too lazy to do some research themselves.

Yes people may be influenced to dress or decorate their home a certain way because of a retro show, some extremists may want to go out and live life like Don Draper. I'm talking about this show, not any other show or advertising or activity like drugs/prostitution/porn that may influence people negatively.
THIS show is just entertainment, I'm not making a blanket statement about everything in life.



To get back on topic of the show itself, I can't wait to see how everything plays out with Joan. How will things change between her and Roger, I can't believe that he sat and did/said nothing. People in the office are bound to find out what happened with Joan and the deal. How many episodes are left? I'm excited to see what cliffhanger they leave us with.

 

[AmateisGal]

Roger *did* tell Pete that he hoped Pete told the Jaguar guy to take a flying leap (or something to that order), so he put up a *minimal* effort at how it was a bad idea.

But yeah, it just showed how morally-astray they all were - except for the one who always appears to be one of the MOST morally-astray - Don! I was so glad that he was completely against the idea and even went to visit Joan. But I have to admit, I was disappointed in Joan for taking that route....

I'm not sure what's going to happen with Peggy...will she sink or swim at her new job?

 

[AtomicEraTom]

Well said. 'Mad Men' is a TV show and that's what a TV show, especially a drama, is for. If anybody is building their life around what Don, Pete, Roger, Peggy, Joan or any of them do in an acting role, well, they're just a new variety of Trekkie.

It's not a documentary, of course it's not accurate, was Happy Days, was M*A*S*H? Did everyone live in Mayberry? No.

Of course things like all the smoking and drinking are exaggerated, that's to get people talking, and it worked during the first season didn't it? Everyone was talking about all the smoking and drinking on Mad Men, mainly because you didn't see that on other shows. But now you don't see nearly as much smoking and drinking because it's no big deal now, people aren't talking about it like they did during season one.

It's a waste of your time to worry about how other people are going to think or feel about this era from watching a tv show. If they can't figure out that it's only entertainment, that's their problem.

 

[Lily Powers]

When Joan looked back and saw Peggy leaving the office, was she sad to see Peggy leave? Did she think Peggy was doing what she had to in order to move up - and in a sense, isn't that what Joan did, thus turning back around to the group of partners of whom she was now (5% of) included?

 

[AmateisGal]

When Joan looked back and saw Peggy leaving the office, was she sad to see Peggy leave? Did she think Peggy was doing what she had to in order to move up - and in a sense, isn't that what Joan did, thus turning back around to the group of partners of whom she was now (5% of) included?

I don't think Joan knew where Peggy was going, unless Peggy had already told her. My sense was that Peggy decided to talk to Don first and foremost. So not sure on that one...

 

[Lily Powers]

I don't think Joan knew where Peggy was going, unless Peggy had already told her. My sense was that Peggy decided to talk to Don first and foremost. So not sure on that one...

I may have been reading too much into it (I really did love that episode and am trying to squeeze every drop out of it).

 

[C-dot]

When Joan looked back and saw Peggy leaving the office, was she sad to see Peggy leave? Did she think Peggy was doing what she had to in order to move up - and in a sense, isn't that what Joan did, thus turning back around to the group of partners of whom she was now (5% of) included?

I wondered a bit too, but I also don't think Joan knew where Peggy was going. Its interesting how that was included - Both women are moving up in their careers, but they got there in very different ways.