Comments on: Shut up, Gawker

By: baraqiel

baraqiel — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 02:20:53 +0000

@DirtyLaundy – that doesn’t seem like a contradiction to me. If you don’t respect marriage as an institution, why would you care that the guy you were sleeping with was married? After all, his responsibility to his wife is far greater than yours.

I’m not saying that this is necessarily moral behavior, just that it’s not a contradiction in terms to be progressive and free-thinking and sleep with married people. I’m pretty sure a lot of men in the 60s (as well as Percy Shelley) used their “progressiveness” and “freedom of thought” as an excuse to sleep on their wives.

By: BeckySharper

BeckySharper — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 01:29:20 +0000

@DirtyLaundry: Yep, that was me, in response to someone asking if she seemed like a “bunny-boiler”, I said “Yes, there’s a real element of I will not be ignored, Dan going on there.” Or words to that effect.

I definitely think there’s something off about Suzanne, and I sense some really wack behavior about to surface, both from her and Don. After all, when he has affairs, Don’s always sought out women whose personal problems and character failings mirror his own–and it never ends well.

By: DirtyLaundry

DirtyLaundry — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 01:18:43 +0000

To be fair I have seen plenty of women on Jez, (including a Harpy editor) reference Ms. Farrell to the Glen Close Fatal Attraction.
However, I’m not sure if the writers know how they want to develop the Ms. Farrell character. On one hand she is this free thinking progressive woman, on the other she is not above sleeping with a married man to find her happiness. Those two ideas do make for an interesting character, but for some reason it’s not playing out where you enjoy the character even though she is a walking contradiction.

By: aspiringexpatriate

aspiringexpatriate — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 22:17:38 +0000

I think lots of writer-ly type men identify with Kinsey especially first series Kinsey. He was a bitter jealous and sometimes brash writer who overall was nice and had dreams, but could never get laid. I mean, hell, even Crane hooked up with Hilde by the end of the first season. I’m kinda sad Hilde isn’t around as much anymore, but when she was it was mostly in her relationship with Pete. I think Kinsey’s scowl “wow” at the end of that meeting was him realizing that she actually is good, and he doesn’t stand a chance. And it happened immediately after a realization that Don can occasionally identify with the struggles of his underlings instead of just yelling at him.

In an ideal world, Kinsey and Sal should start a small beatnik theater company. It would be awesome, and occasionally Cosgrove would write for them. And Pete would just wallow in the back.

Random question, that brown lunch bag Kinsey stole from, did it say “Sal” on it? Cause damn, that’s cold. Course he was being a drunken idiot at the time.

By: kithkin

kithkin — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 04:44:00 +0000

oh dear gawker writers are exactly the fans who ought to be creeping that friend of the harpies’ out. body of christ.

Let’s not forget, too, Becks, that time Don shoved his hand into a woman’s vagina. Hell, compared to that, maybe Gawker’s right, Suzanne following him onto a train is positively batshit!

I thought that was sexy? At least that’s what I read on the internet lol amirite

Also, i’ll fight you for harry crane. I’m taking my earrings out over here.

By: Ferree

Ferree — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 19:39:01 +0000

I tried to like this show but can’t. Partly because I would have been nearly 13 at the time when it’s supposedly set and I’d rather not relive those gender roles I grew up with. But, I’ve finally given up on this show now that they’ve named that character Suzanne Farrell. Suzanne Farrell was/is one of the greatest ballerinas of all time, Balanchine’s muse, and my favorite dancer ever. (I actually own a pair of her autographed ballet shoes.) She is an elegant, refined person and a truly great artist. Her career started taking of at about the time this series takes place. Hers was, and is, a recognized name that was stupidly, yet I think intentionally, assigned to this character. What gives them the cloddish arrogance to name that character Suzanne Farrell? Well, I can guess. I doubt they would hang a famous male artist’s name on some sketchy male character with abandon. But I wouldn’t doubt it’s because Farrell is a near homonym to feral.

By: baraqiel

baraqiel — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 05:17:05 +0000

This is all so odd to me because Betty’s been my favorite character for the past couple of episodes. I mean, yeah, she’s an atrocious parent, but she’s also pretty smart and has impressively sophisticated tastes. (Although, I must say, Peggy’s two pwnages this ep were great.) At this point, I don’t like any of the men on the show, except that British dude, because he’s endearing (poor guy, sent all over the world and just trying to please…)

As for Suzanne, honestly, I just think she’s not very well-developed yet. But I never got “crazy” from her.

(P.S. if there’s going to be a weekly Mad Men post, can it be on Tuesdays? Some of us don’t have TV and must rely on extra-legal internet means of watching…sadface.)

By: BeckySharper

BeckySharper — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 02:24:46 +0000

@Spark: I don’t think disliking Betty is internalized misogyny. Like I told PSoul, I can totally understand all the socio-cultural reasons behind WHY she’s a spoiled, petulant woman-child. But that doesn’t mean I’d want to spend any time in her company.

I don’t like Roger at all (although John Slattery’s silver foxiness does charge my batteries). And Don’s such a good anti-hero that I can’t help but root for him, maybe b/c I know where he came from and I like a striver, even an amoral, cheating, self-destructive one.

By: Spark

Spark — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 01:55:14 +0000

I agree with Gawker, the sentiment if not the expression, except for Peggy stealing Paul’s idea and Betty not caring that Don stole someone’s identity. At this point, we don’t know what Betty understands about the dogtags and photos. Suzanne drunk-dialing Don and talking about philandering in front of the kids were red flags, though she came off a lot more sympathetic and reasonable this episode than in the past.
I want to be sympathetic toward Betty–and to a degree I am–but I just can’t stand her. Next to Pete, she’s the one I have the most visceral negative response to. And yet I can’t help but be charmed by Don and Roger (Roger!). Is it internalized misogyny? Is it just January Jones’ terrible one-note acting? I am troubled.

By: PhDork

PhDork — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 00:09:13 +0000

Oh, I hear you on Harry Crane love (have I mentioned that the Dude has remarked several times that he IDs with Harry, the A/V dork with the nerd glasses? …yeah), but if we’re going to have a circle jerk, then Kinsey, the affected, under-qualified office wanker (in so many senses of the word), seems more appropriate as a namesake.

I think both Don and Suzanne are in deep deep waters, and this one is going to go out with a bang, not a whimper. It’s too close to home, too emotionally intimate. If she’s reading “crazy,” maybe it’s because people sense that Very Bad Things are a-brewin’.

That, or it’s the misogyny.