Comments on: Harpy Televisual Society: Penultimate “Mad Men”!

By: PhDork

PhDork — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 02:07:00 +0000

Something the Dude said Sunday night walking home from Becky’s referenced the connection to POTUS you mention, ceejee. He was being jokey, but I got a little snappish: “bite your tongue.” I’ve never really gotten the Kennedy/Camelot thing, even though I’ve had the “where were you” conversations with older family and friends. But yeah, I think I get it now. *shudder*

By: BeckySharper

BeckySharper — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 01:34:24 +0000

@ceejee: Don’t go there. I wake up in a cold sweat thinking about that sometimes.

By: ceejeemcbeegee

ceejeemcbeegee — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 01:29:30 +0000

The Kennedy assassination has never really resonated with me until this ep. All I could think about was the safety of our current POTUS and how I would feel if…. jeez it makes me shudder!

By: ceejeemcbeegee

ceejeemcbeegee — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 01:25:43 +0000

Let me also explain Carla’s grief… my mother (protested in Texas during the CRM) explained her thought process…

1. “Damn, if they can get to the President, what’s to stop us from being killed too?”

On top of Till, Evers and all the other brutal deaths, it was a common theme that anyone who stood for anything was a target.

2. “Now, they will come for King. And Malcolm.”

3. In reference to Kennedy “There goes our only hope.”

To many Black Americans it was much MUCH more than losing a President.

By: ceejeemcbeegee

ceejeemcbeegee — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 01:19:29 +0000

@bar: Peggy said that to her roommate.

For starters, I’m glad Betty said she didn’t love Don. She needed to hurt him and I believe she did. But Henry is not the answer.

Also, that moment when Carla joined Betty on the couch to collapse in tears… very poignant. When would these two ever share a seat? Never. I bet Carla eats her dinner (if she’s allowed to eat the leftovers) standing over the washing machine. But that in that moment, they were equals: equally grieved and equally in dire need of a cigarette.

By: baraqiel

baraqiel — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 00:58:26 +0000

@Dirty Laundry – Actually, I loved this season way more than the second one — I found the second to be a low point in between the first and the third. Especially that weird California interlude…

@Becky – It’s interesting, I feel like they’re getting into stratifications like class and race much more this season but at the same time I feel like the sort of blue blood people that you and Hillrat have illuminated the identification of for me (thanks!) haven’t played nearly as big a role as they might have, not even from the Brits’ side. But perhaps it’s just the milieu.

By: Dirty Laundry

Dirty Laundry — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 22:32:25 +0000

Wow. How did you guys have such a strong reaction to Carla? She walked in the room and said “Is he okay?” She was on screen for about 20 seconds. I was more shocked to see her light up a cigarette.
I don’t want MadMen digging into the lives of secondary characters, it will just take away time from developing the main characters, and it would make no sense to do it 3 seasons into the show.

And am I the only one who thinks the show is losing whatever magic it had in the second season?

By: BeckySharper

BeckySharper — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 17:47:51 +0000

@baraqiel: Nah, because another generation or two doesn’t matter when you’re talking about a couple hundred years of history and and being on the Mayflower, etc. The Sterlings would be rich and socialites, but not blue-bloods, same as the Hiltons.

Betty’s from an upper-middle class family, from what I can tell. Affluent, but not society people.

By: baraqiel

baraqiel — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 17:39:58 +0000

@Becky — Right, but wouldn’t a family like the Sterlings have much more of that sort of status in the present day if they had continued to be wealthy? This has very little to do with Mad Men, I just find this question…sort of confusing and Mad Men has a lot of useful characters to talk about it. Like, Connie Hilton: nouveau riche, yes? So is Paris Hilton still nouveau riche or does she count as sort of old money on American standards? I understand how this works in Europe given that they had nobility and such for centuries, but we’ve had so much less time to build up that sort of aristocracy and our economy has been so much more volatile. What about Betty? She definitely grew up rich, right? But what kind?

By: BeckySharper

BeckySharper — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 17:23:56 +0000

@baraqiel: HillRat’s right. There’s a big difference between merely being rich and being a blueblood. Pete Campbell’s family were one of the original founding families of NYC. Age trumps money. The Dyckmans didn’t make their money as shills in recent days like Roger’s family–they’ve been rich and powerful for a couple hundred years. To people who care about such crap, the distinction is huge.

I think Roger’s father was in Europe because he fought in WWI, not because he was a playboy. That’s what Roger meant by “when he came back from Europe.” And no, I don’t think Margaret would ever count as a blueblood. She’s the daughter of an ad man, and advertising is hopelessly declasse.