By Andrew Johnston
For a variety of reasons, not the least of which was my shock and grief over the suicide of David Foster Wallace, Mad Men Mondays just didn’t happen two weeks ago. When Matt Seitz suggested recapping “A Night to Remember” and “Six Months’ Leave” together in one column, I realized that the two flow together relatively seamlessly in a way very few Mad Men episodes do: Betty’s depression in “Six Months' Leave” follows her long-simmering anger over Don’s affair, which erupted earlier and further crystallized when she threw out Don after seeing one of Jimmy Barrett’s Utz commercials during a rerun of Make Room For Daddy. On top of all this, the hour contrasts Betty, who is depressed about something immediate and personal, against the Sterling Cooper women mourning the death of Marilyn Monroe. The episodes' presentation of the challenges faced by American women in 1962 invites a tandem consideration.
Ironically, I watched “Six Months' Leave” for the second time the night before I learned of Wallace's death. The contrast between the fictional reactions to Monroe’s demise and the fresh reactions to Wallace’s passing was fascinating. I’ve always been one of those who think that people who say American pop culture is more fragmented than ever are just exaggerating--but while almost everyone in my circle of friends was affected by Wallace’s death to some degree, upon hard reflection I realized that his passing really probably had an impact on only a few hundred thousand people in the U.S., while Monroe’s death united millions, perhaps more, in grief. Although women were more deeply affected by it, her passing was a blow to men, too, Roger and Don’s hard-shell reactions nothwithstanding. (It would have been nice to get a glimpse of Sal’s response.) And it’s not every day that a news story would lead to Don, Peggy and the elevator operator speaking freely with each other. If Mad Men sticks to schedule, the timeline will sail right by the Kennedy assassination; lacking an opportunity to present one of the few 20th century events shocking enough to unite the whole country, the creative staff may have settled on Monroe’s death as the next best thing (and it also creates the intriguing historical argument that Monroe’s death, even as a simple suicide, was the herald of all that would follow in the ‘60s, as each successive death of a politician or rock star was seen as evidence of a giant conspiracy whose motives were too complex for mere mortals to understand).
Fancy sociological BS aside, though, in many respects the divergent responses to Monroe’s death are a perfect metaphor for the gulf between men and women on Mad Men. When Betty makes it to the riding club halfway through the episode, it starts to seem as if she’s escaped her squalor (Betty doesn’t need Carla or even Don to keep the house clean, but when she decides to let go, she doesn’t fuck around). It’s soon apparent that her true motive was to let Sarah Beth have lunch alone with Arthur. Consciously or not, Betty just closed off her safest avenue for a revenge-affair with which to torture Don. Still, as we learned in the season-opening “For Those Who Think Young,” Betty has other avenues for expressing her sexuality.
“Night”’s title, of course, evokes that of Walter Lord’s 1955 nonfiction book about the sinking of the R.M.S. Titanic, which leads one to expect a much bigger crisis than Betty’s embarrassment at the dinner party (I’m inclined to think that, per Don, it’s the drunken antics of Mrs. Colson that the guests are more likely to remember than anything). The title might have been a better fit for “Leave,” where it could have applied to either the death of Marilyn Monroe or Don and Roger’s night out with Freddie, which ends disastrously for two of the three of them.
We never got to see how Don and Betty patched things up after “The Wheel” (or how long it took them to do so), but the opening scene of “Night”, in which Betty exerts herself riding like never before, makes it clear that she’s building up a strong head of steam and is ready to blow. She returns from the ride before Don has even woken, and we’re soon treated to another example of the domestic laziness that always drives Betty bananas. (Don doesn’t seem to mind breaking out the tools on Sally’s behalf, as in “Marriage of Figaro”, but whenever Betty asks him to do something, his first response is always, “Why can’t we call a repairman?”) This time, however, Betty’s frustrated response is further evidence that her knowledge of Don’s affair has turned her into a ticking bomb.
Betty’s passive-aggressive insistence on perfection--we get a doozy of an example when she destroys that chair--comes to an end after she searches Don’s desk for evidence to prove Jimmy’s allegations of the Don-Bobbie affair (at first, I thought she’d find something Dick Whitman-related instead) and then completely falls apart after she gets her annoyance about the Heineken gambit off her chest and throws Don out, creating the circumstances necessary for the house to slide into chaos. Neatness, as we’ve always seen, is a point of pride for Betty, but all of us, at some point, arrive at a place where we just don’t have the strength.
If I had written this recap on schedule, I wouldn’t have had the opportunity to look at Paramount’s amazing new Blu-ray discs of the Godfather films (using the same restoration being shown at Film Forum as its source material), and thereby wouldn’t be in a position to compare Don and Betty’s final conversations to some of the great (if somewhat overly hysterical, thanks to Diane Keaton’s acting) shouting matches between Michael Corleone and Kay Adams. Because we know Don and Betty will presumably get back together (it’s too early for a permanent split if the series is aiming for a long run), nothing in the scene at the end of “Night” has the chilling force of the door being shut in Kay’s face after she sees a parade of soldiers kissing his hand, proving the falsehood of his answer a moment earlier when he let her ask one question--only one--about the family business, which he pledges to answer honestly.
Using similar terms and language, Don baits Betty into asking him about the affair with Bobbie, which he promptly denies. He’s as convincing a liar as ever, but Betty doesn’t buy it for a second. After this, the terms of the confrontation change--now, Betty is Kay at the end of Godfather II, telling Michael that if he doesn’t really put his money where mouth as far as Corleone legitimacy goes, he’ll be looking at a lonely life indeed. Despite having strayed, the Don Draper of Season Two really does seem intent on being a better man, but he’s still screwed up enough to think he can achieve this by hiding information from Betty. As rough a spot as their relationship is in at the end of “Leave”, you can’t deny that his relationships with Sally and Bobby have strengthened significantly this season -- a fact that should have some interesting effects on the separation-in-progress.
Once Don’s Betty-targeting marketing technique was in play, he was thereafter a victim of bad luck: The dinner party seems coincidental--I don’t think Don needed Duck as a witness to prove the trick worked, and he never seemed completely comfortable having Duck there. Duck’s presence was pretty clearly requested by Roger, who, within the context of the business world, is star-struck by Crab’s gig with Rogers & Cowan and eager to form an alliance between SC and the public relations giant. The gambit may have succeeded because of how well Don knows Betty; the flipside of that--even though she’s forever complaining about his inscrutability and refusal to discuss his past--is that she knows Don pretty darn well, too. Under the circumstances, the poor guy didn’t stand a chance
Peggy’s continued rise at Sterling Cooper may seem like no more than fallout from the heart-rending story of Freddie Rumsen’s departure from the agency that drives “Six Months' Leave," but in fact it’s the reverse of Joan’s plot line in “A Night to Remember." Peggy ascends into Freddie Rumsen’s job because, despite his drinking, he was a clear-eyed judge of talent who saw the wisdom of giving her a break long ago. In "Night," Joan proves ideally suited to the requirements of Harry’s new TV department via her skill as a pitchwoman and her knack for insight into soap opera-caliber TV; third on the list of assets are her looks, to which clients are as vulnerable as anyone else. Yet it's important to note that the clients, having no prior impression of Joan, soak in her skills alongside the va-va-voom factor; for the lads at SC who are used to seeing Joan flaunt her body daily, her looks would seem to cancel out any possibility of talent.
Because Peggy has always had a touch of the librarian to her, clients have generally been inclined to look at her work first and pay attention to her sex appeal second. In the case of Father Gill, even if he was attracted to Peggy (an issue that’s open for debate), he couldn’t do anything about it (at least not with having to, oh, throw his entire life down the toilet for a woman who clearly has no interest in him). Because of this, Peggy is pretty offended--and rightly so--when the little old ladies running the CYO dance don’t realize that they’re in the clients’ role here, and fail to show due respect for her job. Petty takes a shot at reminding Father Gill of her authority by bringing the padre to the office so he can see her in action. Unbeknownst to her, Gill has a second agenda--getting Peggy to come clean about secretly being a single mother. He brings with him enough bait to catch half the fish in the North Atlantic, but she doesn’t take any of it.
Peggy’s rise from the steno pool to senior writer in just over two years is the kind of feat that would earn a male ad man the label "prodigy." But as far as the men of SC are concerned, poor Peggy’s accomplishments will (for the time being, anyway) come with an asterisk attached. To Pete, she only made it so far because of the patronage of Freddie. To Don, her success is entirely his responsibility, a means of saying “Fuck you!” to Pete and Duck after they “ambushed” Don in Roger’s office, making it impossible for him to mount a coordinated defense of Freddie.
Freddie Rumsen’s story line is, to my mind, one of the most tragic and heart-rending the series has given us. Part of is is because I really love Freddie as a character--until Duck came along, he was the only guy at SC who really seemed like an “old advertising hand.” Roger has never looked at the industry from anything but an ivy-tower perspective, and most of his gnomic insights into the field sound like they were cribbed from a book, and while Bert Cooper’s knowledge of the field is deep and nuanced, he plays the game at an Olympian level nobody else at SC can access. Freddie is the only one who seemed like an industry lifer -- a trench veteran who entered the field with natural instincts that sharpened over the years; a man inclined to party with junior execs half his age not because everyone his cohort has cleaned up or died, but because he has a true zeal for the business that other old-timers lost long ago.
Freddie’s story is long overdue vis-à-vis the depiction of alcoholism on Mad Men: It’s the first time the show has argued that there are alcoholics and there are alcoholics. There are those who can keep a bottle in their office and celebrate a win the way, say, Don or Ken might, and there are those incapable of getting out of bed without taking a drink, and who use alcohol as a means of pushing the rest of the world away from them. If you’re unfortunate enough to have had much experience with that kind of alcoholic, Freddie’s last night on the town is truly painful to watch: At one level, like Peggy, you might think that in light of all the forgiveness that gets thrown around SC, Freddie deserves another chance. On the other hand, though, it’s fairly indisputable that it’s just a matter of time until the Freddie-style alcoholic pisses himself again (or does something worse) as part of a long, slow slide into self-destruction.
Clearly, Freddie’s final scene with Don and Roger faintly hints that, lacking any direction in life without his job, he might take his own life. I’d much rather see him dry out and land at another agency, but one of the problems when one develops an affection for this kind of alcoholic is that one tends to root for unlikely or improbable outcomes when the dry facts make the likeliest outcome all too evident. I’m told that there’s an AA saying to the effect of “the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results.” The statement is equally relevant to alcoholics and to people who care for them.
It's fascinating how easily the drinkers jumped to the conclusion that it only made sense for Duck, as a (supposed) teetotaler, to bear a serious animus toward Freddie. People today don’t often jump to the automatic conclusion that everybody who doesn’t smoke weed has an ipso facto hatred of stoners or that all vegans have it in for carnivores. Mad Men takes place just three decades after the end of prohibition, meaning Roger, Duck and Freddie were all adults (perhaps albeit just barely) when the 21st amendment was ratified, making it possible for them to drink (legally) for the first time in their lives). Is it possible that kneejerk anti-alcoholism, or anti-teetotalerism among social drinkers as well as addicts, were more common when America’s greatest failed social experiment was still part of living memory?
Equally interesting (in a way much more specific to how the season is playing out) was the revelation of Pete’s particular contempt for alcoholics like Freddie, who he sneeringly refers to as “those people." We haven’t gotten many details about the late Andrew Campbell’s drinking habits (other than the mere fact that he was a WASP, which brings with it baggage and preconceptions galore), but it’s obvious that at some point Pete was severely traumatized by a full-on, binge-drinking, pants-pissing, can’t-stand-up-for-falling-down alcoholic, and that had a huge negative influence on the development of his personality and worldview. We’ve only seen Duck slide off the wagon once thus far, but if he continues to drink, and if his drinking gains momentum, whatever respect and regard Pete might have for him would turn to ash the moment Pete caught wind of it.
After Don and Roger bid Freddie adieu, they go out for a nightcap, and Don gives Roger a pep talk which doubles as an explanation of his desire to improve himself. Roger, unfortunately, misunderstands Don, and, in a bombshell move, he tells his wife Mona that he wants a divorce. Roger suggested the possibility of running off together to Joan more than once in Season One, but he never seemed too serious about it. His general attitude--extending to his wife and daughter as well as his mistresses--is that if you pay another man to handle your women problems, everything will take care of itself. After slowly backsliding toward his S1 level of decadence, Roger has reached escape velocity from his own life and making a mistake he’s sure to regret (and for which Bert Cooper is sure to crucify him) given the importance his profession places on appearances.
The episode ends on a note of slight unclarity: Whom, exactly, is Roger dumping Mona for? If it’s Jane, then things between them must have gotten much more serious off-camera than we realized; having the relationship reach that level without much to tip the audience off feels like a bit of a cheat, given the way Mad Men has tended to dole out info to the audience. If it’s Joan for whom he’s getting a divorce, the move is clearly intended to take her by surprise as much as Mona or anyone else. If Joan won’t accept his flirtatious entreaties to get back together, Roger thinks, I may as well break out my nuclear option while I still have the time. The facts will be revealed (or cleared up) soon enough; in the meantime, I expect a lot of interesting discussion from fans arguing both sides.
Miscellaneous Notes: TV shows set in New York have a long history of giving out bogus addresses for the buildings characters live in, but that’s been happening less and less of late, probably because HDTV makes it a lot easier to toss in “easter eggs” that viewers can actually pick up on (and because obsessive TV nerds just love looking that stuff up on the Internet). 30 Rock in particular has been jammed full of actual NYC addresses used in contexts where writers would once break out the geographical equivalent of a “555” phone number. The point? Any serious 30 Rock fan knows that Liz Lemon’s address is 160 Riverside Dr., a very nice-looking building which has its entrance on W. 88th St. Freddie Rumsen, we learn tonight, lives at 152 Riverside, which is just around the corner, between 87th and 88th. Freddie’s building doesn’t look quite as nice as Liz’s -- at least not today -- but being on the avenue itself gives him a better shot at a nice view. I bet Liz’s building is already part of one Upper West Side walking tour or another; the inclusion (or not) of Freddie’s will make for a pretty interesting index to the “market penetration” (as it were) of Mad Men.
Since my footnotes have come to seem a little repetitive of late when discussing historical facts (“Weiner and the researchers got this right...”, “Weiner & co. got that right...”), I’m going to take a different tack and remind them that historical accuracy shouldn’t come at the expense of continuity, as “Six Months' Leave” takes what seemed like a timeline that was pretty meticulously developed over the course of S1 and then smashes it it pieces.
I’m referring, of course, to the reference to Freddie having known Roger’s father. It was fairly definitively established in the first season that Sterling Sr. perished in World War I, after he’d co-founded the agency and sired Roger but before the agency had become much of a success. For Freddie to have realistically worked at SC while Sterling Sr. was there, he’d need to have been born circa 1897 (making him a 20-year-old newbie in 1917, just before Sterling’s enlistment) and 65 years old in “Six Months’ Leave”. Joel Murray is 45 in real life, and I doubt I could accept Freddie as being any older than 52 or so without major cosmetic makeup being brought into play. The Signal Corps position that Roger says Freddie held would be believable for someone in their mid-late 30s, the age Freddie would have been during WWII if born in 1897, but it leaves unanswered the question of why Freddie wouldn’t have enlisted (or been drafted) for WWI at an age when he was a much more appropriate candidate for military service. The issue of how Roger, who was in the Navy in the Pacific, would have known Freddie in the war if the latter was in the Army and in Europe may seem like another bumble, but it can be easily fanwanked by Freddie being a prewar employee of SC. Some people may not have a problem with any of this, but having Freddie be 60+ is something I can’t easily swallow.
On a lighter note, via a New York Times blog which in turn linked to a blog run by one of my best friend’s closest college pals which in turn linked to a Flickr collection, I found this incredible collection of Mad Men-themed illustrations on Flickr by a woman who uses the alias “Dyna Moe”. Apparently Rich Somer came across Dyna’s unrelated art last year and commissioned her to do the Christmas card he planned to give other cast members. The experience turned her into a Mad Man fanatic, and she now illustrates each episode with an image conveniently sized to serve as computer desktop wallpaper (some have also been resized for use as iPhone wallpapers). The illustrations (another of which opens this week's notes section, above) are just cooler than hell, and I can’t urge you strongly enough to check them out.
Finally, allow me to extend my congratulations to Matthew Weiner and his crackerjack cast and crew for their stunning success at the Emmys last week. Sure, it sucks that none of the acting nominees won, but as John Slattery’s knowing and gracious nod to richly deserving winner Zeljko Ivanek--both of whom have spent years in the trenches--reminds us, individual recognition often tastes sweeter the longer one has been working for it. The basic cable drama explosion has been a godsend for actors like Slattery and Ivanek, brilliant guys who work mostly on the stage or on East Coast-based TV shows and have been semi-anonymously racking up Tony nominations, Ben Brantley raves and Drama Desk awards over the years. This year, it was just Ivanek’s turn (his terrific work in John Adams and In Bruges didn’t hurt things either). Slattery and Hamm are sure to be recognized by the academy in the future; this year, the awards Mad Men received--Outstanding Writing for a Drama Series and the big magilla itself, Outstanding Drama Series,are the ones the show needed to win to establish itself. As one of the few first-year shows in history to successfully grab the brass ring, it seems almost certain now that Matthew Weiner will have the freedom to do what he wants with the show and its overall direction. Based on Aaron Staton’s beard at the ceremony, I assume S2 has officially wrapped; when production begins on the third season, I’m hopeful that it’ll do so with a new sense of confidence that takes this brilliant series even further into the stratosphere than ever.
Andrew Johnston is the television critic for Time Out New York.
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Mad Men Mondays: Season Two, Episode 8, "A Night to Remember" and Episode 9, "Six Months' Leave"
Labels:
Andrew Johnston,
Mad Men,
Mad Men: Season 2,
TV Recap
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
35 comments:
I definitely noted Freddie's proximity to Liz Lemon. And it actually made me wonder if people are actually going to start watching 30 ROCK now that Tina's Palin is such a sensation.
As for Roger's true love, I hope it's Joan (especially after that depressing glimpse at her current home life), but it would be much narratively neater for it to be Jane. Why was Roger so certain that Don wasn't sleeping at home, if Jane didn't tell him as pillow talk?
I think the show was pretty blatantly saying that Jane was the secretary. Why else would they show Roger comforting her after Mona left? Why else would Jane be crying at the site of Roger's upset wife? And why else would Don then make a point of saying he no longer wants Jane to be his secretary?
Just one quick note: It was Betty who destroyed the dinner table chair, not Don.
It's Jane. That's why not only Roger was able to deduce everything that was happening, but why Jane had an almost preternatural ability to help Don out without even knowing him. (Getting him new shirts, for instance.) Don probably thought at first he had another Peggy on his hands -- too bad.
Also, the title is "Six Months' Leave," not "Six Weeks' Leave."
Eires32/Craig--
Thanks a ton for pointing out my idiotic minor mistakes, which I've since gone back and fixed. Gotta love how the Web can make it look like you never made a mistake in the first place! I have no excuse for either mistake, especially not the title cock-up.
Andrew/Craig--
You're both probably 100% correct re. Jane. The way it looked to me when I first saw the scene--an interpretation that's not mutually exclusive--is that Roger, thanks to a combination of his sex addiction and bottomless sense of entitlement, was desperately flailing around for whatever female attention he could get in that final scene. And while it looked like Roger was trying to comfort Jane, she didn't seem all that receptive to the comforting.
Karina--I have no trouble believing that Roger's certainty was a combination of him making a solid guess based on the evidence in front of him and of him projecting his own life onto Don's. Where pillow talk is concerned, I'm sure Roger loves to yakk it up, but I kind of doubt he's much good as a listener.
Andrew,
If you enjoy Mad Men and Dyna Moe, you might enjoy this. No guarantees.
Anon
Something intriguing about this episode for me was how it’s slowly introducing race as more of an issue in the show’s world, starting with Hollis’ line about how "some people hide in plain sight." He may be talking about Marilyn, but it clearly also applies to how most of the show's black characters have been almost silent background. Not only Hollis, but Clara also has more lines in this episode than previously; even if she's playing the helpful, wise maid role for now, she's at least more of a presence. Finally, there’s Roger’s brief mention of BBDO hiring a "colored kid" during Freddy's final night out. The promo suggests that Kinsey’s girlfriend plays a bigger role next week, so it seems like something that’s developing as a real theme.
(Of course, "hiding in plain sight" also works as a reference to Don Draper, or really just about any of the show’s characters.)
My other favorite details from this week:
- The fact that the shirts Jane buys come in a Menken’s bag.
- Don’s tossed-off, drunken reference to "a real Archibald Whitman manuever."
Yeah, it's gotta be Jane!
OK I am a relative newbie, so can somebody please enlighten me why "If Mad Men sticks to schedule, the timeline will sail right by the Kennedy assassination"?
I assume that Andrew is referring to MW's tentative plan to skip a year between seasons, which would have season three beginning in early 1964.
seeing_i: The timeline of Mad Men so far has taken place in the even-numbered years 1960 and 1962. So if they skip '63, then that November afternoon in Dallas will occur well offscreen.
OK I am a relative newbie, so can somebody please enlighten me why "If Mad Men sticks to schedule, the timeline will sail right by the Kennedy assassination"?
Weiner has said that he plans on having the show last five seasons and covering ten years time, meaning that they will skip a year between each season. Of course, seeing how this show uses the occasional flashback, it's always possible that they'll cheat and show the JFK assassination anyway.
I have watched and blogged season 1 with outrageous meticulousness, and I know of no definitive statement as to the cause or circumstances of Sterling Sr.'s death. Really, where are you getting this from? If my sister and I have missed it, we need to fix things, but I think you've leapt to unfounded conclusions.
We think it's Jane too. In fact, "I want her off my desk" seems a direct statement that Don realizes he's been spied upon by Roger's girlfriend for an unknown period of time. Presumably this was how Jane got her job back.
seeing, Season 1 was set in 1960, and Season 2 in 1962. Andrew is suggesting that if the pattern holds, Season 2 will end before November 1963 and Season 3 will pick up in '64.
Just a quick question: Did Duck actually start drinking again in that one episode? It felt like it was left a little ambiguous, given that he abandoned his dog which I took as Duck getting rid of the mementos of his old life (which was what was driving him to drink). And then we never really see the result of this, nor have we seen any follow-up. Personally, I've been assuming that Duck stayed strong and didn't fall off the wagon. Have I missed something to indicate that this is definitely not the case?
@ astfgl -
It's interesting that we read that scene differently because it didn't seem ambiguous to me at the time - but your theory is pretty persuasive! After the moment where he made a move toward drinking and was caught off guard by the dog's big smiling face - then bringing the dog downstairs (we think - oh! the dog saved him!) and then HAHA! Dog out - Duck back upstairs... I felt like we were supposed to take that as a pretty clear (and elaborately shameful) fall off the wagon.
S2 wrapped the week of the DNC; Denver papers covered the whirlwind tours of both Slattery and Hamm as they visited the convention, and made a city of broads swoon:
http://www.denverpost.com/dncsocial/ci_10330236
Deborah: You're right. Roger recounts his dad's WWI trench exploits in "Red in the Face," but says nothing about his passing -- indeed, I don't think it's ever been stated that Sterling Sr. is dead at all.
If nothing else, in the press kit that was sent out just before S1 premiered, Matthew Weiner described the characters and said there that Roger's father was a battlefield casualty, presumably in WWI. I don't know if that makes it "canon" or not, but there you go.
I've also always taken the photo of Bert Cooper and the young Roger (as well as the surrounding dialogue) that in "New Amsterdam" as indicating that Roger grew up fatherless, but that's more inference on my part than anything else.
Thanks for the link and the praise heaped on my illustrations, but your assumed back story is a little off.
I knew Rich for years at the Upright Citizens Brigade Theatre (NY) where we both performed at. I started watching Mad Men last season and emailing him a combination of backstage questions and fawning praise. He asked if I had any interest in helping him with his Xmas card. That got the ball rolling.
Did anyone notice that Don used the name "Tilden Katz" when prompted for a name at the service elevator? That's Rachel Katz's (nee Menken's) husband's name.
Maybe it was too glaringly obvious to warrant a comment... but with the Menken's bag and that reference, do you think a comeback is in store for Rachel?
You knew the minute that Roger "saved" Jane's job that they would be sleeping together. Roger is a quid pro quo kind of guy, and Jane clearly was looking for a meal ticket and was hedging her bets on who she'd land (why else is she buying shirts for Don and getting in his business with all of that tea and sympathy).
I too missed that Sterling Sr died in WWI (just that he was in WWI). If Roger took over the firm when his father died, that also would put Roger in his 60s.
How are they going to handle Sally and Bobby growing up, if they skip years? Get older actors? I always find that disconcerting.....
Is there a reason for assuming that Make Room for Daddy was a rerun? I'd be interested in the specifics of that; I don't know much about the 1962 TV schedule.
Roberta--
Make Room For Daddy ran until 1964, so it's theoretically possible that it was a new primetime episode...but the scene felt like it was taking place in the afternoon. That, plus the Wikipedia nugget stating that "reruns were stripped, Monday through Friday, on NBC from 1960-1965" together pretty well convinced me that the episode was a rerun.
I've also always taken the photo of Bert Cooper and the young Roger (as well as the surrounding dialogue) that in "New Amsterdam" as indicating that Roger grew up fatherless, but that's more inference on my part than anything else.
But Freddie's comments at the bar suggested Sterling Sr. was still running Sterling Cooper when Freddie began working there and Roger was still "Bonnie Prince Sterling."
Make Room For Daddy ran until 1964, so it's theoretically possible that it was a new primetime episode...
Except that Rusty Hamer would have been 14 or 15 in a new episode airing in 1962, and he looked a lot younger than that in the clip. That and the fact that the kids were watching before dinner suggested it was the NBC syndicated reruns.
Did anyone notice that Don used the name "Tilden Katz" when prompted for a name at the service elevator?
Yes. Very interesting, if inscrutable.
I think it was fair for us to a little blind-sided by the Jane/Roger situation, because it correlates to our seeing the show over Don's shoulder. He was as much blind-sided as we were, and so it was an effective ploy.
I hadn't picked up on the "Tilden Katz," reference as being Rachel's new husband, but I seem to remember Duck and Roger having a good chortle over Don choosing that name. Why would that be funny to them, assuming that Don & Rachel's affair was still a secret?
JeffRickard--
Maybe it's just because "Tilden Katz" is inherently a really funny-sounding name?
Alan--that's exactly my point, that Freddie's speech this week violated previously established continuity. I'm going to have to go back and check my discs to see if I'm "misremembering" anything, but I seem to recall several S1 references to Roger (who must have been concieved right around the time his dad went off to WWI, in order for him to be the necessary age to have had the WWII adventures in the Pacific that we heard about) basically having been raised fatherless, starting with the whole bit about the German nanny who was dumped after the Lindbergh-baby incident).
Cindy--
When I interviewed David Chase, he surprised me my revealing that one of his paramount considerations in pacing The Sopranos and determining the lengths of between-season gaps was keeping everything believable relative to the rate at which AJ and Meadow were aging, since he considered them (and the theme of parenthood) to be among the most important aspects of the show. If that rubbed off on Weiner, I wouldn't be surprised if he manipulates the schedule a bit--having one or two of the "real world" breaks between seasons being 15 months instead of 12 or something like that--in the hope of accomplishing something similar with Sally and Bobby.
In the case of Father Gill, even if he was attracted to Peggy (an issue that’s open for debate), he couldn’t do anything about it (at least not with having to, oh, throw his entire life down the toilet for a woman who clearly has no interest in him).
You may have written about this in one of your earlier MM posts (this is the first one I've read -- I'll definitely be going back to read the others!), but I thought that initially it was Peggy who was attracted to Fr. Gill -- from the instant she met him in the vestibule of the church when she was going to skip out of mass early. At the time I thought, oh no Peggy -- what are you getting yourself into now?! ;-) It was at the Easter egg hunt, of course, that her interest disappeared.
MM has so many fantastic, full-of-depth characters and portrayals of these characters -- what a wonderful show! But, I have to say that I find Peggy to be one of the most interesting (after/along with Don and Pete). I just don't know what to make of her. She's gotta be one of the most interesting characters on TV in a long, long time.
The reason that Tildan Katz name was funny (to Freddie and Roger): it was a Jewish name following the "money" names of the other two.
Concerning the back story on Roger's father-"casualty" is defined (especially in military terms) as someone is either killed OR injured in war.
In the context of firing Freddie, it was interesting how both Pete and Duck were written to display such cruelty, wrapped in morality. Like you mention, both seem to be the least inclined to drink on the show. But before I made that connection what really got my attention was how much Pete /looks/ (as well as acts) like a young version of Duck.
Betty snapped when she broke the chair. It was a good scene. Don't you just love it when she smiles? :)
I'm waiting for the third season to be announced. In the meantime you can watch mad men episodes free at MadMenEpisodes.com
Point taken re: Freddy's supposed age being 60+, however I personally think Don's screen-age of 36 (unless I've misheard) is pretty dubious too; One of the few 'Suspensions of disbelief' I've had to use throughout the series.
Post a Comment