New York, I love you... but you're bringing me down

New York City has always been the essence of straight shootin’ and big drinkin’, but what was going on behind the bright lights and loud streets that are portrayed on Mad Men? New York City in the 1960's was a fast paced place, evident by it being the backdrop to an advertising firm in Mad Men.  While it is said that New York is the city that never sleeps, New York City in the 1960's was slowing down, socially and economically. 

As a result of a gradual population shift to the suburbs, much of NYC’s manufacturing industry migrated out of the city. The areas that once housed these manufacturing businesses became sources of crime and low-income settlement.  Strikes became the most common form of garnering attention for a cause, like with the Transport Union Workers of America transit strike (1966) and the United Federation of Teachers strike over firings (1968). Socially, new issues were being brought to the forefront, like the gay rights movement. The Stonewall Riots (1969) were some demonstrations by the gay community against a police raid at the Stonewall Inn in New York City, which catered to a gay clientele.

Great economic stress called for desperate means to obtain money for residents. In 1967, the city council of New York removed licensing requirements for its massage parlors, which led to an underground prostitution scene. Landlords in middle-class areas of Manhattan would lease their residences to pimps that would run prostitution rings in the buildings disguised as massage parlors. In a time of social change and economic depression, it seems that the long-lived institution of prostitution reverted people back to older, happier times.

Although many of the rising issues in New York City took place towards the later ‘60s and Mad Men focused on the early ‘60s, it is reasonable to say that Mad Men planted the seed for future portrayal of these issues.  Many aspects of these social and economic issues can be seen in subtle ways in Mad Men.  The population shift out of the city is depicted by every main character (besides Pete) since no one on the show actually lived in Manhattan.  The constant asking of a bonus from multiple characters pulls into question if the staff was underpaid at the time. Salvatore’s abrupt departure from the show due to his refusal to admit his homosexuality and engage in a gay affair touches on the rising gay rights movement. Prostitution is a recurring theme on the show, but becomes obvious when Don and Roger are seen paying for women to sleep with them. Although Mad Men touches upon aspects of the changing city around the show, it never fully delves into the social and economic decay that clouded over New York City in the 1960's. 

 Image credit: http://www.examiner.com/images/blog/wysiwyg/image/roger2(2).jpg

 Image credit: http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gen/149144/SAL-LEE-MAD-MEN.jpg

What Would Mad Men Be?

The millions of Mad Men viewers see the world of Sterling Cooper through the lens of the historical horizon of the 1960s, however, the article WhatMakes Mad Men Great by Matt Zoller Seitz is based on the premise that the show “Mad Men” is not a historically based drama.  While many may see Mad Men as a period drama, Seitz argues that the show is a sociological study of the characters not a societal study or about how the advertising industry, and the people who drove it, interacted with that era’s forces of change on either a macro or micro level. Although set during one of the greatest periods of political and social upheaval our country has known, Mad Men, he asserts, is not concerned with these events, but merely augment the show’s emphasis on the characters.  Many recent, successful television dramas have been set in historical juxtaposition to significant historical eras like Mad Men such as Downton Abbey, Boardwalk Empire, and The Playboy Club, but they all stand in direct contrast to Mad Men because they let their temporal history mold the narrative and the characters so that the plot is forced to navigate around the issues of the age.

Mad Men’s “main draw is behavior, observed with such exactness that one can imagine the show’s being transposed to the forties or eighties, with different clothes, slang, and inebriants, while still delivering the same basic satisfactions” [Seitz].  The show, Seitz maintains, is about the “mystery of personality” and characters that are “random, inscrutable, and mysterious,” who do things the viewers will never fully understand, much like people in our own lives.  In the show, as in reality, Seitz seems to believe, life moves on, people act, history continues, and another work day of accomplishing seemingly nothing begins.  Mad Men, to him, is about “human behavior observed in the moment. It doesn’t explain. It observes. It’s not about the period, it’s about the question mark.” (Seitz)

Mad Men of the 1980s 

Image credit: http://mirror80.com/wpcontent/uploads/2012/03/rad-men-title2.jpg

The theme of the Seitz article applies modestly to Mad Men, the show does not allow popular history to overwhelm its story. However, Mad Men in any other time period than the 1960s, would simply not be Mad Men. There is no other American era that changed so comprehensively so quickly. Instead of internalizing Mad Men’s universal psychological themes such as the character’s basis for self-worth and satisfaction, viewers simply see this other world of the 1960s, unwilling to internalize the idea that the characters, and our own, existential problems do not disappear. The culture of change that permeated life in the 1960s and forms the background of the drama is what makes the show work in a way no other time period could. 

  Image credit: http://blogs.amctv.com/mad_men_season_2_publicity_photos/main_cast.jpg

 

Image credit: http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01485/Cast_1485693c.jpg

It is preposterous to assume that Mad Men, taken out of context, would be intrinsically the same because the show is just about the characters, as Seitz argues. In Mad Men, our first impression is the world of the 1960s, and how strikingly different it seems from our own more modern society, and it is the time period visuals themselves that allow viewers to be transported into that uniquely different era. We see on the surface the Neanderthal sexual politics, primitive advertising, people smoking in the workplace that dominate the workplace and the cult of the perfect homemaker and the dominance of cold war politics that are vestiges of the past at which we laugh, because we are told, repeatedly, or for some they’ve experienced, that society has come so much further than that. It is this perfect storm of social and political change that, together with its seemingly authentic characters, gives Mad Men it’s unique position of hindsight that makes the show so great Mad Men’s status as a costume drama set in the 1960s is what makes the show special, special enough to have a class about it.

What Would Mad Men Be?

-->

The millions of Mad Men viewers see the world of Sterling Cooper through the lens of the historical horizon of the 1960s, however, the article What Makes Mad Men Great by Matt Zoller Seitz is based on the premise that the show “Mad Men” is not a historically based drama.  While many may see Mad Men as a period drama, Seitz argues that the show is a sociological study of the characters not a societal study or about how the advertising industry, and the people who drove it, interacted with that era’s forces of change on either a macro or micro level. Although set during one of the greatest periods of political and social upheaval our country has known, Mad Men, he asserts, is not concerned with these events, but merely augment the show’s emphasis on the characters.  Many recent, successful television dramas have been set in historical juxtaposition to significant historical eras like Mad Men such as Downton Abbey, Boardwalk Empire, and the Playboy Club, but they all stand in direct contrast to Mad Men because they let their temporal history mold the narrative and the characters so that the plot is forced to navigate around the issues of the age. 

Mad Men’s “main draw is behavior, observed with such exactness that one can imagine the show’s being transposed to the forties or eighties, with different clothes, slang, and inebriants, while still delivering the same basic satisfactions” [Seitz].  The show, Seitz maintains, is about the “mystery of personality” and characters that are “random, inscrutable, and mysterious,” who do things the viewers will never fully understand, much like people in our own lives.  In the show, as in reality, Seitz seems to believe, life moves on, people act, history continues, and another work day of accomplishing seemingly nothing begins.  Mad Men, to him, is about “human behavior observed in the moment. It doesn’t explain. It observes. It’s not about the period, it’s about the question mark.” (Seitz)

The theme of the Seitz article applies modestly to Mad Men, the show does not allow popular history to overwhelm its story. However, Mad Men in any other time period than the 1960s, would simply not be Mad Men. There is no other American era that changed so comprehensively so quickly. Instead of internalizing Mad Men’s universal psychological themes such as the character’s basis for self-worth and satisfaction, viewers simply see this other world of the 1960s, unwilling to internalize the idea that the characters, and our own, existential problems do not disappear. The culture of change that permeated life in the 1960s and forms the background of the drama is what makes the show work in a way no other time period could. 

-->

Caption- Mad Men of the 1980s http://mirror80.com/wpcontent/uploads/2012/03/rad-men-title2.jpg

It is preposterous to assume that Mad Men, taken out of context, would be intrinsically the same because the show is just about the characters, as Seitz argues. In Mad Men, our first impression is the world of the 1960s, and how strikingly different it seems from our own more modern society, and it is the time period visuals themselves that allow viewers to be transported into that uniquely different era. We see on the surface the Neanderthal sexual politics, primitive advertising, people smoking in the workplace that dominate the workplace and the cult of the perfect homemaker and the dominance of cold war politics that are vestiges of the past at which we laugh, because we are told, repeatedly, or for some they’ve experienced, that society has come so much further than that. It is this perfect storm of social and political change that, together with its seemingly authentic characters, gives Mad Men it’s unique position of hindsight that makes the show so great Mad Men’s status as a costume drama set in the 1960s is what makes the show special, special enough to have a class about it.

Mad Women: The Other Side of Madison Avenue in the '60s and Beyond

"As the director of the “I Love New York” campaign and winner of “Advertising Woman of the Year,” it’s fair to say that Jane Maas knows her stuff. Maas was a copywriter and then creative director at Ogilvy, a prestigious advertisement agency on Madison Avenue during the later third of the 20th century and has written Adventures of an Advertising Woman and How to Advertise (ie the advertiser's bible). These two texts are revered worldwide for their insight on the craft that is advertisement, and she, along with Ken Roman are renown for their genius. They were among the best of the best. In her latest publication Mad Women: The Other Side of Madison Avenue in the '60s and Beyond, however, Maas removes her hat as Advertiser Extraordinaire and gives us the inside scoop on the Mad World as a Working Woman. 

Quick fact: According to Jane, high-powered women never took their hats off in the office. Ever. It conveyed status. “It’s one of the rare bits of costuming that Mad Men gets wrong” (Maas 128). Just saying.

In short, all of our guesses about the frequency of sex, drinking, smoking, belittlement, infidelity, and strife in the lives of the Mad Men are true. 

In a chapter entitled “Sex in the Office,” Jane says that most women of the time agree that there was more sex than on the show. More! She also begins with a humorous, little anecdote about a brilliant female advertiser who resided in Connecticut with a three-year-old child. Jane asks her about the sex in her office building, and the woman tells her that she most definitely engaged. Her name? Joan. Coincidence? Probably not. 

As depicted on the show, people were rather nonchalant about sex because the Pill was brand new and freely prescribed. In addition, “sexual harassment” wasn’t an issue, as the climbing-the-corporate-ladder perk of an office rendezvous was all too tempting to copywriters and secretaries, and the idea of Human Resources, a place one would go to report an incident today, hardly existed. 

Maas also goes into much detail about substance abuse. Mad Men does a fairly good job of replicating the prevalence of alcohol, but she cannot remember a time when anyone partook in morning shots. Also, Draper and Sterling keep bottles on their desks, but Maas describes a highly utilized executive dining room that carried “every liquor imaginable” (Maas 111). For free. But even though employees had easy access, she can only recall one person with a severe problem with alcoholism. He happened to be a wonderful and successful creative director. Is this not reminiscent of big shots Don’s and Roger’s excessive drinking habits?

In her “A Day on Madison Avenue, 1967” chapter, Maas recounts her average day. It consisted of many, many cigarettes. Of course the daily grand total fluctuated, but she lit at least three before 8:15. A lesser “advertised” form of smoking was with marijuana, but it was absolutely present in the office and at home among the younger folk. 

Lastly, and by far most interestingly, Jane Maas bares her soul in this book. In truth, I can imagine many a Mad Woman fervently nodding their heads in agreement or even shaking their fists in fury from remembering the lifestyle as they read “Have You Really Come Such a Long Way, Baby,” the final chapter in Maas’ book. She admits that her career came before her husband which came before her daughters. She never really worried about housekeeping or cooking because she had a maid. (One she loved and considers part of the family--a second mother to her children, if you will--but a maid just the same). 

Maas reveals that both the stay-at-home and working mother lived unsatisfied lives. 

Jane calls stay-at-home moms “trapped...because they graduated from Bryn Mawr and Radcliffe and Vassar and Smith, got married and ...vanished. They had no identity apart of being somebody’s wife and somebody’s mother. So as they hung their laundry on the line in their suburban backyards, they gnashed their teeth” (Maas 215). For those of you who loathe Betty and the other housewives, consider this. 

And as a working mother, she talks about the pure anger. “Almost every woman...especially working mothers told me how angry she felt about being torn part, and how much she reproached herself for underperforming in all her roles” (217). She also argues that it’s very, very possible that times haven’t changed, hence the chapter title. She proves this through her chronicle through the ages and the different kinds of mothering method each decade brought. Her analysis is poignant; surprisingly modern with mentions of Tina Fey’s mothering experiences, the helicopter mom, and dependence of an iPad; and finally, rather tragic. She concludes, how “shocking” she finds it that successful career women in their prime are quitting their jobs to stay at home, leaving their lives for rearing children and the money making to their husband; thus, there is no happy medium. Maybe being a family woman and a professional one is mutually exclusive. Her disheartening and baffling (I thought this balance was what being a modern woman was all about!) conclusion is so, so profound. I firmly believe it will resonate with every current or future wife, husband, daughter, son, employee, and employer. (Read: This means everyone). 

Now, a moment of honesty from me: I may have mislead you in the beginning of this post. I told you she took a step back from her advertising ways, but as we see in Don Draper, an advertiser never leaves his or her work in the office. Maas’ struggle is evident and should be shared, her capitalization of our beloved AMC hit series’ success is certainly an example of this constant desire to sell and profit. But nonetheless, Mad Women is special. While this certainly does not apply to any of us Maddicts, this book would appeal to those who have little to no knowledge of the series. Currently it stands among few as a publication devoted to Mad Men, but what really makes Mad Women an essential read is Maas’ thoughtful, humorous, and honest take on the never-ending conflict of being a woman of any time period: balancing a life, a family, and a career--and not necessarily in that order. 

Sources:

Maas, Jane. Mad Women: The Other Side of Madison Avenue in the 60s and Beyond. New York: Thomas Dunnes Books, 2012. Print. 

(Picture from Macmillan)

The Television Election: Marketing Nixon vs. Marketing Kennedy

Image credit: http://images4.fanpop.com/image/photos/19100000/Mad-Men-Red-in-the-Face-1-07-mad-men-19195392-950-534.jpg  

Within the episode “Red in the Face” of Mad Men: Season 1, the viewer is introduced to the major struggle of the 1960 election for the best advertising campaign. Not only was this election the usual struggle between parties, but also the struggle of which candidate could perform best in America’s living rooms. No longer were Americans simply listening to debates on the radio or reading about the candidates; they could also watch them on television and see their reactions. The television audience for politics ushered in a new era of political campaigns. And, as history has proven, President Kennedy used it to his advantage in 1960.

In this episode of Mad Men, the gentlemen discuss the Kennedy Campaign and Nixon. They discuss his inexperience, his Catholic faith and the fact that according to Mr. Cooper, “He doesn’t even wear a hat” as issues working against Kennedy. Peter Campbell responds with, “You know who else doesn’t wear a hat? Elvis, that’s what we’re dealing with.” In this short interaction between the old guard of Sterling Cooper and a younger employee, a magnified lens of the national attitude is witnessed. Overall, the nation would soon decide that Kennedy was a better choice both because of his political ideology and aesthetically because of his apparent youth (He was only 4 years younger than Nixon). His ability to capture a television audience that was young and politically informed was a keystone in his campaign. Television advertising and how the candidates appeared in debates had an influence on public opinion in this election for the first time.

These next two video clips display how the campaigns were different in the way that they approached television advertising. Carefully notice the two different styles used to communicate with the American public.

Nixon was more formal and less remarkable in his ads such as this one. There is no “Zinger” or any type of jingle to make this ad memorable. He focuses in on facts and talks directly to the people leaning on a desk. Although the image conveys authority in a sense, it does not appeal to the public as much. The desk and the way that Nixon uses it as a prop seems removed from the American public whereas Kennedy is shown interacting and shaking hands. While Nixon stuck to traditional forms of advertising, Kennedy’s campaign was more creative in using jingles and other attention grabbing techniques. Thus, the first use of television “Star Power” came into play during the election cycle. 

Nixon was more formal and less remarkable in his ads such as this one. There is no “Zinger” or any type of jingle to make this ad memorable. He focuses in on facts and talks directly to the people leaning on a desk. Although the image conveys authority in a sense, it does not appeal to the public as much. The desk and the way that Nixon uses it as a prop seems removed from the American public whereas Kennedy is shown interacting and shaking hands. While Nixon stuck to traditional forms of advertising, Kennedy’s campaign was more creative in using jingles and other attention grabbing techniques. Thus, the first use of television “Star Power” came into play during the election cycle. 

Image credit: http://blog.americanhistory.si.edu/osaycanyousee/from_the_collections/

Both campaigns also contended with the first series of television debates in presidential campaign history. Upon closer inspection of the photo above, it can be observed that Kennedy is more confident on stage and does not look nearly as pasty. Nixon does not look confident and seems to be out of sorts. Overall, the debates soon sank Nixon who did not wear make up and was usually sweating bullets. His posture, debate style, and confidence in front of the cameras were not as fully developed as Kennedy. The difference between the two men in debates was another key advertising move that was a win for Kennedy. Finally, in “Nixon vs. Kennedy”, the Election Day results flow in with a victory for Kennedy. This end game result is a great tie in with Mad Men and the development of television campaign advertising during the time frame. Overall, the election of Nixon vs. Kennedy was the first foray of political campaigns into television as the main medium of advertising. This particular election cycle in history had a profound effect on advertising campaigns and dovetails perfectly with Mad Men: Season 1.

Links referenced:

Druckman, James M. "The Power of Television Images: The First Kennedy-Nixon Debate Revisited." The Journal of Politics 655.2 (2003): 559-571. Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3449821

Self, John W. "The First Debate over Debates: How Kennedy and Nixon Negotiated the 1960 Presidential Debates." Presidential Studies Quarterly 35.2 (2005): 361-375. Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/275526874

 

 

Hobo Lingo

In the eighth episode of Mad Men entitled “The Hobo Code,” we are introduced to different pieces of Don’s (Jon Hamm) tormenting past. Throughout the episode, one of Don’s childhood memories revolves around a hobo (Paul Schulze) working at his house for a day. In one of the scenes, the hobo is talking to Don (Dick) at night showing him different signs that make up the so called “hobo code.” This hobo code, however, is not something that was just created by the writers of the show to fit in the storyline of the episode.

Image credit: http://contemplatingmedia.wordpress.com/2011/04/07/mad-men-season-one-episode-8-the-hobo-code/ 

During times of economic hardships and distress, people have been known to leave their life behind and move on to find a new life somewhere else. To survive on a daily basis, hobos would (and still) need to travel from house to house looking for work in order to get paid (either in monetary form, a meal, etc.). Despite the work that hobos performed, there were always times when they were not exactly promised what they were originally offered. Not knowing the landscape of the region you are in could hinder oneself from making the right decisions at certain times. Also, going from house to house can waste a lot of time due to the unknown of whether or not going to each house is beneficial or not.

In order to stray away from inconsiderate households and less than desirable territories, a hobo sign language, now commonly referred to as the hobo code, was created. The signs were not hand signs, rather they were carvings and drawings imprinted on physical features near houses and landscapes to communicate to other travelers and hobos on what lies ahead. The messages that hobos were able to leave for one another ranged from simple descriptions of the land all the way to character traits of the members of a household. Whether a sign revealed that food could be offered for work or people were available to help you if you were sick, hobos had a system that, if used correctly, could cause problems to be avoided and fortune to be found.

Image credit: http://www.acontinuouslean.com/2009/01/29/the-hobo-code/ 

When the hobo in Mad Men shows Don (Dick) some of the signs, he shows him the marks for good food, watch out for the nasty dog, a dishonest man lives here, and tell a sad story. When the hobo leaves, he ends up carving the mark “a dishonest man lives here” on the gate to their front house. The fact that Don still remembers this moment as an adult reveals inherent feelings of distrust that Don (and hobos alike) felt from his father.

"People Were Buying Cigarettes Before Freud Was Born"

It seems as though there isn't a single scene in Mad Men, where a cigarette isn't lit. Donald Draper sits on his office couch with his arm draped over the back with a cigarette in hand. Betty Draper rests at home with a glass of wine and a cigarette in hand. Peggy Olsen lights up a cigarette at a dinner date, even though she does not smoke. The countless examples of smoking in Mad Men display how in the 1950s and early 1960s, cigarettes were a staple of American culture. Although meant as a luxury good in its early days, cigarettes had already reached mass production by the 1950s. The urban elite were not the only ones smoking cigarettes, anyone could get their hands on one. Cigarettes were cheap to buy and socially accepted at any location and occasion. Don is always seen smoking at his office, his fancy restaurants and parties, and on the train home. Smoking was allowed on planes, trains, buses, offices, restaurants, schools, and almost any public area you can think of. Hollywood glamorized smoking with celebrities, such as James Dean, the man who always had his cigarette, and Audrey Hepburn, who made smoking classy and sophisticated. 

Image credit: http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1118/1441344538_c8ffe03ac4_o.jpg)

  Image credit:  http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_w7a1VcAua9M/TRsJSWv7ZwI/AAAAAAAAEOw/72BMkyE6DbA/s1600/james_dean+%25289%2529.jpg)

Which brands were the most popular? Lucky Strike is most commonly smoked in Mad Men since Sterling Cooper has an account with them. Some of the most popular brands in the 1950s and 1960s included Lucky Strike, Marlboro, Camel, Pall Mall, Parliament, Salem, Newport, Winston, Kent, Viceroy, Kool and more. Cigarettes advertisements depicted them as part of American life and played on the aspects of being a man or a sophisticated woman, having fun, and relaxing. Just as Don may be smoking because he’s a man, Betty may be smoking because she's stressed, and Peggy may be smoking to fit in. Cigarette brands used celebrity and athlete endorsements, cartoon characters, politicians, children, and even medical professionals to sell their product. In the episode, “Smoke Gets In Your Eyes,” Don knows that even though a magazine called Reader’s Digest claims that cigarettes are dangerous, people would still buy them; Sterling Cooper just can’t advertise physicians claiming they are safe anymore.

Here is an advertisement for Camel cigarettes preposterously trying to make you feel better about smoking since your doctor loves it too.

Image credit: (http://www.unsoughtinput.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/gra_bdoctor.jpg) 

This is an advertisement for Marlboro in the 1960s, hinting that smoking Marlboro cigarettes will make you feel like the rugged man that you want to be.

Image credit: (http://morningcigarette.com/images/block/Marlboro%20Cigarettes.%20Advertising%20in%201967%207.jpg)

Alas, since the word spread about cigarettes being dangerous and the efforts began in the 1970s, the government has heavily regulated cigarette advertisements, added warnings and images to packaging, and banned or limited the places you are allowed to smoke. Back in the “Mad Men” days, however, smoking was not even given a second thought. Light another one, Mr. Draper. It’s toasted.

Links referenced:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/07/business/media/07adco.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/apr/01/tobacco-industry-marketing

Bethlehem Steel

 Image credit: http://www.bethlehempaonline.com/bridges_album/imagepages/image5.htm

In Mathew Weiner’s Mad Men season one episode four (2007), New Amsterdam, Don Draper (Jon Hamm) and his team, including Pete Campbell (Vincent Kartheiser), are working for the new client, Bethlehem steel. Although at first Pete almost ends up costing the company Bethlehem Steel’s business, he ends up saving the day-only to get fired and then rehired. Bethlehem Steel dates back to the 1800s and was America’s second biggest steel producer and America’s largest shipbuilder. Bethlehem steel is one of the most iconic symbols of American industrial manufacturing leadership. Bethlehem Steel was very prosperous in the twenties and thirties because of the military demand for steel. They were able to continue their prosperity post war. When peacetime came, in the fifties and sixties, Bethlehem Steel continued to supply a wide variety of structural shapes for the construction trades and products for defense, power generation, and steel-producing companies. Following the war they still had federal government contracts, rolling uranium fuel rods. Bethlehem Steel hit its high point in 1950s, as the company began manufacturing some 23 million tons per year. In 1958 the company's president, Arthur B. Homer, was the highest paid U.S. business executive and the firm built its largest plant at Burns Harbor, Indiana, between 1962 and 1964. This all means that when the men at Sterling Cooper were fighting for a massive contract, getting it would mean massive amounts of money coming into the firm. By having Bethlehem Steel in the show, the writers are making Sterling Cooper seem like an elite advertising firm. Bethlehem Steel eventually fizzled out in the 1990s due to more competition from the modern foreign firms, but its legacy will be remembered, whether for what it meant for American industrialism or by watching episodes of Mad Men.

Links referenced: http://www.bethlehempaonline.com/steelgolden.html

Historical Accuracy becomes Historical Actuality

-->

Image Credit: http://ikszale.tumblr.com/post/30521801040/may-28-1966-poverty-pickets-get-paper-bag

In his New York Times blog post “On Mad Men, an Opening Scene Straight FromPage 1," Michael Wilson reveals that the opening scene of Mad Men’s fifth season was based on a New York Times article published on May 28, 1966. In the scene, ad executives from Young & Rubicam (Y&R) throw water-filled paper bags out of their office windows to hit African American, poverty-reform protesters below. The drama that unfolded between the ad men and protesters in the scene does not stray far from the actual events and dialogue reported in the 1966 article “Poverty Pickets get Paper Bag Dousing on Madison Avenue” by John Kifner.

Wilson’s article explores the connections between the scene and its historical inspiration, and references people involved in the scene’s creation and reception. He first states the initial, negative response of the show’s critics to the scene’s script and notes that the show’s writers did not actually create the dialogue in question. He then quotes excerpts of the 1966 article to show how strikingly similar the Mad Men writers kept the scene to the actual events. Mad Men’s head of research, Allison Mann, found the article and showed it to the show’s creator, Matthew Weiner. Weiner was “blown away” by Kifner’s article and decided to stay true to the conflict between the ad executives and protesters. Current Y&R chief executive, David Sable, responded with a statement that acknowledged the firm’s wrongdoing and condemned the behavior of those former employees. The article then includes the reactions of the critics to the fact that the dialogue in the scene was not artificially written. It concludes with Kifner’s reaction to his article becoming a scene on the television show.

I appreciated that Wilson’s article took a specific scene and gave the reader both a glimpse behind the making of Mad Men and a specific example of racial tensions in the 1960s. The article included many sources that offered different perspectives and insights about the scene. After reading the article, I am fascinated by Mad Men’s writing staff’s use of research, although this scene is exceptional in its use of Kifner’s article, and not all aspects of the show maintain the same level of historical accuracy. I also found the scene itself particularly interesting because it opened season five with a theme often brushed over in the series—race relations. The placement of the scene in the first episode foreshadows more exploration of race relations throughout the season. Overall, the article successfully offers brings new meaning to the scene as the reader learns about the adaptation of Kifner’s article for Mad Men.

The details provided in Wilson’s article illuminate a Mad Men scene that may otherwise seem unimportant. The scene’s almost exact resemblance to the article from 1966 incorporates the reality of race relations at the time of the civil rights movement and adds depth to the popular period drama.  

Typing at Sterling Cooper

-->

The technology seen around the office in Mad Men is pretty basic compared to the appliances employees working at Sterling Cooper would encounter if they were working there today. That’s why it is so funny to the audience of Mad Men when Joan remarks that the typewriter looks intimidating and advanced. The typewriter; in reality, was a pretty simple device that helped drive offices like Sterling Cooper’s for a good part of the 20^th century.

Christopher Sholes invented the modern typewriter in 1866. The modern typewriter was the first typewriter with a universal keyboard. Shortly after this invention hit the marker, one of Sholes associates changed the keyboard to the modern QWERTY design, which caused the keys to jam less. The typewriter was a tough gadget to market at first, for a wide variety of reasons: the unwillingness of businesses to move on from handwriting, the economic stagnation of the time and the price, which was around 100 dollars (http://www.smithsonianeducation.org/scitech/carbons/typewriters.html).  With a price like that, the typewriter was worth more than most modern computers, with prices adjusted for inflation. Typewriters were also tough to use, because if a typist made more than a few mistake they would have to trash their current document and start all over with a new one.

Around the time the first season of Mad Men takes place, (1960s), (http://www.mit.edu/~jcb/Dvorak/history.html) the first electronic typewriters were being introduced to the market. Sterling Cooper doesn’t use these in the first season, but they would have been one of the companies that would have adopted them to their offices.

Without the typewriter, offices like the one in Mad Men would have had a much harder time producing documents, and offices would have been a lot less productive. Despite the cro-magnon-like appearance that the audience takes away from the device today, it was definitely useful for the era.