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)

A Veteran Reflects on Mad Men

The show Mad Men glamorizes the life of Madison Avenue executives. The smoking, drinking, and casual sex run rampant in the office. But many viewers at home wonder if the show accurately depicts the time period and this particular lifestyle. On Aug. 31^st, 2009, USA Today published an article entitled, “Veteran ad exec says ‘Mad Men’ really were about sex, booze.” In the article, Bruce Horovitz interviewed Jerry Della Femina who is a “Mad Man.” According to the article, Della Femina started “at age 16 in a Manhattan ad agency mailroom. Currently, he is the chairman, CEO, and executive creative director at New York agency Della Femina/Rothschild/Jeary and Partners.” The article discusses Della Femina’s life during the 1960s, particularly addressing drinking, smoking, and sex. But according to Della Femina, “all the drinking, smoking, and sex depicted on Mad Men may be an understatement.

Image credit: Jennifer S. Altman for USA Today 

Also while reading the article, I drew the conclusion that Roger Sterling resembled Jerry Della Femina. For example, he talked about company lunches and that he would walk through the front door of the restaurant and “the bartender would see us and start shaking the martinis…without even asking, the second one would arrive.” This reminded me of the time Sterling told his waiter that he never wanted to see the bottom of his glass. Della Femina was also an avid smoker as was Roger Sterling and admitted to smoking “three to four packs a day.” Another similarity I saw between the two was their infidelity. Sterling cheated on his wife several times. Della Femina admitted in the article that most marriages did not survive during this time period. He even mentioned how his ended after 24 years.

Another interesting aspect of the article was when Della Femina talked about working with tobacco companies. At Sterling Cooper, many of the characters smoke Lucky Strike cigarettes and I just assumed they smoked them because they liked them, not necessarily to impress their client. Della Femina explained how his company used to work with the tobacco company R.J. Reynolds. According to Della Femina, “the R.J. Reynolds guys would get off the elevator on our floor where we had two of those ashtrays filled with sand. The RJR guys would claw through the sand to see if there were butts from any other brands….They wanted to know what our people were smoking.”

I really enjoyed the article and I appreciated the insight that it provided into the world of Mad Men. Although I know many things about the show are historically accurate, I had just assumed that the show had played up the drinking, smoking, and casual sex aspect just to create drama and make the show more compelling. I truly found it hysterical that all of these elements seemed like an over exaggeration turned out to be an understatement. I think the article complemented the show very well and I was able to draw many apt comparisons about the show that I had not previously known were true.

It Just Sounds So Modern

In July of 2010, Ben Zimmer wrote an article for The New York Times titled “Man Men-ese” in which he discusses the accuracy of the show’s dialogue for the time period. Overall, Zimmer defends the historical accuracy of the language used by the show. He questions why Man Men has received so much scrutiny for language despite it being the only show on television that works hard to sustain historically appropriate use of language.

This article provides a clear look at Mad Men’s use of time appropriate language and cites many examples of phrases the creators of the show regret having used due to the language being from a later time period than the show. One example he shares is Joan’s line from season one “The medium is the message,” a phrase that was not coined for another four years. The evidence cited is made more credible because the author actually received this information from a conversation with Mathew Weiner, the creator, executive producer and head write of the show. The author also includes examples of lines with issues from multiple linguists and more generally lines that have upset viewers such as Roger’s line “I know you have to be on the same page as him.”

After discussing more examples of non-historically applicable language, the author then questions why the show has received so much scrutiny for this by viewers, which he argues was brought on by Weiner and his staff members need for accuracy and perfectionism with other aspects of production. This argument is supported by the author’s reference to examples such as the importance of the size of a fruit bowl to Weiner in set design.

The author then redirects the article to his conversation with Mathew Weiner in which Weiner explains the process through which he and his staff writers work to avoid words and phrases that don’t work for the time period. He ends the article by discussing Weiner’s personal struggle to use completely accurate language as he identifies himself as “one of the most nitpicky people in the world.”

Overall, this article provides great insight for anyone interested in the historical appropriateness of Mad Men’s language and pulls from a good variety of sources to demonstrate this, and using Mathew Weiner, the show’s creator as a main source certainly enhances the article.

If You Got It, Flaunt It

--> -->

Helen Gurley Brown, the author of Sex and the Single Girl and former editor of Cosmopolitan Magazine, recently died at the age of 90, leaving behind a long legacy of emboldening “a generation of women with her controversial views about female sexuality, and laid the groundwork for today’s sexualized fashion and celebrity culture.” In August 2012, Booth Moore wrote an article for the Los Angeles Times entitled “Helen Gurley Brown Leaves Behind Lusty,Busty Legacy." In this article, Brown is portrayed as a feminist trailblazer and the inspiration for characters like Carrie Bradshaw and of course, Mad Men’s Joan Holloway.

Moore briefly elaborates on Brown’s early professional life as an executive assistant at the Los Angeles based advertising agency Foote, Cone & Belding, where she eventually became a copywriter (similar to the future career path of Joan). No information is given on how she became the editor of Cosmopolitan Magazine, but Moore does describe how Brown adamantly supported the use of scantily clad women on the cover of Cosmo to both bolster sales and promote the concept that women should own their sexuality.  

Quotes from Brown’s peers make up the majority of the article, and while these quotes further illuminate Brown’s modern views on sexuality, Moore does not connect them to the social implications of Brown’s actions. Moore does mention in passing that the new Cosmo covers sparked an interest in “Miracle bras”, but what about the reception of the covers. A more in depth analysis on Moore’s part would shed light on the various social implications of a woman embracing her body. This in turn would strengthen his argument about the connection between Brown and Joan by demonstrating how they let go of society’s traditional views surrounding women and endured society’s critiques in the pursuit of independence. Moore’s article fails at portraying how difficult it was for women to define themselves and not let a man’s perception of her define her.

Moore’s article is effective in that it adds more depth to a seemingly one-dimensional character by equating Joan to an early champion of women’s rights. In Season One of Mad Men, Joan is portrayed as the femme fatale of the office. Feminist is the last thing that comes to mind while we watch her purposefully ignite the passions of the men prying for her attention at Sterling Cooper (remember the Belle Jolie scene?). Moore’s article casts Joan in a different light. Suddenly her flirtatious smile and curve hugging dresses are not things for women viewers to envy, but something we should all be proud of, a woman in control of her sexuality.

An Inaccurate Portrayal: Homosexuality in Advertising

Image credit: afterelton.com

In May of 2012, David Leddick wrote an article for the Huffington Post entitled, “Being Gay in the World of Mad, Mad Men: What It Was Really Like." Leddick’s article contests the idea that Salvatore Romano (Bryan Batt) is an anomaly in the advertising business because of his homosexuality. He contests also, the anti-gay opinion of the advertising world of Mad Men. As Leddick was an openly gay, junior writer in the 1960’s, he seems well qualified to make these assertions. However, Leddick’s generalizations about gay men and advertising take away from his point. Both David Leddick, and Matthew Weiner, creator of Mad Men, however, seem to be at least, partially right in their differing portrayals of gay men in advertising.

Throughout the article, Reddick recounts his many successes in advertising, notably with Revlon. In reference to clients of his, “they didn't have time to care about what other people did in bed. They only cared about what you did in the office." Leddick substantiates these claims with his high salaries and examples of his achievement that continued to rise despite his sexuality. His article is refreshingly uplifting compared to Mad Men. His article exudes a feeling of freedom, at one point stating, “If you can do it, you can be it." Leddick also describes the openly gay environment at a particular agency in which he worked, stating that, “all the art directors were gay” and that “the gay men on staff knew everything there was to know at the time about clothes, interior décor, you name it."

It is these generalizations, which continue to occur throughout the article, that ruin Leddick’s point. If Weiner was close minded to the reality of openly gay men in advertising, then Leddick is equally close minded to the possibility of there being closeted gay men in advertising, or even New York City for that matter, stating, “If you were gay in New York, you didn't need to run around hiding it." And even Leddick concedes that “stuffy, old-line agencies […] the big ones” discriminated based on homosexuality. Though Sterling Cooper is not among these companies, it is not completely out of question to believe that intolerance existed in this world as well. Though Matthew Weiner may be naïve to the possibility of openly gay men in advertising, his goal is not to represent strictly the Madison Avenue advertisers and their lives. Weiner uses Mad Men as an outlet to represent the unrest and injustice of the sixties as a whole. Through this Weiner is able to stress sense of sin and hostility toward homosexuality, feelings which were not uncommon during the time period. After all, it was considered an illness until 1973.

Ultimately, though Leddick provides an uplifting and direct account of gay advertising in the sixties, he shows us only one glimpse into a world which involved thousands of individuals, as well as remaining unmindful of the purpose of Mad Men as a show.

Slate takes on Sterling Cooper, Hilarity Ensues

In the course of one business day, it is not uncommon to see Don and the rest of the gang at Sterling Cooper consuming copious amounts of alcohol. Whether it be Sterling mixing Smirnoff vodka with his morning milk, the pitcher of bloody Mary’s in the ad pitch or the celebratory glass of rye whiskey. To the these mad men, alcohol has become just another part of the day. It is present in the boardroom, in the individual offices and even in the surprisingly long lunch “hours” frequently taken by these big shot Madison Ave employees. It is present all day because to these men alcohol does not diminish the work they do. They are able to function while under the influence of alcohol, and so there is no problem with a little bit of Canadian to get the creative
blood flowing.

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid271557392?bctid=42484739001

For the staff of Slate magazines Double X, the situation is not quite the same. The women that run this feminist section of the magazine are big fans of the television series Mad Men. For this reason, they decided it would be an interesting experience to try to behave as the characters in the AMC television series do during their respective work days. That is, the women working in this department decided they were going to start drinking as early and as often as the characters on the show. They wanted to know how it truly felt to be well just like Don Draper.

The ladies started out the morning by bringing bloody Mary’s to the 11:15 meeting. At first the presence of alcohol did not seem to have an adverse effect on the behavior, except that simply people felt looser and more willing to share their ideas. The major difference noticed was that they felt no desire to end the meeting, as was usually
not the case.

This meeting was then followed by an anything but dry lunch for the ladies. They each had an estimated 3 martinis during their longer than usual lunch break, and to be perfectly honest, things started to take a turn. The ladies of Double X began to come up with completely off-the-wall ideas for the magazine that everyone seemed to think were brilliant. This was mixed in with a lot of unrelated gossip and loads of giggling. However, lunch could not last forever and so eventually the ladies were forced to return to the office.

Once back in the office, the ladies were meant to enter another meeting with one of the more senior members of Slate. They decided this was a perfect time to introduce the whiskey into the equation. At this point I think it fair to say that all hope was lost for the day. The ladies of the magazine were simply spewing nonsense ideas, and as the only sober person in the room noted “talking extremely loudly.” By the time this meeting was over, it became clear little was going to be done the rest of the day. Simple questions addressed to people often took minutes to get a response because people became easily distracted. And the answers that would be given often were incoherent or simply nonsensical. Productivity was at an all time low.

It should go without saying that the decision to drink during the work day did not go according to plan. The ladies of the magazine simply went about their day believing they were functioning as usual, and upon looking back, they realized everything they decided upon during the day was a load of rubbish. The experiment was definitely one that was interesting and one that will likely never be repeated. It is also hard
to say whether the alcohol had a greater effect on them because they a)rarely drink or b)are lightweight females as opposed to the men on the show. Either way, it is clear the effect on these staffers as Slate was far greater than the men of Sterling Cooper. And after their one day of drinking, it becomes clear that the drinking should be left in the hands of the professionals.

In August of 2007 Anna McCarthy wrote a piece for The Nation titled, “Mad Men’s Retro Charm.” The author aptly describes Mad Men as the combination of a soap opera and a history lesson but does not seem to really grasp the content of the show as she delves deeper. McCarthy puzzles over the portrayal of smoking and drinking. The assertion that she makes regarding the prominence of smoking and drinking (especially among pregnant women) is that the show is about a time when “fatal, dirty habits were considered fun.” However, the characters clearly know little about the long-term health risks of smoking and drinking, and the author’s interpretation seems to be based more on her own knowledge of the substances than anything from the show.

McCarthy briefly seems to understand the show when she discusses “conformist WASP culture,” anti-Semitism, and a lack of racially diverse main characters. She posits that the representation of these issues may shed more light on the perspectives of contemporary writers than it does on the state of the advertising world in the 1960s.

Immediately after this moment of insight however, the author asserts that the part of the show that is the most telling about its “relationship to the era it claims to document is the animation accompanying the opening credits.” McCarthy concludes that this depiction of businessmen falling past the skyscrapers of Manhattan hints at a nostalgia for a time when American consumer culture was an icon of greatness and not resented by the world as a symbol of American egoism and ignorance. She unnecessarily politicizes the show by mentioning connections to propaganda in the “war on terror.” Ignoring the actual substance of the show in favor of an analysis of the opening sequence is the greatest mistake that the author makes. If not for this complete disregard for the show’s content, the reader might be able to forgive her for her mistake in repeatedly referring to one of the shows most polarizing and well-known characters, Betty Draper, as “Betsy.”

The author ultimately gets turned around and around when trying to analyze a modern show about the past. It is her modern interpretation of the show that reveals truths about the present, not necessarily the show itself.

George Lewis Hates Mad Men

In an interview on the website Big Think George Louis, a famous ad man of the 60s recalls his early years from his graduation from the High School of Music and Arts, his time at Pratt University, where he met his future wife on his first day. Although he disliked his time at Pratt, he stayed to be with his future wife. He was told by one of his teachers that he didn’t need anymore schooling and was given the name of a woman who would give him his first job. After being drafted during the Korean War he joined CBS only to leave some time later. He went on to work at many unsuccessful advertising jobs before working with advertising greats such as Doyle Dane Bernbach and Bill Bernbach. He then left Doyle Dane Bernbach to start the second creative advertising agency.



The interview proceeds with the question of how accurate Mad Men is to the atmosphere in the 60s. Louis talks about a call he received from one of the producers of Mad Men who called him because his named had come up many times while they were interviewing the original mad men of the 60s. Louis, angered by the producers lack of knowledge of him or what he had done in the 60s tells him to look for his book Be Careful George which illustrates his growing up in New York to his founding of the second creative agency. Louis is later called back by the producer who, after reading the book, is astonished about all it contains saying “Oh, Jesus, wow, we could have done the show on that!"
 
In the interview George Louis gives a good summary of his early life as a budding designer and ad man in New York. Although the article gives a first hand account of the 60s from one of the founders of New York creative agencies, his hate for the show Mad Men seems more placed on the fact that he was offended the producers did not know who he was or come to him first. Whether or not the show is an accurate portrayal of the advertising firms of the 60s, it is a drama, not a History Channel documentary. At the end of the day, accurate or not, the show does what it’s meant to do, entertain.

What' On Your Playlist, Don Draper?

After a long and hard day at work, Don Draper needs to relax. He boards his train on the way home and finds an open seat. What is the best way to quickly relieve stress? Listening to music! Draper reaches into his pocket and pulls out his shiny brand new iPod, nestles his headphones in his ears, closes his eyes, and hits play. What is he listening to?

Although this scenario would never actually occur in Mad Men, we can now know what Don Draper and the other characters of the show would be listening to on their iPods if they were around today. The creators and producers of the show have teamed up with iTunes to provide a mini playlist for some of the major characters. Each playlist includes five songs that the characters would have been listening to. Let’s take a look at Don’s playlist, along with an excerpt from each song that connects to his character:

1. "Misery," Barrett Strong

My eyes swell up, it’s such a shame
I lost my girl and I’m the one to blame

If the finale of Season 1 were to last a couple minutes longer, I could just imagine Don getting up off the stairs and throwing some Barrett Strong in the record player. He is upset that Betty and the kids are gone, and he realizes that he deserves the blame for not being a good family man.

2. "Smoke Gets in Your Eyes," The Platters

They said someday you'll find
All who love are blind
Oh, when your heart's on fire
You must realize
Smoke gets in your eyes

The title of the very first episode of Mad Men shares its name with this song. While the song’s overt meaning is about love, perhaps the creators of the show chose it based on a secondary interpretation. When watching a new show for the first time, it is natural to “fall in love” with the protagonist. At first, Don appears to be a model businessman. This song could serve as a reminder that your first impression of someone could be distorted.

3. "Late Freight," Dave Hamilton

This song doesn’t have any lyrics, but the tone of the bells matches Don’s personality perfectly. Just listening to it makes you think of a mysterious man, well-dressed in a suit and matching hat.

4. "The Big Wheel," Howard Crockett

You were born a poor man then you got to be a rich man then you wound up a poor
man again
Now they’re rollin’ you back across that track big wheel
The lights are gonna shine across that track tonight

This song seems to tie into the scene where Don sits by the railroad track watching the trains go by. The first line outlines his life; he becomes a rich man only to realize he doesn’t really have much in terms of happiness. The track could be a metaphor for the divide between rich and poor. The lights are always shining across the track – in other words, people assume being prosperous and having a family is all you can ask for, but when you get there you realize “this is it.”

5. "More," Kai Winding & Claus Ogerman

Here is another song with no lyrics, but it still says something about Don. The tune is a sad one, and we can gather some meaning from the title. The previous song communicated Don’s discontent with his current place in life. He is searching for something more. We don’t really know what it is that he wants, and I don’t think he knows either. All he knows is that there has to be something more to life than this.

Analyzing the songs chosen for Don’s playlist shows that the creators put some thought into their selections. They did a good job coming up with songs that portray his character through music.

To view the Mad Men playlists on iTunes, click here: http://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewRoom?fcId=337755403&id=14344

Don Draper Lives

Image credit: http://www.someecards.com/confession-cards/im-like-don-draper-on-mad-men

It is almost impossible to avoid our most endeared and abhorred cultural icons on the internet. Facebook, Twitters, blogs, articles, and fan generated websites create alternate realities where characters live and act in the everyday. Idolization and adoration are no longer limited to the 40 minutes in which a television show is aired; now it exists via mere google search. Don Draper epitomizes this expansion of character, with his life, style, sayings, charisma, sex appeal and emotional distress reaching not only a cult like adoration but also are qualities to be emulated by any man looking to attain his suave. Through a constant stream of social media, parody YouTube Videos, and newspaper articles, Don Draper is just as alive as any real influential celebrity for his persona is even more accessible and relatable.

Wait, What?

See more funny videos and funny pictures at CollegeHumor.

Askmen.com honored Don Draper as the most influential man of 2009 noting that even though he is a fictional character, his “male identity…is enduringly captivating.” They assert that while he is valued for being “values driven and thoroughly masculine” but his “human flaws” allow his character to seem relatable and relevant in the modern world. On the internet Don exercises his ability to reflect old school and the modern world. He exists through his fictional 1960s world through 2010 tweets directed at Connie Hilton and other characters. His old school style influences how the modern man hair styles his hair and how the modern worker bee presents themselves through Draper inspired career tips such as “Play your position” and “Keep your mouth shut.” Don has also managed to pitch ‘pick up’ tactics, so that all men may revel in while attempting to attain his unattainable charm on Saturday Night Live. He is not limited to joyful parody; in fact, there is a tumblr solely devoted to “Sad Don Draper” with photographs even Don couldn’t create a sufficient tagline for. Take this gem…



Image credit: http://saddondraper.tumblr.com/

Don is truly a Renaissance man, with his hand in every media, projecting his image like the advertising agent he is, or at least is on the show. All this Don Draper mania, attention and idolization makes me wonder what the actual character, the real Don Draper would make of it, seeing as he did not even enjoy talking to the newspaper reporter at the start of season 4 in “Public Relations." Then again, the “What Would Don Draper Do?” (WWDDD?) tumblr provides some insight:

91. Dear Don Draper, Do you have any views on men using Facebook?

Yes, the same ones I have of men wearing brassieres.

Mother of the Year?

http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/2010/07/mad_mens_betty_drapers_guide_t.html

We all know Betty Draper is not the ideal mother. Danny Miller’s article "June Cleaver vs. Betty Draper," triggered by the death of actress Barbra Billingsley who played famous TV mother June Cleaver, points this out by analyzing the similarities and differences between Betty Draper and June Cleaver. This article discusses June Cleaver and her image as the ideal 1960’s mother juxtaposed with Betty Draper who, as Miller describes, is a representation of mothers of the 1960’s through a “savagely realistic lens.” Although the two TV mothers may appear physically similar, there are many differences between the personalities of the two women. Miller points out that although June seems like the typical submissive wife she is no pushover. This conviction is exactly what is missing from Betty that makes her such a weak character. Although Miller accepts the fact that Betty Draper is not a good mother to her children, he also explains why he can’t help but sympathize with Betty. He describes Betty as a “tragic figure” who is “trapped in life circumstances.” The article then goes on to discuss the actress who played June Cleaver and how she was just as graceful as her character. Finally the article concludes by saying that Betty Draper would greatly benefit from the opportunity to meet with June Cleaver.



Image credit: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/danny-miller/june-cleaver-vs-betty-dra_b_767067.html

I also find myself feeling bad for Betty Draper and cannot bring myself to completely hate her. Although I have only seen the first season and know that I will be seeing many worse actions from Betty in the future that may sway my opinion, I do not blame her completely for her actions. It is difficult to imagine a life in which we feel we are stuck with absolutely no way out. Although Betty may seem to be a very dramatic representation of the 1960’s mother, her situation was much more common than most people would like to believe. One thing Miller’s article references, that many people seem to forget, is that Don is no perfect father either. We do not criticize Don’s interactions with his kids because we rarely get to see him actually spending time with them. At least Betty occasionally makes an effort to know her children. Although Don often calls Betty childish, Don could be seen as just another child to Betty. She is responsible for cooking for Don and doing his laundry, just as she does for Sally and Bobby, and receives very little parenting help from him in return. It would be very difficult to argue that Betty is even relatively good at being a mother, but it is only fair to understand the background behind her character before judging her for her shortcomings.

Source Referenced:
Miller, Danny. "June Cleaver vs. Betty Draper." The Huffington Post. 18 Oct. 2010. Web.

While Mad Men captivates intellectuals, historians, and UW 20 students, it surprisingly attracts a number of high-end fashion designers with its array of fabulous costumes. In his article “A Style – Setting Show” from The Wall Street Journal, Ray Smith discusses the large number of fashion designers who diligently watch Mad Men for creative ideas for their fashion lines. They often watch the show twice; once for the fashion, and once for the plot.

The women of Mad Men have two distinct styles. The career women tend to wear tight pencil skirts, fitted sweaters, and sheath dresses, which more than likely are worn to attract attention from the men in the office. The suburban housewives wear motherly pouf – style dresses in public. The men wore slim suits, slim – fitting white shirts, skinny ties, and pocket squares.



Image credits: Dolce & Gabbana Fall '08 from Style.com



Image credit: http://bbright.blogspot.com/2010_11_01_archive.html

Both Mr. Som and Michael Kors have based runway collection on Mad Men. Michael Kors said, “The wardrobes are exquisite and the attention to detail is beyond forensic.” It is surprising how the style of the 1960’s is coming back into fashion. The love of Mad Men fashion has trickled down from high - end fashion lines to stores where the average American would shop. Banana Republic had Mad Men themed displays for its stores and even offered a lucky fan a walk on role on the show. Mad Men has revolutionized how we look at 60’s fashion. It has brought the look of the 60s back to the forefront of fashion. There is evidence of 60’s fashion everywhere you look. In magazines, runway shows, and billboards. Tory Burch and her design team have utilized Mad Men for inspiration for her highly popular silk tunics, dresses, and other products. It was a huge surprise to Mad Men’s costume designer, Ms. Bryant that the show’s fashion would take off like it has. I may just go out and buy myself some Mad Men inspired clothes.

Citation: Smith, Ray A. "A Style-Setting Show." The Wall Street Journal. 7 Aug. 2009. Web. 13 Feb. 2011.

Critiquing Mad Men

In recent article published in New York Review of Books titled “The Mad Men Account," Daniel Mendelsohn criticizes the amount of praise and accolades given to Mad Men when it is really just a glorified soap opera. He claims that the show has been viewed in too bright of a light and does not deserve to be compared to shows such as The Wire and The Sopranos, both on HBO.

Mendelsohn cites weak writing, a chaotic and oftentimes unbelievable plot, and what he calls a “glib” attitude towards 1960’s culture that positions current attitudes and culture far too superior to it. Instead of creating an in-depth look at the problems of the times, ranging from misogyny to racism, Mendelsohn claims that the writers of Mad Men instead present an unrealistic look into an imagined American society. Similar to Latoya Peterson’s argument in “Why Mad Men Is Afraid of Race," Mendelsohn says that instead of Mad Men briefly introducing a topic such a racism and then ignoring it, the writers of the show should expound more upon this aspect of society. He cleverly calls this the writers “advertising” an issues rather than dramatizing it. In addition to criticizing the work of the shows creators, he also writes that the acting is almost always bland and uncreative, with the actors more focused on playing stereotypes then real people.

Even after showing the flaws of the show, Mendelsohn says that he has watched every episode and will continue to watch. He says the reason for this, and what he assumes is the reason for many other children of the 1960’s, is that is offers them a chance to see the world that their parents would have lived in. They view the world in the ways that Sally Draper and Glenn Bishop would have witnessed it, and Mad Men offers a glimpse into what society could have been.