MADMEN - WHY THE EXCITEMENT OVER A TV SERIES SET 50 YEARS
AGO? MADMEN Perfect Recipe for Modern TV Drama Viewers
"I love the fact, that in one point
in time all women didn't look like cheap whores, this show captures that, and
many things of that nature."
"
...people have a lot of nostalgia for an era when you could be a
complete cipher in 1956 and leading a rich ad agency in 1963, just by
getting someone drunk and lying about having received a job offer (as
Draper did)... or dropping acid at Woodstock in 1969 and protege of a
F-500 CEO in 1974... or completely average and able to buy a house at
age 24. The era when no one had heard of the Satanic Trinity
(healthcare, housing, and education costs) that would begin eating the
middle class a few decades later. That doesn't exist anymore."
Matthew Weiner, the series creator, sets lead Don Draper up with a full stack of attractive qualities, then mixes in just enough self-destructiveness and amorality to repulse us.
Ideal TV fare ala Breaking Bad if you're into this sort of thing. The
postives of the early '60s era get pretty much trashed, as expected, in
typical lmodern TV screenplay.
With the
seventh and final season of AMC's
blockbuster 'Mad Men' cable TV series now concluded, it's of
interest - at least to those who follow society's trends and sociology - to explore
the amazing following the program has had, especially with younger folks who
weren't even alive during the time the
story line took place. Add to the fact
that that era of the 1950s and 1960s has
been pretty much disregarded (except perhaps for the late '60s) by the same
younger population (and mainstream media) as racist
and repressive without the all-encompassing technology which is
pervasive and key to their world today.
With over 3 million viewers for the final episode over the weekend, it's viewership may not be record-breaking
but it's up there. The show is considered
one of the better written and more subtle series with an
underlying message, tailored to reach the ardent watcher of modern TV
drama. Madmen creator Andrew Weiner, who wasn't even alive in the early 60s , says he's proud the the series gave women a
voice, showing the mistreatment of women and how they courageously dealt with
it. Like most of today's programs,
writers have taken license to color the earlier eras with a paintbrush, usually
depicting a time much more 'backward'
than today's more tolerant and accepting
society; if we think we still have problems today, boy, look at the those 'mad
men' of the 50s and 60s, Weiner might say.
Long gone are true portrayals of earlier eras, and for that reason we
didn't watch but an episode or two of the program - enough to see a somewhat
contrived depiction of a much misunderstood - and, yes, underappreciated -
era. And, despite all of Weiner's
efforts to ignore or gloss over those better elements of of the
post-war era, it's exactly those
qualities - romance, honesty, realism and 'happy days' - that have attracted so
many viewers, despite the poetic license to alter the true flavor of the era,
which wasn't quite as bad as it was made to appear.
Yes, the rich, white men could be bullies who took advantage
of 'the softer sex,' and who played into racism of the times to some extent.
But, it wasn't quite as black and white
from what you would get watching the series.
It was an era before health care, education and housing costs have all
but wiped out the middle class, and perhaps a nostalgic quality to that ,
alone, though the writers do their best to depict the era in a
depressing light. Or, perhaps, it's more the human failing. Again,
the writing is done to appeal to the modern times, perhaps trying to
make us feel better than the sad sacks getting drunk and going crazy
before our eyes. You may have a
show set in the '60s but the writers will even admit they would color
things
with a modern view point; for example they weren't hesitant to make a
'dowdy'
(as they were called in the day) woman look even dowdier just for
effect.
Says Weiner, "I was raised by a strong woman. I have
two powerful, professional older sisters. My wife is a powerful, professional
woman. And I have four sons, so I haven't been able to pass that much on –
except the fact that [as a man] you'd better listen, and you'd better not act
like you're in the majority, and you'd better perceive the world as a human
being and not in terms of gender," he said. But, that may be exactly what
attracted women to men of the era - a strength where men were men and women
women, even if the men would go overboard.
How many times did the woman keep running back to them - or the man to
the woman. Perhaps women wanted to put
up with a sometimes over-the-top man who really showed love and care, rather
than equivocation. Even if he did sometimes drink too much or become
belligerent at times. After all,
marriage rates have only gotten worse since then.
Despite all the 'colorization' today's audience could see
through to the REAL substance of an era when there were real families, when
people dressed up and real romance
ensued. Yes, there were dress codes then
and rules that many would later rebel against, but that's exactly what many
today seem to miss and yearn for. There
was even an honesty then in the deception that existed.
Something about the debonair Don Draper ending up in a
hippie commune doing yoga just seems a bit contrived. Maybe true, and perhaps the problem with
society quickly jilted from the 'happy days' early 60s Kennedy era to the post-Kennedy 'flower children' times when men gave up their macho honesty for
squishy, phony 'feel good.' Without having seen the episode, what if Don
Draper would have NOT gone to the hippie camp and maintained more of his honest
macho-ism. I just have to assume that
Don started getting squishy to appeal more
'today.' Just to see the photo of the still
white-shirted, Madison-Avenue-looking Draper there in yoga pose with hippies
seems to say it all. Would be
interesting to hear if women preferred
the early 60s Draper or the 'yoga' era Draper. I would guess many would say the former, despite
the politically-incorrectness.
Believable? Or, more poetic license? How easy could people really CHANGE from
their early '60s persona to a totally different late-60s mindset? Matthew Weiner, the series creator, sets lead Don Draper up with a full stack of attractive qualities, then mixes in just enough self-destructiveness and amorality to repulse us.
Ideal TV fare ala Breaking Bad if you're into this sort of thing. The
postives of the early '60s era get pretty much trashed, as expected, in
typical lmodern TV screenplay.
A few comments from the peanut gallery (as they used to say):
"I love the fact, that in one points
in time all women didn't look like cheap whores, this show captures that, and
many things of that nature."
" add the lens of the '60s and the wild contrast
between today's world and that period culturally, and you have the perfect
backdrop to examine aspects of our history that seem mundane now that they've
passed, but were critical and electrifying socially at the time. It's easy to
forget how different things were in this country even 40 years ago, and that
lends a certain voyeuristic aspect to the show, as well as a visual distinction
that makes it unique from almost everything else on TV these days. Avant garde
decor and fashion of the day are jarring in comparison to what we consider chic
or stylish today.'
"I think it can be a good show but it
just gets boring after a while. I liked season one and the Whole 'who's Don
Draper' arc alright but I didn't find much interesting in season 2 and finally
gave up in season three a couple of eps in. It is a lot like the Sopranos in
that some episodes are really good but you have to wade through mountains of
boring garbage to get there and have it make sense."
“Mad Men” is the flagship of
the new Intellectual Vegetable Television complex, the kind of meticulously
crafted TV that the formerly bookish spend their intellectual leisure taking
in. It’s reached the point where lacking cable is worse than announcing you’re
illiterate. “But I stayed in and read Dante,” you whisper, feebly. Why are you
being like that? everyone asks. Dante was agesago. Why aren’t you taking advantage of the Golden
Age of Television and being part of The Conversation?A'
" I've seen
a few episodes. The sets, the interiors, and the clothing are
fascinating....but for me, it felt like "there was no *there* there."
None of the characters seemed particularly interesting or memorable to me, and
everyone just seemed kind of "empty."
I can't
enjoy a show about "empty" people.
Also - my
parents were young-marrieds in the 1960s. But they were university people and
listening to them talk about what they did (had dinners with the international
grad students where different couples cooked food from their countries, went to
plays and concerts, refinished furniture) seems so much more interesting than
the slick surface world Mad Men presents..."
So, perhaps Mad Men appeals to a certain type of person
willing to while away hours on a program that really goes nowhere, tries to
preach a little. Perhaps, as one commented, the contrasting atmosphere of a
bygone era had some appeal and the soap-opera-like characters appeal to those
who like soap operas, maybe. Or, if you like the phony world of advertising
maybe that's another appeal of the show.
But, certainly, the essence of the 1960s is missing. It's really a show
about characters. Though time moves on, apparently the characters go nowhere,
really.
Why has the this program, set in the so-called repressive era
of the 1950s and '60s rung so true with
so many today?
Even though Hollywood has gone out of its way to portray the
early part of the '60s in a negative light where men were men and womenwere
downtrodden with racism pervailing and all - and with the end of the '60s a
little more romanticised. But, apparently it's the EARLY 60s, repression and
all, that seems to appeal to alot of people, today.
Women have commented that they would like to go back and live
in that period. This is younger women
who weren't even born then and older women who would like to return to those
days.
Many say that there was REAL love then as compared to today
in the somewhat manufactured society we now live in under technology's mighty
reign, where a date is a text away rather than a more personal phone call. Love letters, by the way, are a thing of the past. Of course, nobody would want to try to
decipher my handwriting, which has gotten only worse with lack of opportunity.
Somehow, even though men may have been more sexist then, it
was a GENUINE sexism without fake airs. Men admitted to being sexist , yet
there was still real love. Whereas today, if there is real love, it's often
hidden somewhere within the layers of technology. Phony sentiment where men are
told to 'play the game' and treat women a certain way even if it's not really
'them'.
The women's movement in recent decades has loved to make fun
of the Leave It To Beaver era and June with her pearls and high heels in the
kitchen washing dishes. But, in fact, that is exactly what a large segment of
women, and perhaps men, want today. A
real family life, even if over-glamorized, where women (and men) dress up..
Maybe that is one of the things that's missing today. A lack of dress code - and rules, in
general. Maybe having a set of guidelines wasn't so bad,
afterall. Could that not be beneficial and help towards a more organized,
interesting life. And what's wrong if men are men and women are women? Today , the sexes have so much closed in on
each other one can instantly pull a
Trans-Jenner. Was it not a more
refreshing time not to have to see people altering their appearances - and sexes
- or, maybe we just like seeing others go through it to make ourselves feel
better. Or, then, maybe it's just prurient interest for titillation value more
than anything.
So, for all the fun that's been made of Ozzie and Harriet and
Father Knows Best, maybe it's all coming back to roost. I loved those shows as a kid- and today would
rather watch them than most anything that's on TV today, including Mad
Men. One could say those early shows
were contrived, too, but there was a certain honesty in those defined
roles.
For what sexism and racism there was back then - and there
may have been a lot, the fac t of the matter is that people still got along -
and better, perhaps , than they do today. If you're a white person how many
black friends do you have, or vice versa? Probably none. Poverty was one-third
among blacks -and society in general- of what it is today. And, outside the
South, races probably got on better then than they do now. I cannot recall all the bickering and racist
accusations then as we hear today. Ask
someone who lived then and now which era saw races getting along better, and, e
ven with 60 years of so-called healing and trillions of dollars of government
busing, wellfare, food stamps, etc. they'll probably tell you there's not a lot of difference between then
and now, if anything then was better.
So,
in summation, why all the fuss over Mad Men? Something to do with your
time. And, if you are one who can sit in front of TV for hours watching
something that's relaxing and enjoyable to you, more power to you. Your
friends may watch it and so you watch it and then you share some
thoughts. OK, fine. But, if you're looking for a true depiction or
period piece from a bygone era with real drama, intrigue and TOP
CHARACTER ACTORS why not watch a singular movie classic like 'Sunset
Boulevard.' In two hours you can watch a true epic from a screen writer
who lived the times and part - and save yourself a lot of wasted
hours.
