Mad Men Musings

Posted by Rob Walker on August 13, 2007
Posted Under: Entertainment,Mad Men musings,Reviews

The primary client in the most recent installment of Mad Men was, of all companies, Bethlehem Steel. Since this follows Lucky Strikes and Right Guard in an aerosol can, I’m getting the feeling that the show’s creators like picking brands and products and firms that seemed mighty in 1960, and are irrelevant, marginal, or gone today. (Bethlehem Steel dissolved in 2003.) Anyway, protagonist Don makes one mildly interesting comment – about advertising’s frequent role of telling us something we already knew but hadn’t thought about lately.I thought maybe that would be the subject of today’s Musings, but this turned out to be Pete’s episode. He’s the junior agency guy with big ambitions and all that. We learn that he’s from some kind of blueblood family, and his cartoonishly WASP pop sneers at the ad business as a disgrace to the family name.

Later, we can kind of see Pop’s point. Since the initial pitch meeting sputtered, Bethlehem’s honcho is staying in New York overnight to give the agency another crack at new ideas. Pete is given the job of entertaining the codger – an assignment that, so far as I could tell, boiled down to lining up a couple of hookers. It’s never quite made clear that that’s what the young women are, but I’m not sure what other conclusion we’re supposed to draw. It’s all handled rather matter-of-factly.

Now, I’m not in the ad business, and never was. So I don’t know. But was this standard operating procedure at one time?

In any case, later in the episode when Don wants Pete fired, the move is blocked because the agency can’t afford to alienate the old-line power families of New York.

What’s interesting about all this is that it suggests 1960 was not, perhaps, the moment of ad-agency all-powerfulness that some observers of the show have suggested. Instead, maybe, it was a time when admen were still trying to shake their image as sleazy hucksters. Maybe they were trying to become respectable members of the professional class, but — suits and posh offices and suburban homes and fancy martinis aside — not quite making it yet.

Footnote: Clearly my Mad Men musings have had little to do with the show as, you know, a show. Basically, I’m not sure I’d be watching if I didn’t happen to have an interest in advertising, and how that business/practice/cultural form changed over the course of the 20th century. However, Time’s James Poniewozik makes a fairly convincing case for the show as pure entertainment, “showing an intriguing ability to change itself up from week to week.”

Further diversion may be found at MKTG Tumblr, and the Consumed Facebook page.

Reader Comments

Now that it’s apparent that the 60’s thing is just an allegory for our society, it’s even more interesting. And it was slow to get going, but now we’re going somewhere with the plot. If you haven’t seen them yet, there’s a very funny site that has 2 minute “plays” of the highlights of each episode. They’re better than the show. The exchange between Betty and little Glenn here is hysterical:
http://www.unboundedition.com/content/view/1954/50/

#1 
Written By kelly on August 13th, 2007 @ 5:08 pm

I’m watching it for the same reasons. And ad people today are still trying to shake the “sleazy hucksters” yoke.

#2 
Written By David Burn on August 13th, 2007 @ 5:12 pm

mad men is about american identity… how citizens perceived themselves one way, oblivious to the numbing dumbing sameness of their conformity. draper gets to play anti-hero because he knows that it’s all a facade, courtesy of that purple heart that he pulls out in times of trouble. little does he know what the 60s and 70s hold in store for him.

and the story of 20th century america is how mass media — sponsored content, not subscribed — came to shape that american identity more so than church, state or family.

#3 
Written By greg 7sins on August 14th, 2007 @ 8:25 pm

American identity? Give me a break! Read _The Man in the Grey Flannel Suit_. You’ve just described Sloan Wilson’s book, not this show.

I’ve watched Mad Men for the advg hook as well, but it’s a serious snooze. The characters are all two-dimensional stereotypes; the men are sexist, asshole opportunists; the women are either passive naifs or sluts. The suburbs are bad. Rich people are mean. Marriage is empty. The writers hit you over the head with plot points. Last episode was all but unwatchable, the way they kept informing us that the copywriters were jealous of the short story writer. The scene with the guy ripping up the magazine was so retarded, I had to avert my eyes.

#4 
Written By carrie on August 20th, 2007 @ 9:45 pm

Trackbacks

  1. TV with MeeVee  on August 13th, 2007 @ 3:27 pm