Comments

1. Chris Chambers wrote:

   Weiner is treating the times accurately–within that very narrow demographic. Their world is tiny. Events of the 60s will overtake them soon enough.

   Posted 17 Aug 2009 at 8:04 am ¶

2. cocolamala wrote:

   i notice a difference in tone and subject matter btw the two perspectives frame the black experience —

   the first does not refer to Carla’s life except in
   reference to Don Draper, et al.

   the second provides a more “insidery” perspective, including criticism of her bosses and wholly self-referential cultural touch points.

   i was just reading up on this book “the help” this weekend. a commenter on Ta Nehisi Coates’ site expressed reservations about the narrative, noting that her grandmother had been a domestic worker.

   A fictional novel authored by a Southern white woman who grew up with a black caregiver, the book’s title seemed problematic for me.

   Although the author chose to tell the stories of two black maids from the 1960s south, I see how the authors perspective might shape the narrative anyway…

   I doubt the child of a domestic worker would title a book about her parent’s experience “The Help”

   I don’t know if the child of white employers is hearing the same stories about the experiences of her black maids and caregivers, as they are telling their own children once they get home.

   and it goes from there.

   Posted 17 Aug 2009 at 8:31 am ¶

3. cocolamala wrote:

   For example, the first chapter of the novel starts out in the maid’s voice — but the first paragraphs are about the birth of the white female character.

   The book which is (supposedly about the lives of black domestic workers) does not start off with a story about the domestic worker’s own life, her childhood, her children, or how she came to be working in that small southern town…but with the birth of the little girl she is charged with taking care of.

   I found the first two pages on Amazon, and here’s a link to one southern black author’s response to these types of books.

   Posted 17 Aug 2009 at 8:47 am ¶

4. Phil Deeze wrote:

   Black care-givers/domestic workers during this time period have been characterized in shows like “I’ll Fly Away”, “Corinna, Corinna,” “Driving Miss Daisy” and many man many others.

   I think, on a small level, many white folks ENJOY these representations and harken back to a simple time when things were “better” for them. I mean, Hollywood can’t even let Chuck Berry discover rock and roll in “Back to the Future.” It’s Marty McFly appropriating and imitating Chuck Berry’s music as a contemporary kid and then going back in time, replicating Berry and then Marvin Berry’s band is just magically able to keep up. Older black folks from the early days of rock and roll/rythym and blues just LOVE that part of the flick, by the way.

   The question is were those times better because whites, in that time period, largely did not have to compete with any black man or woman for corporate jobs, comfortable lifestyles, etc? Or was it really that much better for ALL Americans?

   This is why skits like the “Niggar Family” on “Chappelle’s Show” are so funny and sad at the same time.

   When TV started to change and America was given a chance to see exactly what Florida Evans did when she left Maud’s house as a domestic, I think that was a major shift in the paradigm of the virtually nameless, faceless black female domestic worker.

   Posted 17 Aug 2009 at 10:29 am ¶

5. HighJive wrote:

   FYI, most of those Mad Men Twitterers were not sanctioned by AMC. People did it on their own, and because they became so popular, AMC let them proceed. One blogger, Adbroad, found herself with a ton of followers because of her @BettyDraper persona.

   http://adbroad.blogspot.com/2009/06/10-rules-of-twittertainment.html

   Posted 17 Aug 2009 at 9:29 pm ¶

6. Black Market Index wrote:

   I defer to TNC, who said it better than I ever could have, when it comes to the racial aspects of Mad Men (a show, by the way, which I love… not as much as some of the critics, but it has some downright amazing writing).

   http://ta-nehisicoates.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/08/race_and_mad_men.php

   Posted 18 Aug 2009 at 12:44 am ¶

7. cocolamala wrote:

   i think it’s kind of interesting that ppl can write lines for Carla on twitter. at least she’ll have some viewpoint, some kind of voice. it could be used to comment and critique how the writers treat her. or to spawn all sorts of subversive fan fic.

   Posted 18 Aug 2009 at 10:17 am ¶

8. wha...? wrote:

   But wait! It gets worse , or rather, more curiouser.

   http://community.livejournal.com/ohnotheydidnt/38366684.html

   Posted 20 Aug 2009 at 10:07 am ¶

9. Midnight Productions wrote:

   it is a whole other world or should i say time period.

   i don’t watch it in disbelief. i watch it as a very good joke ~ as in

   * ‘there is some truth to every joke’
   * ‘they couldn’t have made this up if they wanted to’
   * ‘history will repeat itself if we are unaware’

   and yes, yes, yes…i know it is fiction. but, just think…if Matthew Weiner (b. 1965 in Baltimore) was trying to capture things he saw and realized he was excluded from in the 60’s and 70’s or heard stories from his dad and grand dad about why they need to stay together as a community…then there you go.

   so to keep going along this same line (as in someone is giving us a peak into the way things really work ~ he did a great job / learned from one of the best on Sopranos) and look at the characters I have seen thus far (MM Season 1 Show 4) and believing what i know about …

   * the typical career arch with in families that are goal oriented, then

   o the work arch is — workers, engineers, artist, (brat / entitled / lost? can this be a career? – this is how i view Mike somewhat)…start cycle again. of course there are some that have multiple generation having the same type career.

   The Mad Men are artist.

   Case in point, Roger Sterling (played by John Slattery) has a daughter that came off as a brat in one of the first shows.

   o as artist, and new york – one of the know universe centers at that time in the late 50’s and early 60’s – wealth and breading was everything. noted by ~

   *the newly wedded upstart ‘Pete’ and his bride ~ new (she was i am guessing) and old money
   *the way the upstart ‘Pete’ was not fired because he was someone with no money but clout
   *the way ‘Don Draper’ hides his past
   *the way everyone is in everyone else business to find out who is really who and what’s what so they can figure out how far down their noses to look

   * the politics and networking today. they had to come from somewhere…even if it is bastardized / turned inside out by showing everyone everything via you tube and running of the mouth ad infinitum via twitter or facebook / myspace. however, we still see it
   o the passing of the torch so to speak from ‘Bertram Cooper’ (played by Robert Morse) to ‘Roger’ to ‘Don’ is a typical and still seen.

   o personally, i am actually surprised i have survived this long in the valley because dont look like the next torch carrier, however, i typically remain uncontroversial.

   ~except a very few times over one project, i got two contractors laid off and wound up working with them at another company ~ one as a contractor and the other as a manager…needless to say when things started to go sideways they went really quickly and i think it actually bit me in the back…I’ll have to think about that one.

   o …anywise, the each one, reach for one, and teach one is still alive and well in the ‘network’

   * the comments and the treatment of non-people. it is still the same…
   o like in one of the first shows, the waiter that got reprimanded for being to talkative when he did not talk about the cigarettes he smoked

   o the treatment of the female Jewish department store owner

   o the taboo of female contraception and the gynecologist visit

   o depending on where I am and how i am dressed or not dressed, i still get the cold shoulder…

   ~ just the other day when i was waiting to order some food, guy walked right up as if i was not even there and ordered before me…one of the staff saw this and made sure my breakfast was cooked before his…but there you go.

   i could go on all day about what I’ve seen on that show and

   * how it really could be a harmonized view of that time period in NYC / how advertising did show people what they needed and needed to be

   * how the people of the 50s and 60s needed something to believe in and they bought the ads – hook, line, and sinker – and tried to model their lives to that level

   * or how this show is in some sort of way ‘we are where we are today as a nation because this is what we where’ look back time machine.

   but yup…sometimes fiction is truer than life. and i believe it.

   Posted 20 Aug 2009 at 5:42 pm ¶

10. Robin D. wrote:

    All of those twitter accounts are unofficial fan creations.

    Posted 21 Aug 2009 at 10:42 pm ¶

11. Helen Ross/Ad Broad wrote:

    Thanks for this really interesting post, Latoya. Robin D. is right–all of the Mad Men twitter feeds are fan created. I know because I am @BettyDraper. (Thanks to HighJive for the shout above.)

    For me, tweeting as Betty is not only fun, it allows opportunity to give voice to women who had little voice at the time: pre-feminist suburban-bound housewives in the early 1960s.

    But I am careful to keep my @BettyDraper in character with the Betty that Matt Weiner has created, the repressed, complex character played superbly by January Jones.

    On the show, characters can’t say what they think unless they’re talking to another character. We, the audience, must infer their thoughts from long pauses or silent draws on a cigarette or from meaningful glances, as when Carla stares at the drink Don tops off while he offers her a ride to the station.

    But on twitter, characters can reveal thoughts they can’t articulate on TV either due to ordinary contraints of the medium or the constraints of living in 1963. It’s important to remember that constraints imposed by the era are one of the keys to the success of the show. The story wouldn’t be nearly so gripping (or believable) if 1963 characters had 2009 sensibilities.

    The commenter cocolamala suggests Clara could use her twitter feed to “critique how the writers treat her. or to spawn all sorts of subversive fan fic.”

    But I think that would destroy the necessary illusion that Mad Men characters on Twitter are the same as they are on TV. Mad Men is the story of ordinary people living ordinary lives, doing the best with the cards they’ve been dealt. It isn’t a vehicle for polemics. It’s entertainment. But entertainment can prove to have the bigger impact. I once heard the head of the Ms. Foundation say that the movie Thelma and Louise did more for the women’s movement than 20 years of research studies and political tomes.

    I forwarded your blog post to the person who writes @Carla_Madmen, curious about her thoughts. Which I’ve included in a post, for anyone interested.
    http://adbroad.blogspot.com/2009/08/mad-mens-carla-raises-consciousness-140.html

    Posted 22 Aug 2009 at 12:11 pm ¶

12. SAL wrote:

    Latoya,
    What did you think about the comments on The Root about your story on Mad Men? I felt like the majority of readers really wanted to give a pass on the portrayals of race in the show, even though it’s written by someone born in 1965 and, most importantly, the ad world and society are still extremely segregated. Just curious. I was very surprised at how defensive the comments were (or, actually, not). Dissapointed, really.

    Posted 23 Aug 2009 at 4:44 pm ¶