It's a quiet, more deliberately paced television show than we've seen in a long time on non-premium cable (or ever?), and for some reason, the workplace-based show soothes me on Sunday nights as I fitfully think of the week ahead. And makes me yearn for a time when everyone had an office with a couch and could take 3-hour lunches. But that's another post.
The Atlantic has an interesting piece this month on why Mad Men works, and why it sometimes doesn't. I laughed at Benjamin Schwarz' comment that we like Mad Men because the New York Times' Style section tells us to (funny 'cuz it's true), but I don't buy into his theory that we like the un-PC elements of Mad Men because they make us feel a smug satisfaction, that we are so far beyond the implicit racism/sexism/classism of the early 60s. I think any other show would dwell on these elements, whereas Mad Men weaves the conventional wisdom of the time into the fabric of the show far better than other television dramas I've seen in the past. It serves to inform the characters rather than as a prop, or blunt reminder of the period setting -- I think it's a well-informed exercise in showing rather than telling, a mistake so many blundering narratives make. Just one girl talking. Anyhoo, his take on Betty Draper/January Jones' acting is spot on, though -- I hadn't been able to pin down what was off with her character but I've always thought Betty rang a bit false...
Head over to the Atlantic to read the whole piece:
No comments:
Post a Comment