for I have sinned. It’s been two weeks since my last confession.
This is how Peggy’s sister, Anita, begins her confession. She then admits to taking money at the laundromat and also taking the Lord’s name in vain. Anita then pauses, seems to ponder what she wants to say next, and then speaks again, hesitantly at first:
And I’m … I’m so angry, father … I’m so angry at my little sister. She’s causing my mother so much pain … She had a child out of wedlock. She seduced a married man. It’s a terrible sin, and she acts like it didn’t even happen. And I hate her for it. I feel so guilty about it … but everybody keeps falling all over themselves, trying to help her, and she goes on like nothing happened. Nothing at all.
So much there. In very few words a volume of subtext, pain, accusation, revenge, jealousy, and denial.
Anita stole. I’m not saying she pulled off a bank heist, or swiped money from a blind man’s tin cup, but it was stealing none-the-less. She chooses to twice use the word “took” rather than “stole.” It softens it, doesn’t it? I’m not blaming her, most of us would chose to distance ourselves from the coldest , most accusatory term.
But she pulled no punches when it came to Peggy. She not only laid out her sister’s sin in elaborate detail, she also made sure to portray her sister in the worst light. Possibly, she even deliberately misinterpreted events to make her sister look even more the sinner, but I believe there is another interpretation.
We don’t know what Peggy told her family, but I doubt it was that she seduced a married man. I imagine she mentioned the father was married, and Anita filled in the rest. The truth as we witnessed it is that Pete pursued Peggy without any initial encouragement on her part. She allowed him, a then engaged man, into her bedroom, and that can legitimately be laid down at her door, but she didn’t seduce a married man.
Even the later scene in Pete’s office wasn’t a seduction on Peggy’s part. Again, she quickly acquiesced to Pete’s proposition, perhaps even harbored fantasies about making love at work, but she was not the pursuer, but rather the pursued. Anita’s version of events has Peggy as some femme fatale, some destroyer of the covenant of marriage, a seductress stalking her prey, and we know that’s not the truth.
Anita, angry at Peggy, covetous of her sister’s freedom, might believe it to be true, but more than that she seems intent on Father Gil believing that to be the case. Peggy’s confession would be quite different, but he doesn’t have the benefit of knowing that, and because the words were said in the confessional he also has no reason to doubt Anita.
Why does Anita jump to that conclusion though? Presuming all she knows is that the father is married, and I can’t imagine Peggy saying much more, why does she assume that Peggy seduced Pete? Why not Pete seduced Peggy or, considering her sister’s distraught state, why not Pete forced himself on Peggy?
I say it’s because she isn’t kidding when she says she’s angry at her sister. In fact, she isn’t just angry, she’s fucking pissed. So pissed that she can’t imagine a scenario where her sister isn’t completely to blame. And if she’s to blame, she got off really lightly.
What about me, father? My troubles? What about me being good? For what?
Where’s my reward? I don’t seduce married men. I don’t come to church hungover. I take care of my children! What about me, father?
Father Gil tells her she’ll get her reward in heaven, but that’s cold comfort. He tells her that she loves her sister and she seems to reluctantly agree, but none of this fixes anything. He also tells Anita it’s not her place to judge her sister, even as he begins to judge Peggy.
And then Father Gil tells her that she should forgive her sister, because she isn’t as strong as Anita. People are analyzing the last scene a lot and wondering the priest’s intentions, but I think some of it is laid out here. He pronounced Peggy weak based on Anita’s interpretation of events. He mistakenly felt like he had the full story.
In light of that, handing Peggy an egg to give to her child doesn’t seem strictly benevolent. Perhaps it’s meant to be a kind act, because Jesus teaches to love the sinner even as you hate the sin, and because He frowns on the stoning of whores, but there seems to be little room for doubt that Father Gil judged her a sinner. But more than a sinner, because according to his faith she is as we all are, but also weak and wanton. He doesn’t seem to see her sin as having given into temptation, but being the one who tempted someone else away from the path of righteousness and then abandoned the child, the result, of her sins.
I believe that Anita’s resentment toward Peggy goes back long before the baby, but the catalyst, the reason for her confession which seemed awfully new for someone who’d confessed two weeks prior, was seeing her sister be singled out by Father Gil.
If there’s anything The Bible isn’t short on it’s parents playing favorites. And, often, the “P” in parent should be capitalized lest there be a stray bold of lightning. Anyone raised in the Catholic Church, especially in the time period of Mad Men, would consider a priest God’s earthly agent. To have his favor is to have His favor.
A father’s favor, God’s favor, is the stuff of evocative fiction. Ask John Steinbeck, if you have a Ouija Board, that is. The whole premise of East of Eden is how we are constantly living the story of Cain and Abel, not just in our religious lives, but within our family lives.
The character of Adam in East of Eden represents at different points in the novel Adam (duh!), Abel, and God. As a boy his father loves him best, prefers him to his brother, Charles, and loves his gifts best of all. (Although he gave his dad a puppy and what man in his right mind is anti-puppy?) As a young man he loves a deceitful woman who gives birth to two sons. And as an old man he prefers one son, Aaron, over another son, Caleb. And the cycle begins again until he gives his blessing to the less favored son.
From East of Eden:
“Two stories have haunted us and followed us from our beginning,” Samuel said. “We carry them with us like invisible tails — the story of original sin and the story of Cain and Abel.”
Anita’s issue with Peggy is chock full of both. Eve, the temptress, the seducer, the cause of The Great Fall, who would surely seduce a married man without a qualm. Abel, the one who found favor with God even though he wasn’t necessarily the better person.
The above scene from East of Eden has a character relate the Cain and Abel story, refreshing the reader and the other characters about the details, and another character points out that “No story has power, nor will it last, unless we feel in ourselves and true of us.”
Adam says that he doesn’t really understand the story, feels that Cain was treated poorly by God. He didn’t understand why both men gave what they had — Abel being a shepherd, gave a firstling of his flock, and Cain, being a farmer gave the fruit of the ground — but only one garnered God’s favor. Later on he forgets this moment of compassion and understanding, and shows favor to one child over another, even though both gave the best they had.
I can imagine that Cain’s anger felt righteous and good, just as Anita’s confession seemed righteous and good. Both of them gave their best only to see favor given to a sibling that they feel deserved it less.
And then there is Jesus’s story about The Prodigal Son. It’s a parable because we know the story isn’t literal, and that this is one of those times that the father in the story is, well, really Father. A man has two sons. One is a deadbeat who takes his inheritance and leaves home, maybe he initially gets a job in advertising, but eventually herds swine. Pigs are not kosher so the son has clearly hit rock bottom. He comes dragging home and his father celebrates his return. The good son, the loyal child, the non-swine herder, does his own rendition of what about me, father? My troubles? What about me being good? For what?
Anita is not an unsympathetic character. We follow Peggy around and we know her truth, our allegiance naturally goes to her, but Anita has a good point. She is the one who probably schleps mom to the doctor and the hairdresser and church. And now she’s raising Peggy’s kid and taking him to the doctor and getting up with him in the middle of the night and raising him. Peggy drops in once in a while, after the dinner dishes have been cleared, and if the prodigal had her way she would never even say goodnight to her child.
Their mother would kill the fatted calf for Peggy at a moment’s notice. And Father Gil likes her a lot. But Anita is giving the best that she has, her version of the fruit of the ground…
And it isn’t nearly good enough.
So she confesses her sins — swiping coins, taking the Lord’s name in vain, and being angry at her sister, whose sin is so much bigger than anything Anita has ever done. And the anger feels righteous and good, as does removing the blinders from the eyes of Father Gil.
From East of Eden:
Samuel said, “There’s an advantage to listening to the words. God did not condemn Cain at all. Even God can have a preference, can’t he? Let’s suppose God liked lamb better than vegetables. I think I do myself. Cain brought him a bunch of vegetables maybe. And God said, ‘I don’t like this. Try again. Bring me something I like and I’ll set you alongside your brother.’ But Cain got mad. His feelings were hurt. And when a man’s feelings are hurt he wants to strike at something, and Abel was in the way of his anger.”
Bless me, father, for I have sinned, but please see that my sister has sinned more. I took coins, but she stole a husband.
Why am I the only one being punished?
***
Speaking of Cain, he was the original hobo. The original outcast. And he carried a mark on his forehead, not to condemn him, but to protect him. Don relates to the hobo, the outsider. Don was the not the favored son, that was Adam. And his actions inadvertently lead to the death of his brother.
Just throwing that out there.
68 Responses to “Bless Me, Father…”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
CP–I wonder about the parish grapevine. Somebody upthread observed that the baby must have been an open secret in the 'hood, with Anita suddenly turning up with a new baby after not being pregnant, and with Peggy not being anywhere to be seen for several months. It may also have been that the family went to the priest when they found out about Peggy being in the hospital, for back then babies had to be baptized right away or they might end up in Limbo.
He was clumsy in the way he brought it up, but I wouldn't infer that his knowledge was only through the confessional–he sounded pretty weary when Anita confessed, like he was waiting for something like this to bubble up out of either mom or sis.
I've been repeating myself ad nauseum about Gil's revelation that he enjoyed the guitar plus his informal grace–he's going to be one of those folk Mass priests when Vatican II comes down. He's already itching to get out of that long dress and into some sandals and a dashiki; he just doesn't know it yet.
I didn't mean to imply that Peggy not wanting her son was unnatural. I completely understand her reasons for that. (Heck, I'm not sure if I want children myself and I'm a few years older than she is.) It's the self-delusion and emotional disconnection that his existence has caused her to develop that worry me. On the rare occasions when she actually looks at the kid, her expression is so cold and distant. It reminds me a little bit of Dexter, in some ways. Not that I think she kills people, you understand, just that she doesn't seem to feel anything for him other than a vague sense of obligation forced on her by her family.
I agree that it probably would've been healthier for her, mentally, if she had been allowed to give the baby up for adoption and not think about him anymore.
"Thanks for pointing out “Anita†was on Wonderfalls.
No problem.
I'm such a nerd that way.
Speaking of which, I completely forgot to mention that "Vicky" was played by Marguerite Moreau, one of my girlhood heroes from the Mighty Ducks movies. (At least, I'm pretty sure that's her. IMDb doesn't list the character at all.)
*****
Entirely off topic, but irresistible to the Whedonite: "Kinda like Vampire Willow being labeled as “kinda gay†as a throw away joke, but then Non-vampire Willow became quite gay a couple years later."
Joss knew either Willow or Xander was going to discover they were gay during season 4, but he hadn't decided yet when they made 'Doppelganger' (in season 3). The running gag of "Is Xander gay (too)?" started with Larry in the locker room and continued all the way through the end of the series, mostly utilizing Spike and Andrew. [/fangirl]
I don't know if in this series we will see the Draper daughter as a teenager, but I'm willing to bet that if we do, she will be a heavy drinker and have problems. There's a thread beginning here that shows alcohol usage and preparation by this young child and yes, I know personally that rehabs are full of people who say that's how they got started. But, you can't really blame the daughter. The parents aren't really rearing these children well. Did you notice how the camera zoomed in on the daughter pouring Don's drink with mostly vodka which to me signalled that she was fixated on the the alcohol rather than the juice. But, I agree, back in those days, parents didn't relate to the fact that their drinking might influence their kids.
Robin,
Yep, I've read that about making someone gay. But the lines could be either throwaway or significant, depending, as they turned out to be for Xander.
I think it's time for Joss to make the boy the gay one. Not Andrew heavily implied gay, but out and about gay.
Anyhow, with Sally, they can either pick up the drinking thread or let it go. At the end of the series, if Sally is never a heavy drinker, nobody will see this as an unfulfilled plot line, because it didn't have that much weight. If they do pick it up then the viewer will see it as having been foreshadowing.
As long as we're geeking out, Roberta pointed out that Anita is the Trekker on West Wing that got reprimanded by Josh for wearing a Star Trek pin to work.
I'm joining all these threads late — just watched the episode for the first time last night. This summer's medical adventure has arrived.
This Monday was bad; next week will be worse. I have been promised.
Deb — great post (#22). You're right: there is nothing pathological about not wanting a child. Or about changing your mind, once you have one. The beauty of my role in the lives of my stepkids is that it has gotten to expand as their mom's role has changed. We all change as we get older. We might get more interested in some things (like work), and less interested in others.
Sometimes, a woman's interest in being a constant presence in the daily lives of her children does change. This has been a huge benefit for me.
If we women can see each other as people who continue to grow and change, long after we have children — see each other without judgment, I guess I'm saying — I think our existence together will be a lot easier. For us and our kids.
As for growing up around things like alcohol use: I think I can speak a little to that. I was a kid with a lot of adult responsibilities, and I remember bringing my dad a beer shandy (beer + lemonade), one day in the backyard. I might have been — what, eight? Nine?
I overdid it with the beer. There was a lot more of that than lemonade, because my siblings (I have a lot of them) had pretty much polished it off. So I filled the glass with mostly beer, thinking, Heck, it's Dad: he won't mind.
The drink wasn't to his taste. I could see it on his face with the first sip. But he's a nice guy, so he didn't tell me. "Fine," he said. "It's fine."
Now, I have maybe two drinks a week (three to four if I'm on vacation). I grew up in the Seventies, surrounded by drinking adults. And obviously, I was a little worker, and I knew how to make cocktails. Kids still had to be neither seen nor heard in my era — but we had to be useful, for sure.
So, will Sally Draper grow up to be an alcoholic? I side with Don on this one. Nobody knows why anyone does anything. Least of all me.
I was thinking that if you survey an AA group, you're going to get a percentage of people who were taught to mix drinks as kids, maybe a high percentage, and that'll feel like one leads to the other.
But it doesn't say anything about what a control group of non-alcoholics would say about mixing drinks as kids, if the percentage is higher or lower. I don't have an answer for that.
I think Sally would be in her late teens assuming the pattern keeps up (seasons taking place in even years with a year in between). I think Sally would be about 16-18 when the series ends.
Here is what I think about Sally and the drinking.
I don't for one minute think that we are setting up a teenage alcoholic storyline. I think, as Glass said upthread (comment 36), we are perhaps allowing for one at some time in the future, but as has been pretty much covered in this discussion, it could go either way.
I think Weiner was showing us two things. (Probably more, but I'm going with two.) One is, the cavalier attitude towards alcohol. Children didn't drink because they were children, but they were not kept away from alcohol, because alcohol was not considered a bad thing. As rampant as drinking still is today (and probably always will be), it is held in a different light. Sally pouring drinks and being able to sneak drinks is just one more example of how different it was then, like drinking in the office or everyfreakingwhere and anyfreakingtime.
The other is that this is another example of how unprotected the kids are, and in particular, how little attention Don pays to them. The way he walked past Sally as the Creative department paraded into his office was frankly chilling. He seems to be bonding more with Bobby, and I hope that's not a direction that they're taking this (Don not being as loving a father to Sally as he is to Bobby) because I just don't want to see that, even in the hands of these writers. But it was Bobby that he went to last season, Bobby he woke up and said Ask me anything.
Oh we all snuck drinks in the morning–not because of the booze but because of the GINGER ALE!! WOW!! POP!! Nobody ever let kids have pop because it was expensive. It was purchased for mixers only.
About Peggy–I really don't think anybody born after 1950, maybe even anybody born during the official "baby boom" can understand how crappy her situation was. Competent young women of legal age routinely got overruled in favor of parents or married older siblings. You weren't really considered a competent adult until you were married and even then you were subordinate to your husband.
I believe her confidentiality (by our standards) in the hospital was violated–some nurse called her family and said your sister/daughter is here and she just had a baby come deal with it–and then the family rushed in and the doctors decided they were the ones with decision making authority since obviously showing up in the ER in labor is a sign you may not be playing with a full deck.
So she's screwed–that baby would have been surrendered for an adoption except for her family. So she is angry at her family and angry at herself and trapped and if she were a little braver she should move to San Francisco or LA and start over. I wonder if that's what will happen with her.
I'm coming to the post late, but just wanted to add that in addition to Cain and Abel, the Biblical story that seemed most apropos to the Peggy/Anita conflict is the story of Mary and Martha (which appears in both Luke and John). In that story, Jesus rebukes Martha for complaining about her sister shiriking her duty; he tells the complaining Martha that Mary "has chosen wisely," or some such thing.
Now Mary had chosen to sit at the feet of Jesus and learn and Peggy has chosen to leave her child with her sister and pursue a glamorous life in Manhattan, so I realize that the parallels end at some point. But I do wonder how the Father Gil story is going to progress and whether, if he ends up on the receiving end of Anita's complaints, or if he simply gets more information, if he might feel like Mary/Peggy really did make the right choice.
I am coming to this post really, really late. I just discovered this excellent blog and I am playing catch up on Mad Men with On Demand.
I just wanted to post a comment from the perspective of a practicing traditional Catholic.
The fact that Anita is going to confession would not have seemed unusual for the time. Monthly confession is recommended and weekly confession is not out of the question – all the more so in 1962. Catholics of today don't go to confession nearly as often – but then there would have been lines at the confessionals every week.
Anita confessing her sisters sins is a common thing. Every guide to confession you read says not to do it – and every priest I know says that it's common. I know I have done it myself.
I think in addition to the 'why is it that I am good but everyone loves my sister theme' there is something else. The fact that this shows that Peggy is envied everywhere she goes. At work because she made it out of the secretarial pool, and at home because she is escaping the path of a 'good' girl (marriage and caring for parents and children).
Anita said out loud what Joan never would – 'Why does this little nothing of a girl get everything when I have been working here for years and get nothing.'
A word about confession. Fr. Gill breaking the seal of confession was shocking to me. Seriously shocking. I don't think that a priest in 1962 would have driven her alone in his car… but I KNOW he would not have broken the seal of confession in that way. Someone earlier wrote they thought the Church had changed it's stance on the seal of confession – that is NOT true. A Catholic priest can not reveal the contents of confession (or even if someone went to confession) under any circumstances.
As a Catholic I find the portrayal of Catholicism in 1962 to be fascinating. Some details have been perfect (Can you say *real* grace now Father) and some have been wrong (Mass is not the repetition of the same prayer in Latin again and again). The time period and the inclusion of a Catholic character leaves lots of openings for story arcs with the transitions in the Church in the 60s.
"I wonder about the parish grapevine. Somebody upthread observed that the baby must have been an open secret in the ‘hood, with Anita suddenly turning up with a new baby after not being pregnant, and with Peggy not being anywhere to be seen for several months."
Okay, people. I've watched the flashback episode where Peggy has the baby at least 5 times, but I'm still SUPER confused. It appears Anita WAS pregnant (quite pregnant actually). I remember being SUPER confused when Anita asks Peggy if she wants to say goodnight. I wondered if she just couldn't stand seeing a baby at all cause it reminded her too much of her own, but what's the deal? How did I miss the answer to this? Is it Peggy's baby in Anita's house? If so, where is Anita's baby? If not, I might have been imagining things.
Call me an idiot, but I need your keen eyes for this. SO confused.
Peggy gave up her baby for adoption. Her sister was pregnant around the same time. Peggy can't bear to be around children, especially a child so close in age to the one she gave up.
Also, this is just an incredibly good post.
About the seal of confession, it didn't seem to me that Father Gill told anyone or even acted directly on something someone told him. I do think he is just trying to soften Peggy up enough to get her to confide in him so he can help save her.
I agree that Anita viewing Peggy as a "seductress" which she clearly wasn't with Pete, is wrong. But I think Peggy, at least at first, totally has the hots for Father Gill. (Heck, I sure do! Colin Hanks is adorable.) Of course, Anita didn't see the once-over "hey, sexy" look Peggy gave Father Gill when they first met, all the while asking innocently, "Are you the new priest?" but WE see with that subtle look that Peggy is still aware of her womanliness, and I think, open to a new guy. It's just alarming that as she's leaving Mass (hung over no less) she totally eyes him.
Anyway, WOW, everyone. Great post. Great comments. I LOVE this blog so so much. Frankly, I spend too much time here. hehe
Thanks for the clarification, Deborah. That's what I thought! *Phew* I felt so dumb for a minute. ha. A lot of people on here were saying the baby Anita's taking care of is Peggy's, but that just didn't make sense to me!
Plus the whole parallel storyline with Pete & Trudy's adoption situation made me think for sure Peggy had placed her and Pete's baby among "the discards" as Pete's mother said. It was just too perfect for this Dychman snob to be saying that — when in fact she was talking unknowingly about her grandchild — for it not to have been written that way on purpose. Weiner & MM writers are simply genius.
Oh man, I love this show. Love this blog!
We were left in the dark until episode 5, purposely led to believe Anita's baby might be Peggy's as a red herring. Matt was surprised, though, when people continued that speculation after Anita's very pregnant belly was revealed in the New Girl flashback.
Matt was surprised, though, when people continued that speculation after Anita’s very pregnant belly was revealed in the New Girl flashback.
And so were we. It continues, the conjecture (which crosses from conjecture to really really stretching) that Anita was just pretending to be pregnant (with like, pillows?) to help cover up for Peggy, or that Anita's baby died and so she took Peggy's. Matt answered the question. Fin.