The Picture of Sheila
The picture of Sheila on Paul’s desk? That was foreshadowing. Someone is going to see it; someone other than Sally. Someone who is none too comfortable with it.
Just sayin’.
The picture of Sheila on Paul’s desk? That was foreshadowing. Someone is going to see it; someone other than Sally. Someone who is none too comfortable with it.
Just sayin’.
I know about your blog, it’s Basket of Kisses, right? I love it, I love it.
—Matthew Weiner
August 20th, 2008 at 7:32 am
Deb, ITA that someone at SC will lose their shit finding out about Paul and Sheila. Hmmm….Wonder who?
It was good to see Sheila’s picture on Paul’s desk after all the abuse his character took the other other week. Loved that in that moment, Sally’s mind opened up a little, I hope.
August 20th, 2008 at 8:27 am
Deb I thought it was a lovely casual picture which Don’s daughter assumed was his maid. She then moved in for the kiddie kill with the talk of kissing and lying on top of. Paul was very composed when he could have run out of the room screaming
August 20th, 2008 at 8:37 am
He’s still a poser. Pete had a picture that big in a frame on his desk in the pilot, but they were engaged. He loves the controversy; loves that most people walk into his office and force themselves not to say anything.
August 20th, 2008 at 9:57 am
I do believe that someone will speak to him, and I would guess it will be Roger. Sally assumed it was a maid, but adults know you don’t keep pictures of maids on your desk. Sure, he’s a poser, let’s see how far he’s willing to go for his radical pose.
August 20th, 2008 at 10:54 am
Whether he’s making a point or not, Paul’s demeanor when talking to Sally about Sheila makes me think that he does really care about her as a person, not just a symbol of his own open-mindedness. What may have started out as a bold social statement seems to have turned into an actual relationship.
Or maybe Paul’s just that good of an actor, but I don’t know if Sheila would’ve stayed with him after the way he left her hanging with Joan at the party unless there was really something there.
August 20th, 2008 at 11:10 am
Am I correct? This is how I remember the scenes. Pete’s photo of Trudy was on his desk, facing him when he sits in his chair. Paul’s photo of Sheila is on a side table beneath a lamp and facing toward whoever comes into the room.
August 20th, 2008 at 11:10 am
These things are complex. Paul is young; maybe 25, maybe 29? And being driven towards someone out of rebellion, being attracted to someone who is “other” without understanding the deeper implications, this happens every day. People get married to prove something to their parents, and stay in those relationships for years. Of course real feelings develop, but mature feelings? I’m not so sure.
August 20th, 2008 at 11:11 am
Patti, yes, good catch. It’s for public display.
August 20th, 2008 at 11:15 am
You know, I wonder if Cooper has an Asian wife/ girlfriend at home? That’s quite a bit of Asiaphilia (is that a word?) for a 70-ish white woman to be putting up with. I kid…sort of
Does Don have any photos of Betty and the kids in his office? I hadn’t noticed. A lesser show would pan over to the photo of Betty as Bobbie started seducing him.
We haven’t seen much of the peripheral black characters this season. I ‘d love a scene with two of the black cleaning people noticing and commenting on Paul’s photo. I’m sure they are there emptying the trash and vacuuming every night. In fact Weiner could do a whole upstairs/downstairs spin-off of MM and I’d watch every week, even if it was just webisodes.
August 20th, 2008 at 1:09 pm
Jackie, no, he doesn’t. Or at least didn’t in S1, because Peggy greeted Betty with, “I recognized your voice”.
August 20th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
He wants people to notice, if nothing else, because it’s trendy. Remember that we’re a year away from the I Have A Dream speech, and civil rights is definitely in the air. Also, there is a gorgeous musical called No Strings starring Diahann Carroll that opened on Broadway in 1962. She plays a fashion model in Paris who falls in love with a white Pulitzer Prize-winning writer.
August 20th, 2008 at 4:05 pm
There’s profile of Diahann Carroll in the August issue of Vogue if anyone is interested. She says some interesting stuff about being a black woman in the entertainment industry in the 60s and 70s.
August 20th, 2008 at 4:10 pm
I have to say that it takes a certain type of bravery to do that as that time. Not just because of how many people he could be offended, but also because I’m not sure he’d have recourse if it was damaging to him professionally.
August 20th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
Glass, that’s a good point. But Paul thinks he’ll see whatever hits him as it’s coming. He’s reckless. The snotty remarks to Don are reckless. He might just have that picture as an act of defiance, without really thinking about the consequences.
Which, in case you’re wondering, yes I relate to.
August 20th, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Remember, he stole that typewriter, and some innocent girl almost got fired for it. Reckless. Entitled. And yes, a little high on the defiance.
August 20th, 2008 at 8:51 pm
I agree that Paul has the photo displayed possibly for shock value, although I don’t doubt that he does genuinely care about her.
On a slightly different note, does Paul’s new look remind anyone else of Orson Welles?
August 20th, 2008 at 9:24 pm
I have given this some thought, and I have decided that despite the fact that some feel Paul is just trying to be hip, you have to really look at it through the lenses of the time: it was not just “hip” or cool or posery to have a interracial romance at that time: it was downright career ending, relationship ending, family destroying suicide. I just don’t buy that people will go that far simply to be perceived as cool. I will give a modern example:
I was recently at a party in another part of the country, not my own (the east) and a woman was saying that companies should not give same sex benefits because there would be no way in knowing who was lying just to get benefits - I had to bite my tongue (first of all, this has been happening for years so she was clearly behind the times) - I can’t think of having read or heard about one incident since this has been going on ( which is for years) where someone “pretended” to be gay. It simply isn’t done, even today. I have many gay friends, many who live openly and happily, and even they would admit that being gay does make life harder . . it’s not something you fake to be avant garde or to get some benefit. My point being, no, I don’t think Paul is just a poser. Maybe it started that way, but I just don’t see anyone in his position going that far at that time just to prove to his friends that he’s cool. I recommend the The human Stain by Phillip Roth as a commentary on the complexities of race and racial identity and relationships during this time period to demonstrate the consequences that Paul’s actions would have had . . no no way. He may be a poser, but not because of that.
August 20th, 2008 at 9:49 pm
Though it’s still hard for me to not see Paul as a poseur (I can’t get past that damn silly scarf!), I’m wondering if our seeing him talk to Sally about it is meant to change our minds. It’s one thing to want to appear hip and cool in front of his friends or fellow employees, but would he feel the same compulsion in a conversation with a little kid? There’s no social pressure there, or social gain to be had. It might even be risky, since her father is Paul’s boss (Does Don ever come into Paul’s office, and so see the picture?). There’s no telling what a kid might say, something like “Did you know that Mr. Kinsey is dating his maid?”
August 20th, 2008 at 11:00 pm
carocat, that’s such a stupid argument (not yours, the woman at the party’s). There’s ALSO no way of knowing whether or not people marry just for benefits, and in fact, some people do. There is nothing in the law to prevent two platonic friends of different genders from marrying so that they might enjoy legal protections, health care benefits, and so on.
Again, I don’t think Paul is faking his relationship, or his feelings, for Sheila. But I think he’s a poseur.
Consider a teenage girl, top of her class, good student, cheerleader. Next thing you know, she’s dating a stoner. What’s the attraction? Did she just happen to be smitten with him? Unlikely. Probably she was initially attracted by the transgressive nature of the relationship. And maybe she stayed in part because it was transgressive and dangerous and thrilling, and in part because she got to know the guy and care about him. And she’s immature, so the joy of “being in love” is hard to distinguish from whatever “real love” is.
Meanwhile, her parents find out about it, and kick up a fuss. So of course she fights back. Who wouldn’t? And since they say there’s nothing good about him, naturally she has to come up with a counter argument. “You don’t see he’s so kind,” she says, and so now she’s kind of obligated to perceive him as kind, and be touched by his kindness.
Your daughter brings a young man in
Says “Do you like him, Pa?”
Just tell her he’s a fool, and then
You’ve got a son-in-law!
Paul is that teenage girl. I’m sure he enjoys many fine things about being with Sheila. Maybe she’s smart. Maybe she’s introducing him to a whole new world he’s deeply curious about. Maybe she’s a stevedore in bed. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t a pretentious rebelliousness about the whole thing.
August 21st, 2008 at 7:44 am
Yes Deborah, I see the distinction you ar trying to make, however, I’m still gonna give Paul some credit. It’s just damn risky for him no matter what.
Oh, and the other thing, yeah it was ridiculous (I hope you got that I felt that way!). In fact, I think it’s more likely that two heterosexual people would get married for benefits than two same sex hetereosexual people would declare they were gay for benefits!
I hope that also my post about this conversation demonstrates how closed minded people still are, and that, I believe is the whole point that Weiner et al are trying to make with Mad Men . . thinks haven’t changed as much as we think.
Finally, thank you for this blog. Last year I was posting to the AMC site but its impossible to navigate and the people have gotten very vitrolic and immature and frankly, it’s no fun now. I will remain here.
August 21st, 2008 at 7:51 am
Carocat, I definitely got it from your first comment. And it does ring true with the ‘undertheme’ (made that one up) of the show; that things are not so different now.
I had a hard time with the AMC blog last season. You’d find some awesome comments, but a lot that were, as you say, immature. And the volume was too intense to sift through, and again, as you mentioned, it’s tough to navigate. I did a little better over at TV Squad, where it was smaller and more intimate, and where Bob Sassone really cares about the show. But then we started this, and we created a place where we ourselves would want to be, where we go a little deeper than open threads and quizzes. Glad you found us.
August 21st, 2008 at 7:54 am
Carocat, like you, I’m giving Paul a lot of leeway! This man is risking his career and his life dating Sheila, even if he is a poser.
Then again, most of the characters are posers in some way on this show, if one thinks about it….
August 21st, 2008 at 8:36 am
Been thinking about what we actually know about Paul. Cold hard facts.
The evidence of poseurdom/douchiness:
- stole the typewriter and let someone else take the blame
- “Death Is My Client”
- that Roy Rogers scarf
- waxing about Montclaire
- thinking that getting along with “negroes” in Jersey City made for an interesting story
But Shiela wouldn’t qualify, because all we know is:
a) he calls her his baby;
b) he keeps her picture on his desk; and
c) he didn’t want her to talk with Joan (suspicious, but still circumstantial)
The point being that everything we think we know about their relationship is from Joan. And is Joan an objective party? Of course not - they used to date.
Now, we like Joan and consider her a speaker of the truth, but all this speculation about Paul and Shiela (the negative stuff anyway) is based on heresay. And as I’ve mentioned, Joan was way over the line with that stuff - she acted horribly to Shiela and was unnecessarily cruel to Paul.
Is it possible that Joan’s dissatisfied with the doctor (who we’ve not met yet), and looking to crush anyone else’s good time (particularly an ex’s good time)? Raise your hand if you think Joan’s above that …
So what can we make of Paul and Shiela’s relationship? From the cold hard facts, not much.
August 21st, 2008 at 9:28 am
@B. Cooper
So what can we make of Paul and Shiela’s relationship? From the cold hard facts, not much.
True. We’ve barely seen them together (a few seconds at the party), and not at all when they are alone together. Once we do, we might get a better idea.
that Roy Rogers scarf
Hey! Don’t go ragging on Roy Rogers, even indirectly! Roy Rogers was cool!
August 21st, 2008 at 9:31 am
B. Cooper, you make good points, but I don’t think Joan was all that over the line. (I have a post I saved about that…) As we enter the party, Paul is provoking Joan about her boyfriend, being snotty about him and pretending they hadn’t yet met. Paul and Joan bristle with anger at one another, I’m not willing to blame either.
carocat, welcome to the site. Roberta said more or less everything I would have said.
August 21st, 2008 at 9:50 am
Mel - cool DESPITE the scarf, not because of it …
August 21st, 2008 at 11:04 am
Hey kids, re-watching (I’ve been home sick all week)–the photo was on Paul’s desk. Sally walked in and sat at his desk. It faced her. The camera angle was confusing.
August 21st, 2008 at 11:16 am
Ooops! Sorry…
August 21st, 2008 at 11:22 am
s’okay.
August 21st, 2008 at 9:29 pm
You have to remember there is a double standard for the sexes. Even now. For a white guy to date a black woman it is and was considered exotic. Also if they date Asian women.
The big fear for the whites at that time (primarily the men) was if it became acceptable for white men to date black women, then the ultimate horror would happen, Black men dating white women.
I tell you that is where it all stems from. White men just did not want the big strapping, black studly men taking their women. I could go on about Penis envy! White men are afraid and rightly so (I have discovered medically) that black men are better endowed.
We had a conversation about this at work and I work with a lot of blacks. They had me rolling with laughter.
This latest movie with Will Smith (Hancock) is the first movie where the black main character had a love scene with a white woman. They usually cast an Indian, Asian, Hispanic woman as the romantic lead.
Now see if that don’t open a can of worms.
August 21st, 2008 at 10:24 pm
As always, sage words from Mr. Cooper.
We keep forgetting that this is Mad Men. It’s possible for a character to be admirable and an asshole in one fell swoop. Don is a prick but he’s fair-minded and honorable (+ gorgeous). Pete is a sniveling weasel but you have empathy for him. Betty is annoying and manipulative, but a lot of her complaints are completely valid, and you’re on her side. Roger is a cad, but he’s utterly charming.
It’s not one or the other. It’s both. Paul is a poseur–there’s never been any question about that, but that doesn’t mean his feelings for Sheila aren’t genuine. I’m a Black woman who’s dated White guys in this day and age and have encountered problems. I can only imagine what it must have been like in 1962. Personally, I think that’s a lot of grief to put yourself through just to appear hipper than thou. I can’t imagine someone willingly putting themselves out there like that–especially pseudo hipster intellectuals, who are bigger cowards than anybody. They talk a good game, but when it comes down to actually delivering the goods, they’re like ghosts–invisible. Paul is still right there in the mix. I gotta give it to him for that.
It may turn out that Sheila is nothing more than a hood ornament for Paul, but, if you think about it, is Betty’s situation with Don any different?
August 21st, 2008 at 10:30 pm
He got revenge for Sheila too. He outed Joan’s age.
I agree, it seems a lot of the characters have things we can love and hate. They are very 3 dimensional. I think that is why I think the show is so acclaimed.
August 22nd, 2008 at 3:47 am
I think that there just may be something more to Paul’s relationship with Sheila. I looked at her photo and it isn’t just a mug shot/portrait, it shows a relaxed person who I’d bet believes the man loves her. Paul’s a poseur but he does have a private life apart the game he goes to every day.
August 22nd, 2008 at 8:52 am
The fear of Black men dating white women is old in this country and has to do with fears about miscegenation as well as fears about upsetting social hierarchies.
It was socially acceptable for white male slave owners to rape and have children with their Black female slaves because that was a way of asserting authority, creating terror, maintaining white male power over African-Americans and women, and increasing their slave labor force. Given that, to this day, men are supposed to have more social power than women, it doesn’t upset any racial or sexual hierarchies for white men to date Black women (or other women of color).
At the same time, I agree with hullaballoo and others that Paul is taking real social and professional risks in dating Sheila, even if there is an element of poseur-ship in his doing so. (I’m still not as convinced as others that he’s a poseur).
The reason there is so much fear about Black men dating white women–a fear that’s been exploited by the McCain campaign in their ads of young white women associated with or excited about the Obama campaign–is that white women are considered white male property, and what belongs to white men must not be ceded to a Black man. By definition, in the racist (sub)conscious, a Black men having sex with a white woman is rape, or at least theft: Black men violating white men’s property. Also, white women get coded as pure and virtuous, and god forbid that purity be “tainted.”
Black women, on the other hand, get coded (by racism) as already tainted, not pure and virtuous, so really they’re just waiting to be violated.
August 22nd, 2008 at 9:26 am
Inanna, that’s a very cogent analysis.
August 22nd, 2008 at 10:47 am
Excellent analysis Inanna!
And even though I think Paris Hilton is a plague on society. I absolutely loved her retort to McCain. It was a low blow.
August 22nd, 2008 at 5:45 pm
Excellent posts, everyone. Also, I don’t doubt that Sheila is getting some flack from her family/ community for this relationship too. She might not have the same professional risks as Paul, but a woman of color crossing the color line was (read: is) not always considered to be a “step up” (at least not in a good way). Even when I was small (the early 80s) people my mom’s age and older would remark upon the Hollywood black woman/ white man relationships as being at bit of a novelty. There’s the whole notion of being considered a traitor or sell-out which I doubt Paul will encounter.
Also, I noticed this review of a movie which is related to the MM time period.
http://movies.nytimes.com/2008/08/22/movies/22dare.html?ref=arts
August 22nd, 2008 at 10:44 pm
Ding, ding, ding. Inanna gets the prize! That’s why the issues of race and sex, and by extension, class are so complex. And only when we’re able to see the entire issue for what it is can we ever move beyond it.
And Jackie, I agree with what you say as well. To this day, Black women still take flack for dating White men — mostly by our own communities, although there’s still a little old style White supremacy thrown into the mix too.
One of my favorite movies of the MM era is Paris Blues, about a couple of jaded jazz musicians who hook up with two teachers on vacation in Paris. The film stars Paul Newman, Sidney Poitier, Diahann Carroll and Joanne Woodward. One of the things that immediately struck me about this movie was that the Black woman was the object of desire for both men. Not in a crude, animalistic — “exotic” — way, which was (or is depending on your perspective) normally the way our sexuality’s portrayed in media. But in an honest, straight-forward, very modern way. She was a lot like the Rachel Menken character (whom I miss — bring her back, please?).
Can you imagine? Getting to choose between Sidney Poitier and Paul Newman? Poor Diahann Carroll.
August 22nd, 2008 at 11:20 pm
It’s like Sophie’s choice, only the opposite in every way.
It’s nothing like Sophie’s choice, really.
*adds Paris Blues to the list*
August 23rd, 2008 at 12:07 am
I seriously want that choice.
I may have to go back and rethink a couple of times.
August 23rd, 2008 at 12:13 am
*plans to “ponder” overnight*
August 23rd, 2008 at 7:48 am
Heres a choice
Denzel Washington or George Clooney?
August 23rd, 2008 at 8:04 am
Clooney. No contest. I’m not a huge Denzel girl. I may be the only woman in the English-speaking world who isn’t, but there you are.
August 23rd, 2008 at 8:08 am
I love Denzel.
But please. You’re talking about Clooney.
Clooney, Poiter, Newman, Denzel.
Clooney. Not even a contest. I mean, okay, a fun contest.
August 23rd, 2008 at 8:34 am
Clooney and Banderas, that would be a contest.
I’d need a test drive.
August 23rd, 2008 at 8:38 am
I’m always late to the party…LOL!
Just have to give Inanna yet another kudo for an excellent analysis!
Also, as stated by Jackie and Hullaballo, Black ladies who choose to date a White (or any non-Black) man catches a lot of shit. And much of it comes from other Blacks, sadly. Unfortunately, there’s also some White folks who also possess a negative attitude toward interracial dating.
Live and let live, I say!
August 23rd, 2008 at 8:42 am
Clooney and Hamm. My head would just explode and that would pretty much wreck my chances with either one.
August 23rd, 2008 at 10:28 am
Kay, in the world of attractive black men, I totally crush on Elvis Mitchell. OMG a tall, handsome movie geek with THAT HAIR. I die.
August 23rd, 2008 at 11:18 am
@Ellelque — I choose Denzel. No contest!
August 23rd, 2008 at 11:33 am
Clooney v. Hamm? Hamm. Wouldn’t even LOOK at Clooney!
August 23rd, 2008 at 12:16 pm
Deb, Elvis is very witty and entertaining!
Right now, I know all eyes should be on the Obama/Biden ticket but there’s a guy working as a counsultant for Obama’s campaign…Jamal ?. I’ve no idea what his last name is but he’s so nice to look at on CNN!
As for Clooney vs. Hamm….Both! A nice little Kay sandwich!! LOL!
August 23rd, 2008 at 12:26 pm
One whispering in each ear… those voices…
shit. my head just exploded again. that’s really gonna leave a stain.
August 23rd, 2008 at 12:27 pm
I haven’t seen this Jamal guy, but I don’t think there’s anyone Obama could have chosen as a running mate who could compete in the looks department.
Biden, blah blah blah. I didn’t really love any of the realistic veep choices.
August 23rd, 2008 at 2:35 pm
Oh Hamm would do it for me. Younger, seems less tainted by celebrity. Not so full of himself. I picture George Clooney yelling his own name out during sex. The women I work with are convinced Clooney plays for the other team.
Hamm says he like blue jeans and a vintage T-shirt. He is just so hot.
August 23rd, 2008 at 2:38 pm
Biden, one of the whitest and most vanilla man in America. Poor choice. I was looking forward to Obama’s campaign. Not anymore.
I wanted him to pick a woman so that the cracker, racist would have to think twice before taking a shot at him. Now the cracker racist will get what they want, an eventual white president.
Sorry, I am just so cynical these days towards politics.
August 23rd, 2008 at 2:52 pm
I am, btw, also convinced that Clooney is not for women. Hurts my heart, it does.
August 23rd, 2008 at 3:11 pm
@Ellelque, I agree, Clooney is full of himself. And he’s dumb as a stump. This is why I always say I prefer not to know anything about what celebs “think” because it often ruins their appeal for me. (o:
So definitely, Hamm and Denzel over Clooney, no contest.
August 23rd, 2008 at 4:50 pm
Sorta a Denzel and Hamm sandwich! Mmmmmm.
August 23rd, 2008 at 5:14 pm
I could forgo Clooney altogether, although I will admit that he’s a damn fine looking man. He’s just so fucking smug, which kills it all for me. And if he’s a dim bulb, too? Forget it.
I do like some 1960s era men, though. And I’m talking about full grown men who were in their 30s and 40s back then, not the young rock and rollers who were emerging at that time. Well, except Jimi Hendrix because…well…But in terms of looks, virility, and style, I don’t think there’s anyone around today who can compare to say…Sidney Poitier, Paul Newman, Sean Connery, Harry Belafonte, Omar Sharif, Steve McQueen, James Garner, Alain Delon, Marcello Mastroianni, and so many others from that period. Mmmm, mmmm, mmmm. The mind melts just thinking about them.
And has Obama actually chosen Biden as a running mate? I thought he was just on the list.
August 23rd, 2008 at 5:51 pm
I think Clooney is highly intelligent, and I say this as a woman who doesn’t find him all that attractive. He’s one of those people who puts his politics out there, true, but that’s not stupid so much as, er, off-putting.
The smug thing — have you heard John Mayer speak? That’s smug, but I also find it kinda cute. If someone is truly intelligent and funny, I think they’ve earned smug.
That’s why I’m only semi-bitchy once in a blue moon.
August 24th, 2008 at 7:51 am
John Mayer truly screams his own name out during sex. That thing was Jennifer was doomed from the beginning. Wish that girl would get some good guy karma. She deserves it.
August 24th, 2008 at 7:59 am
I think Clooney is pretty smart, and gorgeous, and I’m not convinced he’s teh gay. Also, he’s exactly two days younger than me.
Biden was announced yesterday. He’s definitely the whitest guy in Congress. But like I said, all of the rumored choices sucked.
August 24th, 2008 at 7:59 am
I may be incorporating a new clause about not being allowed to say that Clooney is smug or unintelligent into our BoK ground rules. Checking with Deb on that first.
Gay I won’t fight.