Smoke Gets In Your Eyes: Midge says “They’ve invented something called Grandmother’s Day.” (Did I get that right? Is it Grandparent’s Day? I think I got it right.)
Anyway, not so much.
National Grandparent’s Day was started in 1973, although not signed into law until 1978. Hallmark created its first cards for the occasion in 1978.
As far as I am able to determine, Grandmother’s Day did not exist until 2009.
I wouldn’t call this a “goof” so much as a different reality in the fictional world of Mad Men. After all, Sterling Cooper co-exists with Doyle Dane Bernbach and McCann Erickson, and has real clients that were really held by one of these other agencies, so a certain fudging of truth is permitted.
Still.
49 Responses to “Grandmother's Day”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Agreed that it is not a goof–it’s way too glaring for it to be a mistake. We discussed long ago how some of the ad campaign stuff is dead on, like the timing of the VW Beetle ads, and some are rewritten history, like Lucky Strike. To your point, history has to be rewritten, otherwise Sterling Cooper can’t actually work on anything real.
I always assumed she wasn't talking officially but more like "guess what my stupid thing my company has me doing now? They invented something called Grandmother's Day hoping that it catches on and makes them money." I used to work in advertising and public relations and we were ALWAYS trying to invent the new next best thing.
I don't think she works for a company. If she did, she wouldn't be painting at home at midnight. She's freelance. So "they" is not her boss but her commission.
Midge definitely came up with a creative way to say, "I love you, Grandma."
I have no memory of a Grandmother, or Grandfather, or Grandparent day in the early '60s, or late '50s, or I'm sure I would have been pressed to sign a card on such day.
Didn't catch that as an anachronism, but maybe because I hadn't known until now that the greeting card companies had managed to invent such a thing in the early '70s.
I'm not sure about alternate reality stuff — although Midge being sarcastic about an early greeting card attempt at holiday making is plausible, this is more than likely a goof from a younger scriptwriter assuming grandparent's day went back in time.
Yes, she is freelance, but my main point still stands. It did not have to be official for her to be tasked to create something for it. That's exactly how most of our secondary holidays became real calendar-worthy ones in the first place. The practice of celebrating and the supplementary items for it came first, then something official was proposed. I just wouldn't fault the writers for this one.
Roberta and I agree this might not be a "fault," like "It's Toasted," it might be a choice to rewrite history for script purposes.
Hallmark's website said they issued their first Grandparent's Day card in 1978, the year it was signed into law. But the "movement" to create the day started in 1973.
I'm willing to give Matt that this isn't an anachronism, it's a choice, but I definitely don't think we should bend over backwards to imagine that "someone" made such cards.
Well, agonizing over whether they really had it in the first place defeats the point of the scene anyway.
The scene is ironic, something you're supposed to see that Don doesn't even get in so much as his bohemian, stick-it-to-the-man girlfriend makes her living by painting maudlin greeting card crap–much like his "creativity" is funneled towards selling things, not actually being lasting art.
It's a bit that gets repeated when Don breaks it off with her, finally realizing her "free-spiritedness" is so much being a posuer; instead of putting her money where her mouth is (literally) she'd rather smoke pot, listen to jazz, and pretend she's deep.
Uh, Don leaves Midge because he realizes she's in love with another man. As for a "poseur" it would be hard to beat Don, or rather Dick, posing as Don.
Midge turns Don down on a trip Paris for her beatnik — if that ain't love, I don't know what is.
(Quick, someone, anyone, invite me to go to Paris! Only Dick Cheney would get a negative from me.)
I think Midge was designed to make Don realize he's older than he acts. He's been through WWII for goodness sake and yet he acts like a twenty something kid. The Grandmother's day reference only served to make him realize he's a Dad and older. Midge ticked him off because she didn't care about the fake life he'd built for himself – the life he'd dreamed of – the well to do businessman. To Midge, he was a "square."
IMHO…
I don't buy that about Midge, Stagmom.
Midge is a fake. Just because she cynically laughs about what she does, it doesn't stop her from doing it. Earning a check for painting commercial greeting card crap is earning a check for it whether you think you're above it or not.
^^^The point of mine you missed, Judy.
Tom, putting together a website like this, complete with extensive cultural trivia, necessitates agonizing. It shouldn't be mistaken for enjoyment of the show.
And I don't think Midge is a fake. Not as free as Roy, indeed, not as "free" as Don, who is willing to run off to Paris. But I think he respects her for her ability to earn a living; he disses Roy for not having a job. I think he sees Midge as a respectable human for striking that balance, it's just that he's done with her when she can no longer provide what he (thinks he) wants.
Stagmom, Don has not been through WWII, but Korea.
I think you misunderstand the use of "fake."
And who's talking about respecting her or not for earning a living?
"Just because she cynically laughs about what she does, it doesn’t stop her from doing it. Earning a check for painting commercial greeting card crap is earning a check for it whether you think you’re above it or not."
^^Very specific.^^^
If you claim to be a beatnik and "Down with the man, rah-rah-rah," yet accept his money for selling out, what do you call it then if "fake" and "poseur" aren't the right term? Hypocrite? Bullshit artist?
Tom:
Midge doesn't go on with the "down with the man, rah-rah-rah" stuff; _Roy_ goes on like that, when he's competing with Don for her, and the guy with the Fez in "The Hobo Code", but Midge hasn't.
That should be "fez"; I'm not entirely sure why I capitalized it.
Then maybe we watched two different shows…I seem to remember Don even calling her hypocrisy when he saw she had a TV.
He said "I thought you hated TV" and seemed more interested in who gave it to her, e.g. another man. "Calling her on her hypocrisy" is kind of a stretch.
Don's recollection of their conversation isn't exactly unbiased. He would have every reason to exaggerate her tone because he wants to justify his reaction to it without copping to the real reason he brought it up, namely, that he's jealous of her.
Besides, the fact that she didn't approve of television at one point in her life (although clearly not any more, as she admitted in "Ladies Room") doesn't prove your point. There's no evidence that she looks down on advertising, or Don for working in advertising.
Sorry again; that should be, "that he's jealous of her receiving gifts from other sexual partners."
I give up. I guess Jack Sparrow was wrong. Y'know just 'cause Elizabeth Turner dressed like a pirate, hung out with pirates, fought on behalf of pirates and all the pirates considered her a pirate, she still wasn't.
Just 'cause Midge hangs out with beatniks, has sex with beatniks (and, call me old fashoned, but I hope she'd be doing it because there's some kind of common interest beside just compatable parts), has spoken out against things beatniks saw as common and degrading to culture (like TV) and doesn't defend Don against other people's attacks, she's still not one. Okay then, glad we cleared that up. We'll all ignore those feathers, the bill, and the webbed feet. Was that a quacking nosie? No, of course not. Must've been in my crazy old head.
And of course, the whole added thematic facet of Don having such a fake life that even the "real" people he's found are actually guilty of being fakes too–to hell with that. Thinking Matthew Weiner could be depthy like that–who am I kidding?
Tom:
I'm trying to say that Midge, although clearly part of the beatnik scene, didn't necessarily look down on advertising (or Don for being an ad man) and hence wasn't necessarily a hypocrite for being part of it. I don't recall saying that she wasn't a beatnik, just that her reactions might not be simplistic as you're painting them.
And no, Midge doesn't defend Don when Roy speaks up. Don is a big boy, who can take care of himself in that regard, and she clearly doesn't mind watching the two of them fight over her. In "Babylon", after all, she invites Don along with her and Roy. I'm not sure what else she would have had in mind when she did that.
"I’m trying to say that Midge, although clearly part of the beatnik scene, didn’t necessarily look down on advertising (or Don for being an ad man) and hence wasn’t necessarily a hypocrite for being part of it. I don’t recall saying that she wasn’t a beatnik, just that her reactions might not be simplistic as you’re painting them."
So is that like being a wiccan and thinking the whole "goddess" thing is crap?
I don't get what you're saying. Beatniks had a specific ethos, sounded out loudly by Roy. And the show screams she's a beatnik.
I also don't get your hang-up with her looking down on Don. How do you get that from this:
“Just because she cynically laughs about what she does, it doesn’t stop her from doing it. Earning a check for painting commercial greeting card crap is earning a check for it whether you think you’re above it or not.â€
Seriously, tell me. Otherwise you're voraciously defending a point that only you brought up and that I'm not even talking about.
Tom:
No, it's like hanging around with Wiccans but taking some of what they say with a grain of salt. It's like having friends and not agreeing with all of their beliefs. It's something that happens all the time. I'm pretty sure it happened with Midge, who takes quite a bit about the scene with a grain of salt. Take her comment that "everybody knows that you have to get out of the Village for a decent screw," or that she was going to Roy's reading "to act surprised when Jack Kerouac doesn't show." She doesn't take the beatnik ethos any more seriously than she takes Grandmother's Day.
And re: Don, it wasn't clear to me whether you thought she was a poseur because she looked down on advertising, or because she looked down on ad men, so I was trying to cover both possibilities.
Again, I don't see how out of a sentence that deals with greeting cards and producing art for them one gets "Hey, he's talking about advertising men, and more specifically Don Draper. Because Don Draper and creating art for greeting cards goes together like Chocolate and Peanut butter!" but to each their own, I guess.
As for you're defense, it's arbitrary. You can say the opposite to everything you just laid out. Why does she poke fun at it around Don? because she's trying to sell the notion she's on his wavelength, just looking in for some laughs. Why does she do this, why does she do that? Oh, it's not that she believes it, because she says she doesn't. Sorry, that doesn't work as a defense because it goes against any thematic weight she has as a character. It also ignores that fact that she lives in Greenwich Village, smokes pot/listens to jazz with her friends, sleeps with an obviously outspoken, angry guy who is the real one she's in love with, etc., etc.
A couple of cracks to Don doesn't change that. There's a reason the man she truly loves in the angry outspoken guy, not the grey-flannel suit one.
A new book is coming out that seems ideal to help us get through the months before Season Three cranks up:
1959: The Year Everything Changed
(Also sounds as tho Matt might have been inspired by the galleys — and yes, I'm joking.)
"Slate columnist Kaplan takes a contrarian view to the common wisdom that the '60s were the source of the cultural shift from pre-WWII traditions to the individualistic, question-authority world of today. In Kaplan's view, the watershed year in this transformation is 1959."
"He delves into that year's cultural and political scene, citing Miles Davis and his revolutionary album Kind of Blue; William Burroughs and his equally revolutionary novel, Naked Lunch; and the opening of Frank Lloyd Wright's radically designed Guggenheim Museum in New York City as examples of fundamental breaks with past conventions. Kaplan's case is cemented by three 1959 events that he convincingly argues were catalysts for paradigm changes in relationships between men and women (the pharmaceutical company Searle sought FDA approval for the birth control pill), in how citizens view their government (the first American soldiers were killed in Vietnam) and in communications and information transfer (the microchip was introduced to the world). Kaplan doesn't quite convince that 1959 was “the year when the shockwaves of the new ripped the seams of daily life,†but his writing is lively and filled with often funny anecdotes as he examines some key elements in the transition from the mid to late 20th century. 16 b&w photos. (July) (Publishers Weekly, May 4, 2009) "
Review
"An engrossing story about not just where the ’60s came from but the birth of the future. Kaplan does a masterful job of weaving together the strands — in politics, society, culture, and science — that have brought us to the postmodern age."
–Jonathan Alter, author of The Defining Moment: FDR’s Hundred Days and the Triumph of Hope
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0470387815?ie=UT…
Judy, thanks, we'll look into that!
So I've only skimmed through this debate because it was getting on my nerves, but I will point out that while Midge does hang out with beatniks and have sex with at least one, she also hangs out with Don and has sex with him. She never once gave him shit for what he does for a living–she seems to support it.
I don't think she's a hypocrite. I just don't see it. The only dishonesty I see in Midge is very human–she may well have cared for Don more than she let on. Maybe. I'm not sure. But if she did, she'd begun to pull back from him rather than perpetuate the disappointment. And she also may have been in a bit of denial about Roy, until Don called it out. But none of that is hypocritical.
I think Don mistakes running for freedom. In Midge, who seemed so free, he thought he saw someone willing to run. When she wouldn’t go to Paris, he saw her as less free, and then saw she was in love. In the sense that she wanted to live in New York, and not drop everything and run somewhere, she was less free; in the sense that she could sleep around without getting possessive, she was more free. I don’t see that as hypocritical either.
Well, Roberta, it's not really a debate. If you take my view, that is supported with ample evidence from the show (of Midge being a beatnik who sells out and does work for 'the man') or if you take Tarzan's that she's not really a beatnik despite living that lifestyle to the nth degree, either one supports the idea of her beatnikism being fake and her being the perfect first character for Don to be sleeping with as her life or her values are as constructed as his.
Either way I'm right. Haha. I know. Gol' durn me for making people think more and realize deeper thematic layers about this show. "I had it all figured out and then you made me reconsider my preconceived notions and see the added depth Weiner put in a show I like. Damn you Tom, damn you to hell, sir."
If on the other hand you associate "she makes greeting card art" with "Don Draper" or you somehow equate her doing greeting card art with who she has sex with, then you have poor reading comprehension and I can't help you.
Your arguments would be more interesting, Tom, if you didn’t pepper them with language so snide and hostile to the other readers here (as well as to the writers). I am always delighted to have my eyes opened to a new point of view, unless the tone indicates that I’m some kind of dope for engaging in the discussion instead of simply kowtowing in awe.
“Either way I’m right. Haha.” Doesn’t violate the comments policy. But it doesn’t win friends or engage discussion either.
Tom:
I’m frustrated that you’re seemingly unwilling to engage my actual argument about Midge. I’m still not sure where I said that Midge wasn’t a beatnik. What I’ve said is that we haven’t seen her go around denouncing “the Man” in heated tones like you say she does. You have been thus far been unable to produce an example where she has, and instead have assumed that she must because she’s a beatnik and all beatniks are the same in this regard.
It seems to me that the Greenwich Village lifestyle probably included a wide array of people and had different attractions for different people. Midge seems to care primarily about the way that living in the Village offers her a fair amount of personal freedom–to live independently, sleep around, smoke pot, etc.–and less about the political side of things. Obv. Roy is different in that regard, but Midge could love Roy and even love his passion without necessarily agreeing with him on every particular.
I don’t believe that this conclusion takes away from her thematic import. The importance of her storyline in “The Hobo Code” in particular, where it reaches its climax, has everything to do with issues of freedom and attachment, not authenticity. It’s about Don’s and the audience’s realization that Midge is tied down more than he/we had thought.
In any case, this is my last post on the subject. I’m not sure that this discussion is getting either of us anywhere.
We’re not talking about “The Hobo Code.”
Why am I supposed to engage on this front when the original post refers to the pilot and I’m referring to the pilot?
Deb, yep I was snide.
It’s hard not to be when you make a plain, clear statement about a character’s thematic import (in regards to the topic at hand) and people either half read (or don’t read at all) and start randomly babbling at you, but make sure they’re opposing whatever you say while they do it.
Tom, at the point where you refer to commenters here as “randomly babbling,” you hover closer and closer to violating our comment policy. Reign it in.
I think maybe it’s rein. Otherwise I’m right there with you. I was there a few comments back.
You're right about the g. It was a nice g but not needed.
It seems to me that the Greenwich Village lifestyle probably included a wide array of people and had different attractions for different people. Midge seems to care primarily about the way that living in the Village offers her a fair amount of personal freedom–to live independently, sleep around, smoke pot, etc.–and less about the political side of things. Obv. Roy is different in that regard, but Midge could love Roy and even love his passion without necessarily agreeing with him on every particular.
Can you back this up? I’m going by the textual evidence the show offers us. Which is how you discuss a text.
“Midge seems…” based on what? Your feelings?
I think Midge’s comment was vague enough to pass scrutiny. She might have been referring to some idea the greeting card company proposed, or something an opinion column suggested. They had to go with something believable-sounding (“Don, did you know they’ve declared May 18 “Take Your Mistress to Work Day?”) whether it was completely accurate or not, and Midge’s vagueness about “they” gives them a loophole.
It’s a great device to express both Midge’s and Don’s cynicism about their work.
One of the things I love about Mad Men is that characters do have layers, and are more complicated and even contradictory than on most TV shows. I love that we don’t instantly know everything there is to know about Peggy because she’s Catholic, or everything about Roger because he’s rich, or everything about Midge because she wears a peasant blouse. Real life isn’t that simple, and Mad Men embraces that.
Seems like Tom should smoke some pot …
Thanks for the link, Deb. Still about as clear as mud, tho…am I missing something?
SFC, no, we're confused too.
Ah, forget it. I'm not going to bother with this farce.
"Geez, this guy is rude to people when they don't try to even understand a word he says and then voraciously argue with him on points he's not even making. Like WTF is up with that?"
I should have known better than to come back when I was basically ostricized for not falling into the group think over Don referencing Carla as a girl. When a poster like Judy says that if you don't agree with the consensus that you're a racist yourself, and the mods let that sort of thing slide, the air around a place is clear enough I guess.
Have fun, you guys. It's been…something.
#12 @ Deb:
Got lost in all the heated exchange going on above, but you bring up a point that’s been bothering me through both seasons: the “missing pages” in Dick/Don’s backstory. Yes, we know full well he was in Korea, but if “The Hobo Code” was set in the Depression, say 1935/36, and Dick Whitman looks to be, what, 10, 12, isn’t it conceivable he would have been involved at least at the tail end of WWII, even if he was just in basic training? Conceivably “The Hobo Code” could have been set in a later time frame, but the costuming and the whole concept of “hobos” seems so indelibly associated with the Depression. Yes, Korea was Don’s formative experience, but the chronology gaps, while not diminishing my enjoyment of MM in the least, still nag at me. Hope we get some more of Dick/Don’s backstory in Season 3.
SFCaramia, read this here: http://www.lippsisters.com/2008/07/14/dickdon-adam-bizarro-world-timeline/
Yikes! That was quite a comment thread. Korea – of course. My Dad was in "the big war." I still think Midge made Don feel old.
Seriously. Yikes.
I start to call it spam.
Deb?
I hit the delete button.
I invite everyone to re-read the Comment Policy. We have, from time to time, deleted specific comments, as I have done today. All of us get too heated sometimes; the Gods know I am guilty of that myself. A judicious bit of moderation allows us all to keep our heads.
Repeat offenders will be banned at the sole discretion of the infallible and despotic Lipp Sisters, clicking ex cathedra.
What she said. Only I'm not sure what some of the words are, but that's okay.