the Kennedy assassination
We received an email (I turned my response into a post so quickly that I did not ask for permission to use the writer’s name, so I’m leaving it out):
Just a tip that I’m surprised more Mad Men fans haven’t been discussing – or not that I’ve seen anyhow.The info before Season 3 started was that they intended to skip the JFK Assassination – but I think that was just misdirection. The wedding invitation that Margaret Sterling showed her father in Episode 2 clearly stated that it is to be held on November 23, 1963 as the attached photo shows.
Thanks for the email and for the photo grab!
It has been kicked around in our comments section; definitely noticed by most. I don’t think it was meant to be subtle, so much as ominous.
Weiner had said repeatedly last year that he had no intention of covering the Kennedy assassination– his position was basically, it’s been done and done, and why revisit?
Matt, from an interview with Alan Sepinwall last October:
“I can say one thing in advance: the Kennedy assassination is very well-trod territory, and I just don’t see myself adding to that.”
Now what we’ve heard more recently is a little bit different.
He speaks to Alan again on the same topic:
“…if we do do it, it’s going to be something different.”
What we know about the way Matt works is that he focuses purely on the season he is in. When you ask him what’s coming in the future, it’s not just that he is super-spoilery protective (which he is), but also, he doesn’t work it out that far in advance. He says that he has ideas about where characters will be at different points in their lives, but that he ties those concepts more to their ages than to circumstances or history.
As an aside, that is so much a factor of the genius of Mad Men; he doesn’t treat each character through the scope of the continuum within the era; he is more informed of them by their place in their personal timeline. He isn’t looking at Betty as a 60s housewife, but as a beautiful woman who married young and started having kids and has no career. In the 60s. It’s different. And it’s why we can relate to these characters, as opposed to being removed from them.
Anyway, I hope this answers the question. I imagine it will come up a hundred more times, but here it is.
Basket of Kisses: The unofficial blog of AMC's Mad Men. Where all the cool kids meet & greet to talk about Don Draper, Janie Bryant, Christina Hendricks, Jon Hamm, Matthew Weiner, & subtexty things.
Loading...
August 28th, 2009 at 8:01 am
That picture's cropped as not to display this, but that wedding invite would not fly with a really, really careful bride. They use two different kinds of apostrophes; one in the "o'clock", and another style for the possessive of the church.
August 28th, 2009 at 8:07 am
Nice catch.
If Margaret and Roger had a closer relationship, he could have brought it in to work and run it through Editorial. Believe me, we've run many wedding invites/menus/all kinds of stuff through our Editorial department.
August 28th, 2009 at 8:50 am
I never took MW's comments to mean that 11/22 would be ignored, just that it would not be a focal plot point.
August 28th, 2009 at 8:55 am
What I loved about the handling of the Cuban Missile Crisis is that the story went on. It affected some people more than others, but all we really saw were the ripples. We saw it from the perspective of all these little people who were just trying to live their lives, and not from some omniscient historical eye. Although the assassination was a different sort of event, and everyone who was alive then can tell you where they were and what they were doing when it happened, my guess is that we'll just see the ripples.
If I was writing the show, I'd have Margaret and Brooks call off the big wedding in the wake of the assassination and return to their original plans.
August 28th, 2009 at 9:23 am
Maybe they'll handle it by skipping over the actual day, and deal with the aftermath. Has Matt ever indicated a specific time period when the season will end?
August 28th, 2009 at 10:11 am
#11 Yes, precisely. Your own personal history always is the yardstick for understanding the rest of the world at large. Both personal and inescapable from the larger scene at the same time is what I was trying to say.
August 28th, 2009 at 10:12 am
Funny story: That's my first memory. I was 2. My mother didn't believe I was able to remember that far back, but I was able to map out the apartment; where the tv was, where I was, where she was.
August 28th, 2009 at 10:13 am
i definitely get a feeling the season will end before the JFK assassination. this would put season 4 starting in 1964 with several months past and the aftermath is still being felt but has died down a little.
But on the other hand, most seasons of the show run for about an 8 to 9 month period of time, so assuming season 3 started in April, November would end the season.
Just my two cents
August 28th, 2009 at 10:25 am
True, just because they showed the date on the invitation is no particular reason to think the show will actually cover it in any detail. In fact, it seems that NOT covering the wedding at all would be more in keeping with MM (kinda like how we just skipped right past Joan's & Roger's weddings) Maybe they just focused on that date to make it clear that no matter how Margaret, Roger & Mona decided to handle the wedding, it's going to suck big time.
OK, another request for pointless predictions – will they devote an episode to Betty having her baby? SURELY they couldn't just skip over that. Can they….?
August 28th, 2009 at 10:39 am
Sometimes the impact of skipping something is profound (the American Airlines presentation) and sometimes Matt skips events because prelude and prologue are more intriguing (Joan's wedding).
August 28th, 2009 at 10:50 am
Also on the invitation, the sixty three should be sixty-three
August 28th, 2009 at 11:38 am
I am glad to see this picture, because my husband (who is an Episcopal priest) and I were wondering about the church in which they would marry. We figured it would be Episcopal, and sure enough, St. Bartholomew’s is an Episcopal Church in NYC.
August 28th, 2009 at 11:40 am
I wanted to be a November bride. When my husband proposed, I wanted to marry him as soon as possible.
The only thing that prevented me from doing this was my sister-in-law (and close friend)'s due date: she was pregnant with my brother's youngest son that year. He was born on November 4. Yes, Jake's birthday last year was wonderful.
We ended up getting married over a holiday weekend some months later, in February. Neither month is typical of brides. I like to think that I wasn't a typical bride. Don't we all, though?
I think that Margaret is throwing her hands up on this wedding. She told her fiance to arrive late, picked any old invitation, and she clearly stated that if her dad's new wife planned to be there, she herself would not. I half expect her to elope after all — sticking Roger and Jane with a lot of crap, a huge bill, and a smug ex, all on the saddest weekend in American history.
August 28th, 2009 at 11:49 am
…sticking Roger and Jane with a lot of crap, a huge bill, and a smug ex, all on the saddest weekend in American history.
I hope Roger ordered lots and lots of liquor for the reception. He's going to need it, no matter what.
August 28th, 2009 at 11:54 am
Gypsy, you're a riot.
IF we get that far this season, I bet the wedding goes ahead. Baby Draper is another matter. I'm in the doom camp on that one, because of those S3 photos of a sad, svelte Betty…
August 28th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
Anne, I was a November bride the second time around; November 5, in fact. Of course, there were only 2 guests, not counting the Justice of the Peace.
August 28th, 2009 at 12:02 pm
brenda, allow me to play devil's advocate and point out that Betty was svelte & sad in seasons 1 & 2 when she had two living, healthy children. Well, sad in s1 & angry in s2.
gypsy, there is no possibility in this world or the next that Roger will order insufficient liquor.
August 28th, 2009 at 12:05 pm
Her people are Nordic, after all.
August 28th, 2009 at 12:08 pm
Only one other person ventured to say that it's guite possible that since Margaret's mad at her dad and wanted to elope in the first place that she just goes ahead and elopes before November anyway. If she wanted to get at him big she would make him spend that money for no reason, right? But as a fan, I'm pretty content to just let it all happen without trying to forcast the entire season at episode 3.
August 28th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
Poor Margaret Elizabeth, has probably found what most young brides of her stature have found, and that's the fact it isn't actually her wedding, but her Mother's and Father's. Margaret probably has very little to say about it other than making final selection on a few choices presented to her by Mona and Roger. As for the date, I would imagine it was pushed back because of the divorce and Roger's rush to get Jane down the aisle. Truly amazing poor Margaret actually wants to go through with the Church wedding at all …
That being said, I wouldn't be a bit surprised if the show led up to just before the wedding and we skip over the assassination all together. But if he doesn't, I"ll be fascinated to see how the characters react.
August 28th, 2009 at 12:14 pm
On the subject of the font, we linked to an article long ago pointing out that the use of fonts on Mad Men is sometimes sloppy.
August 28th, 2009 at 12:27 pm
"sticking Roger and Jane with a lot of crap, a huge bill, and a smug ex, all on the saddest weekend in American history"
Anne B–That would be the icing on the cake, wouldn't it? Something tells me Roger is going to be a casualty of the swinging sixties, much to his infinite regret. In Season 3 he's already showing signs of becoming rapidly obsolete. (Although no one has better command of the zinger
)
So far Roger's engineered two questionable marriages, whose outcome remains to be seen: The SC merger and his marriage to Jane. The SC merger is already showing signs of being an awkward fit, and I think a large part of the blame for this symbolic marriage can be laid at Roger's doorstep, since of all the partners, he was the one who was advocating it so strongly, being desparate for ready cash because he chose to ignore his attorney's advice and marry Jane instead of keeping her as a mistress.
And as for his actual marriage, unlike Joan and Roger, IMO Jane and Roger have never really been a "fit" either. There was something viscerally that was just plain wrong seeing them together in that bedroom scene last season. She's the right age (and now will have the bucks) for being part of the free-spirited sixties; Roger would probably relish the sexual freedom it's going to bring, but he's just too much of another era and stuck in the entitlements his sex and class brought to follow. I think along with Margaret's marriage, something might well happen with his; his attorney's warning that "these young girls often change their minds," might well come to pass. So whatever direction Matt chooses to go with the assassination, Margaret's November 23, 1963 wedding date is one of those "pay attention" markers he's known for employing so that we'll all keep on our toes.
August 28th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
Matt's just effin' with y'all. I'm sure he's cackling into his cornflakes on how much people are making of this. I can see why he feels there's no need to do it. I mean look how easily we fill in the blanks with one little throwaway sight gag.
The description of this episode said something like "Roger takes over planning of a wedding." I didn't see that, did I miss something?
August 28th, 2009 at 1:24 pm
@#5 Yeah, that’s what’s so great about Matt’s storytelling; the public/historical context versus the personal/private. Public memory/history is a big deal…and at the same time it’s not. His method kinda reminds me of the exact opposite of Rick’s famous line to Ilsa in “Casablanca,” “The problems of…little people are a (huge) hill of beans in this crazy world.”
Original line if you recall was, of course, “The problems of 3 little people don’t amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world.”
August 28th, 2009 at 1:31 pm
Who gets married in November?
That was my first question, when I saw the date, and then of course, I realized what the date was. But seriously: this can only be a plot device. They’ve been engaged for a number of months. They easily could have had a June wedding (most popular) or an August wedding (second most popular). Sure, Roger blew the June wedding by his own but August was still an option.
That year, Thanksgiving was the following week. Who would bring family together twice within a week? Matt is definitely reaching here.
August 28th, 2009 at 1:34 pm
@ #8 I don’t think the date is so unbelievable. I got married on December 27. That brought my family together twice within a week.
August 28th, 2009 at 1:38 pm
I see the wedding with all the mixed emotions of the national tragedy, as well as all of the complicated personal dynamics, producing a memorable season finale.
August 28th, 2009 at 1:38 pm
gypsy, Matt doesn’t indicate. Indicating is not a Matt thing.
August 28th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
SFC, Casablanca itself puts the lie to that statement, by telling the big historical story from the point of view of three little people. It’s only through these “little” stories that any of us care about the big things.
August 28th, 2009 at 1:42 pm
Margaret wanted to elope, so a popular wedding time would be anathema to her. A fall bride so as not to be conventional.
August 28th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
"Poor Margaret Elizabeth, has probably found what most young brides of her stature have found, and that’s the fact it isn’t actually her wedding, but her Mother’s and Father’s."
To quote etiquette expert and Kennedy White House social secretary Letitia Baldrige on weddings of the time: "Mother decided, father paid, and bride complied. (The groom had no say whatsoever)."
Source: Legendary Brides
August 28th, 2009 at 1:50 pm
I don’t know what was common then, but Thanksgiving weekend weddings are fairly common now. So the weekend before felt plausible.
Sure it’s a plot device, with a close-up that big, it was certainly not a missed detail. But you never know with Matt. The season could end the weekend before the wedding, with some extra ironic tones. Who knows.
August 28th, 2009 at 1:53 pm
A straightforward treatment of the First Kennedy Assassination as seen by our Mad Men would involve people sitting in front of their TV’s for a long weekend. Watching Oswald get shot live. Then watching the funeral–beautifully planned by Jackie. TV watching does not make for exciting TV. Perhaps a trip to Brooklyn to catch a novena at Peggy’s home church?
Nope, episodes just before or just after The Event would work better. Or an episode with The Event as background to dramatic developments. Margaret & Brook go ahead with the wedding since all the plans have been made but the reception turns into an Irish wake–even if nobody’s Irish. Would Mona’s Compromise Seating Chart put Roger at the Sterling Cooper table? Many dramatic possibilities there. Time for Roger’s Heart Attack #3? There are several emergencies waiting to happen at the Draper homestead…
Being in High School when JFK was murdered & remembering it quite well, I have no need for a Class in 20th Century History. But I trust Weiner to come up with something interesting.
August 28th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
I'd like to see Betty, feeding the baby late on a fall afternoon, with the television on in the background. The programming shifts from a game show to "CBS News Special Report". Betty catches it out of the corner of her eye and slightly turns away from Adam toward the TV. Fade to black. End of Season 3.
August 28th, 2009 at 5:10 pm
When I think of Margaret's wedding, I go back to how Mona sold it to her daughter: the mental image of gliding around a dance floor, all dressed up, in her father's arms.
Can we agree that this is likely not Maraget's image of a good start to married life?
I've known other young women who have ditched the whole deal, for much smaller reasons than hers. (Still good ones, though. A feeling is a reason. You don't have to be able to articulate it to others to know it's true.) I would not be surprised if Margaret chooses not to marry at all.
As for the idea of this season stopping short of the assassination: that's exactly what I hope will happen. I am hoping that shot of the wedding invitation was a red herring.
August 28th, 2009 at 5:18 pm
Frank:
In 1968, my parents were newcomers to the West Coast of the U.S. I was 2, and they were also new parents … again.
They had stayed up to watch Bobby Kennedy make his speech from the ballroom of the Ambassador downtown, not too far from where my father worked. My mom finished feeding my infant sister, and went into the bedroom to put her back down to sleep.
When she returned to the living room, the coverage of the event had gone nuts. People were shouting and pushing, cameras were shooting in the hotel kitchen. Bobby had been shot.
You have a good sense of life as it's actually lived, Frank. Here's hoping you're a writer yourself.
August 28th, 2009 at 5:32 pm
I hope the invitation is kind of a head-fake by Mr. Weiner. By that I mean that I would be disappointed if the entire season came down to the audience's knowledge of what happens on the 11/22/63 juxtaposed against Margaret's wedding … Margaret is not even someone we really even know as a character, and her position in the Mad Men universe is kind of peripheral. I just can't get worked up over if her wedding is marred by this cataclysmic event.
I'd much rather view JFK's assassination on the show through other people's eyes … Peggy's, Pete's, Bert's. In fact, Kennedy himself has hardly been mentioned at all, considering we're almost 2 1/2 years into his administration at this point.
Anyway, never fear … I put my full faith and confidence behind Mr. Weiner and his crew to dazzle and amaze.
August 28th, 2009 at 5:53 pm
Kennedy has hardly been mentioned, but even two episodes in, we can see the influence in changing fashions and attitudes.This is a younger country.
August 28th, 2009 at 5:53 pm
Anne B:
Thank you for the kind words.
I was five when RFK won the California primary. Our family was visiting relatives in LA, also not far from the Ambassador (as you remember, not exactly the best neighborhood). It was the first time I ever remember seeing fear in my parents' eyes. They were convinced that the country was going to turn on itself and tear itself apart. I remember people clinging to the hope after MLK died, "at least we have Bobby". No more.
That night was also first time I ever encountered hopelessness. Not mine but the people around us. My brother and I both knew that something bad had happened. We didn't understand it but we knew now is not the time to be goofing off. It was late but no one seemed to care that we weren't in bed. We just sat there, watching the people watching the TV. It would be twenty three years, ninety six days and about eight hours before I'd see that collective look again.
PS I am a writer. So are you. So is everyone else who contributes to BoK. We are lucky we have this forum. Thank you to all who are responsible.
August 28th, 2009 at 7:38 pm
Frank, that would be such a great way to end it. Having lived through the assassination myself as a child of 9, I still remember that afternoon vividly, and your scenario would be the way many people experienced it–a shocking, cataclysmic event brutally invading just another ordinary day. Your treatment would be a great way to conclude the season without rehashing it all over again. Subtle but powerful. It would fit with the way how Kennedy is being felt and perceived this season while not actually seen.
August 28th, 2009 at 8:33 pm
I like the idea of seeing everyone's first reaction, then ending the season. I want to see everyone huddled around the television in Sterling Cooper. For some reason, I'm convinced Peggy is going to cross herself, even though we know she is far from a devout Catholic.
If the new baby's first name is Adam, I wonder if the middle name will be Richard.
August 29th, 2009 at 5:32 am
"Adam" … chills.
Deb: my comment was regarding Kennedy himself. The emergence of youth of course is all around … but we've only glimpsed him on the television in S2, and saw the campaign ad in S1. Bert and Don talked about him personally in NvK about stealing Chicago. That's all I meant.
August 29th, 2009 at 8:47 am
As to the wedding date. The Sterling's are NY Society. A November wedding, in season, would be appropriate, as everyone would be in town, not summering here there or everywhere. The typical family gatherings would not apply.
August 29th, 2009 at 8:58 am
My math sucks. It should be thirty three years. Blew that one.
August 29th, 2009 at 9:23 am
SFCaramia – Thanks. I have to admit that I was subconsciously influenced by the end of the Sopranos. I didn't think about it while I was writing but I dreamed about Carmela and Tony last night.
RetroGirl – I like Richard! I guarantee to you it won't be Archibald.
B.Coop – My little tribute to the one character whose fate truly broke my heart.
August 29th, 2009 at 11:26 pm
Thought I read somewhere this entire season is taking place over just a three month period of time this time, ending in mid 1963… or maybe I dreamt it. We know tonight's episode is during the Kentucky Derby (first weekend in May), so how does that fit following the first two… wasn't last week's around May Day (May 1)?
August 30th, 2009 at 7:46 am
Jerry, The Derby was on Saturday May 4, 1963. The May Day scene took place on a previous weekday – probably Weds May 1 if they held it on the actual May Day. (Yes, I am officially obsessed.)
If you're right about the season ending mid-1963, that would coincide with Betty's approximate due date. Ooohboy, wonder what that means!